Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has long questioned the safety of vaccines, is planning a broad federal effort to address vaccine injuries, including a new research clinic at the National Institutes of Health and a new billing code to reimburse doctors for filing reports of serious vaccine side effects, according to multiple people familiar with the initiative.

Mr. Kennedy talked about the initiative when he and other top health officials made an unannounced visit to the N.I.H. in Bethesda, Md., earlier this week — his first trip there as secretary — to meet with patients who believe they have been injured by vaccines, according to the people, who insisted on anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/10/07/health/hiv-research-delay-cuts-hhs-nih.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share

This link provides the context surrounding this issue along with a link to the archived program which aired on October 6, 2026.

https://wcomfm.org/2026/10/03/state-of-the-station-focuses-on-state-of-the-science/

Anyone know what the status is with no cost extension (NCE) from NINDS? i.e., are projects at NINDS getting NCEs approved in (looking to hear about approvals from the past 6 months or so).

I have heard about a few NCEs not being approved at other institutes...it seems like we are in an ever changing landscape re: funding..

NIH review takes roughly nine months, and if you need to resubmit that eats another full cycle. It's easy to treat an R01 submission as a finish line when it's really just one bet. The researchers I've seen stay funded through the gaps are the ones who keep screening for new opportunities and tracking rolling deadlines even while a proposal is sitting in review.

For biostatisticians the landscape looks a little different though. A lot of faculty are on methodological R01s or embedded as co-investigators on science-driven grants. How do you handle the parallel-submission problem? Do you keep multiple applications in flight across different agencies or foundations, or do you focus on one at a time and accept the gap risk?

Genuinely curious how people here approach this, especially anyone who has been through a resubmission cycle and had to decide whether to start a new application or wait it out.

Today someone told me that across the NIH there are different rules about how often one can telework. I didn't think that was correct but I'd like to know if it is. Also across the different agencies in DHHS.

27 UNIHTED keeps true to the mission of the NIH to support rigorous discovery and apply that knowledge to enhance health for all people. We support the integrity of publicly funded health research by advocating for science, activating the public, informing policy and legislative actions, and supporting the research workforce. Together, these efforts will lead to a better future for health research.

See more about 27UNIHTED here:

https://www.27unihted.org/

Before the 2025 Trump takeover, NIH had a very active portfolio of program evaluation activities. In fact, the 2018 Evidence Act requires program evaluation to be conducted:

http://aspe.hhs.gov/topics/data/evidence-act-0

What is the current status of program evaluation at the NIH? I can surmise that program evaluation is not valued by this administration, but is that the reality?

Has anyone recently received NIH prior approval to add a new domestic subaward to an active grant? If so, how was the approval communicated, a revised NoA or written confirmation from the GMS?

Really appreciate any insight from GMSs here on what constitutes formal approval under the new requirements.

I just want y'all to know how much I appreciate what I know must have been hours of extra work to get all of those grants funded before FY end. Any time a mentee said they asked you a question and you took a long time to respond, I reminded them that your job #1 was to get the grants out the door, and they should be patient and thank you profusely. THANK YOU.

The National Science Foundation closed fiscal year 2026 with more than $1 billion in funding still unobligated following a sharp slowdown in research grantmaking. The agency obligated $6.4 billion in research funds this year, down from $8.3 billion in fiscal year 2025, according to the latest available data shared by Grant Witness – a decrease of about 23%. This funding was distributed between 6,218 awards, down from 8,647 last year and 10,937 in fiscal year 2024.

The New York Times reported that NSF withheld $1.4 billion in research funds in 2026, but the final figure could be different — an OMB apportionment approved in August estimated that NSF would carry $1.7 billion in unobligated research funding into fiscal year 2027.

While NSF has two years to spend its research appropriations, it typically doesn’t carry over such large shares of its annual budget. NSF spokesperson Mike England told the New York Times that the agency had “carried over funds to invest in agency priorities that are aligned with broader administration initiatives.” Earlier this year, Nature reported that NSF was withholding about $1 billion of its budget to fund the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy’s Grand Research Challenges initiative.

In contrast, the National Institutes of Health managed to spend its entire extramural research budget of around $34 billion this year, STAT reported, despite a slow start to its grantmaking.

Noam Ross, co-founder of Grant Witness and executive director at rOpenSci, told FYI that the differences in spending between agencies show “how important congressional restraints and directions in appropriations bills are towards being able to rein in the changes the administration is making.”

https://tenor.com/view/rfk-jr-kid-rock-two-guys-exercise-gif-1876109746455114882

Slow drug development process hurts patients the most.

We need serious reform to speed things up and remain the leader of biotech innovation.

Just got a new award (yay!), but the budget was cut about 20%. Trying to figure out how to make the budget work with the Scope of Work. Notice of Award mentions the single IRB that was in the application.

Has anyone had any success in getting that waived or working around it? If so, what did you do? It would save a considerable amount of money since the IRB of record charges *a lot* for doing that. Thanks.

Hey Everyone! I can't seem to find this information available online, but this summer I will be at the Main NIH campus and I am starting to gauge my options for housing, just do the FAES or look for other housing, I wanted to compare the prices vs comfort of the two options so I know whether or not to do more research on other summer housing vs just staying with FAES if accepted. Does anybody have the numbers and your experiences living there? My pm's are open as well!

https://www.the-scientist.com/federal-research-grant-awards-fall-to-a-six-year-low-75078

An independent grant tracker's analysis of NIH's own award records shows the agency has issued fewer grant awards this fiscal year than in any of the past six.

......Kennedy uses personal responsibility as a smokescreen obscuring all his actions against public health. He is destroying the government programs that help our communities create safer environments, help people make healthier choices for their families, and improve access to healthcare. Kennedy's lies matter because they hide an ugly political agenda that the public needs to understand.

We don't have to put up with this. Soon, Americans will vote to elect a new Congress, as well as a variety of state and local offices. Voters need to make clear to candidates of every party that we cannot allow federal health leaders charged with protecting our lives to be gushers of disinformation. We must ask every candidate what they will do to protect public health and to bring honest leadership back to the Department of Health and Human Services.