The Trump administration's press to cut spending at the NIH would reduce the share of grants that go toward what are called indirect costs. Think laboratory construction, heating, utilities, and ventilation — the equipment and peripheral support necessary to enable complex research projects.
"You get a set amount directly for the research, but then you negotiate a rate to help pay for those things that support that," UK spokesman Jay Blanton explains.
In all, the university receives roughly $160 million a year through the NIH.
"We compete for those grants and contracts from NIH," Blanton says. "Those are for things like cancer research, children's health care, diabetes, heart disease."
And the drastic cut in those "indirects" — to 15% or about half of the NIH's typical historical rate — would slash at least $40 million from UK over the course of a year.
"If this policy change is enacted, it will impact the way we do research at the University of Kentucky. It will cost UK tens of millions of dollars annually and will hit our local and state economies. More important than any numbers, though, it will impact the work we do to advance the health of Kentucky in those areas most critical to our future," UK President Eli Capilouto wrote Monday.
While the university says it's too early to dive into how such a cut would affect ongoing research or hard-won designations, such as the Markey Cancer Center's status as an NCI Comprehensive Cancer Center, Blanton says Capilouto's pledge is to keep the campus informed and continue to make the case for the school's biomedical research.
"Where we are right now is we're taking things one step at a time. We want to transparently and openly communicate when we know things," he told WUKY, reiterating the president's promise to a research community holding its breath: "I'm going to communicate openly with you about something. I'm going to talk to you about the impact of it. I'm going to talk to you about how we're gonna respond. And right now, our posture is it's our responsibility to tell our story, to underscore why this is so important."
For now, the steep cuts are on hold after 22 states sued and a federal judge put a temporary block on the changes.
