By Nathan Waters
Given a recent funding freeze and layoffs at the National Science Foundation (NSF), millions in grant money may be in limbo for the University of Flint-Michigan (UM-Flint) and Kettering University.
Since its creation in 1950 to “promote the progress of science,” “advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare,” and “secure the national defense,” the NSF has supported the work of 262 Nobel Prize winners and 353,000 scientists, engineers, educators and doctors. With an annual budget of over $8 billion, it funds approximately 25% of all federally supported basic research conducted by America’s colleges and universities, according to its website.
But now, in the foundation’s 75th year, things look less certain. Following a January 27, 2025 memo from the Trump administration’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB), funding was frozen for NSF and many other agencies across the U.S. government while those agencies work to “identify and review all Federal financial assistance programs and supporting activities consistent with the President’s policies and requirements…”
In a coinciding action, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued guidance to “identify all employees on probationary periods” and “to determine whether those employees should be retained at the agency.”
The National Council of Nonprofits soon challenged the order in the D.C. Court of Appeals. There, Judge Loren L. AliKhan issued an administrative stay and required the White House to respond to the plaintiffs’ request for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO). The memo was then rescinded by OMB.
Then, on Feb. 18, the NSF laid off most of its probationary employees as well additional employees classified as “intermittent experts,” or those who don’t work full time for the agency.
This action was taken following an overhaul of federal agencies by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), formerly United States Digital Services. The layoff accounted for 168 employees, or about a 10% reduction in NSF’s staff, according to a statement by NSF Spokesperson Michael England on Feb. 21.
Again, this action faced legal challenges, this time from the American Federation of Government Employees and AFL-CIO. Here, Senior District Judge William Alsup of the U.S. District Court of Northern California and Senior District Judge James Bredar of the U.S. District Court of Maryland separately ruled that firings of probationary employees across six agencies was illegal and those employees needed to be reinstated.
The rulings did not include those fired from NSF. However, the guidance was updated on March 4 to include the phrase “OPM is not directing agencies to take any specific performance-based actions regarding probationary employees.”
In a written statement, NSF Director Sethuraman Panchanathan ordered “reinstatement of terminated probationers with back pay and no break in service” based on the updated guidance.
While all this tumult off in Washington may feel far removed, it has effects here in Flint’s own institutions.
According to the National Science Board, public research in the United States is primarily done in educational institutions with funding from the federal government. Dr. Ken Sylvester, the Interim Executive Director of the Office of Research and Economic Development for UM-Flint describes the model as one “for the world” because “it is so innovative and competitive.”
“It offers an enormous comparative advantage for science and innovation globally,” Dr. Sylvester explained, adding that partnering with universities allows the federal government to “sustain a robust research enterprise that benefits and strengthens the U.S. economy” for less than the same work would cost either inside the government or private industry.
UM-Flint has ten active grants of nearly seven million dollars from the National Science Foundation. Those include $3,372,553 for the university’s Strategic Use-Inspired Research
Growth and Engagement (SURGE) program, which has a goal, as described by Dr. Sylvester, “to strengthen the ability of a regional public university like ours to respond to the needs of our community and industry partners.”
He added, “The professional staff who will be supported through this award will expand our external partnership building and better prepare our faculty to identify and meet the research needs of external stakeholders.”
On the other side of town, Kettering University has been working with the NSF, as well.
The university has $2 million in grants, including $465,000 awarded in September 2024, to implement a research experience for undergraduates (REU).
REUs allow students from across the country to work on research projects with Kettering over a 10-week summer period while being provided a stipend. From the award abstract, the $465k in funding will go toward a three-year REU in autonomous vehicle development: “Students will focus on the technical challenges and how to meet them through increasing the level of autonomy in the automotive industry and address issues such as preventing driver fatigue, providing mobility to those who are unable to drive, and increasing safety on the roads.”
Per a press release from Kettering, Dr. Diane Peters noted that the grant “allows us to make a significant impact by bringing together a diverse group of students and providing them with a comprehensive research experience.”
She continued, “We are committed to creating an environment where students can thrive academically and personally while also engaging with our broader academic community.”
While the changes at NSF are still developing, both UM-Flint and Kettering are doing what they can to navigate them.
For UM-Flint, Dr. Sylvester said: “The situation is very fluid at the moment. We are confident that our faculty can respond to any concerns the science agencies [have] about the objectives of their projects. For now, existing awardees are proceeding with their studies.”
When reached for comment on the current situation, Rebecca Norris with Kettering’s media relations team responded, “Right now we are looking for guidance when it comes to these grants and are not able to provide a response.”
This article also appears in East Village Magazine’s April 2025 issue.
Editor’s Note: This story has been updated. It initially named the AFL-CIO and the American Federation of Government Employees as the plaintiffs in the case against the OMB. The correct plaintiff is the National Council of Nonprofits.
