Congress Votes to Delay Implementation of New OMB Guidelines for Federal Grants

Last month, members of the Senate voted 90-6 across party lines to put a hold on the proposed Office for Management and Budget (OMB) new guidelines for awarding federal grants. 

Many stakeholders in scholarly communications were critical of the proposal, which would make grant awards subject to review and approval by political appointees, and argued that this approach would undermine research integrity. Publishers also expressed concern about provisions that, for example, prohibit funding for international collaboration, conference- and publication-related activities, and memberships. Both the International Association of Scientific, Technical, and Medical Publishers (STM) and the Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP) submitted extensive comments opposing provisions in the guidelines. Many academic institutions, societies, and nonprofit organizations also released individual statements.

Note that the impact of the new guidelines, which as written would apply to all federal grants, extends well beyond scholarly communications. As news of the revision’s contents spread, nearly 500,000 comments were submitted in response to the OMB proposal.

The congressional resolution to delay the implementation of the OMB guidance came as welcome news to those who opposed it. Since then, however, both the Department of Education and the National Science Foundation have announced drafts for grant funding rules that appear to implement some aspects of the OMB proposal. STM submitted their comments on the NSF’s draft on August 26.