The National Science Foundation was created 75 years ago, at the behest of Vannevar Bush, who put together the famed study, Science, The Endless Frontier, in 1945. The NSF has played a critical role in a huge amount of science and engineering research since its inception, including advanced development of the laser, the page rank algorithm that ended up in google, and too many other contributions to list.
The NSF funds university research as well as some national facilities. Organizationally, the NSF is an independent agency, meaning that it doesn’t reside under a particular cabinet secretary, though its Director is a presidential appointee who is confirmed by the US Senate. The NSF comprises a number of directorates (most relevant for readers of this blog are probably Mathematical and Physical Sciences; Engineering; and STEM Education, though there are several others). Within the directorates are divisions (for example, MPS → Division of Materials Research; Division of Chemistry; Division of Physics; Division of Mathematics etc.). Within each division are a variety of programs, spanning from individual investigator grants to medium to large center proposals, to group training grants, to individual graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. Each program is administered by one or more program officers who are either scientists who have become civil servants, or "rotators", academics who take a leave of absence from their university positions to serve at the NSF for some number of years. The NSF is the only agency whose mission historically has explicitly included science education. The NSF's budget has been about $9B/yr (though until very recently there was supposedly bipartisan support for large increases), and 94% of its funds are spent on research, education, and related activities. NSF funds more than 1/4 of all basic research done at universities in the US, and it also funds tech development, like small business innovation grants.
The NSF, more than any other agency that funds physical science and engineering research, relies on peer review. Grants are reviewed by individual reviewers and/or panels. Compared to other agencies, the influence of program officers in the review process is minimal. If a grant doesn't excite the reviewers, it won't get funded. This has its pluses and minuses, but it's less of a personal networking process than other agencies. The success rate for many NSF programs is low, averaging around 25% in DMR, and 15% or so for graduate fellowships. Every NSF program officer with whom I've ever interacted has been dedicated and professional.
Well, yesterday the NSF laid off 11% of its workforce. I had an exchange last night with a long-time NSF program director, who gave permission for me to share the gist, suitably anonymized. (I also corrected typos.) This person says that they want people to be aware of what's going on. They say that NSF leadership is apparently helping with layoffs, and that "permanent Program Directors (feds such as myself) will be undergoing RIF or Reduction In Force process within the next month or so. So far, through buyout and firing today we lost about 16% of the workforce, and RIF is expected to bring it up to 50%." When I asked further, this person said this was "fairly certain". They went on: "Another danger is budget. We do no know what happens after the current CR [continuing resolution] ends March 14. A long shutdown or another CR are possible. For FY26 we are told about plans to reduce the NSF budget by 50%-75% - such reduction will mean no new awards for at least a year, elimination of divisions, merging of programs. Individual researchers and professional societies can help by raising the voice of objection. But realistically, we need to win the midterms to start real change. For now we are losing this battle. I can only promise you that NSF PDs are united as never before in our dedication to serve our communities of reesarchers and educators. We will continue to do so as long as we are here." On a related note, here is a thread by a just laid off NSF program officer. Note that congress has historically ignored presidential budget requests to cut NSF, but it's not at all clear that this can be relied upon now.
Voluntarily hobbling the NSF is, in my view, a terrible mistake that will take decades to fix. The argument that this is a fiscally responsible thing to do is weak. The total federal budget expenditures in FY24 was $6.75T. The NSF budget was $9B, or 0.13% of the total. The secretary of defense today said that their plan is to cut 8% of the DOD budget every year for the next several years. That's a reduction of 9 NSF budgets per year.
I fully recognize that many other things are going on in the world right now, and many agencies are under similar pressures, but I wanted to highlight the NSF in particular. Acting like this is business as usual, the kind of thing that happens whenever there is a change of administration, is disingenuous.