On Tuesday, the National Science Foundation (NSF) announced the termination of 168 employees, approximately 10% of its workforce, in a drastic move aimed at adhering to President Trump’s executive order for reducing the federal workforce under the banner of efficiency. Before the layoffs, the NSF employed around 1,700 staff members who oversee a substantial $9 billion federal budget dedicated to a wide array of research, from astrophysics to civil engineering.
An emergency meeting convened at 10 a.m. ET, conducted via Zoom and in-person, where Micah Cheatham, NSF’s chief management officer, informed staff of their termination effective by the end of the day, with no severance packages offered. Notably absent from the meeting was NSF Director Sethuraman Panchanathan, who reportedly gave the go-ahead for the firings.
Critics have voiced strong concerns over the mass layoffs. Neal Lane, a former NSF director (1993-1998), stated:
Firing talented people, including scientists, who have already invested a year or two with the agency is a waste of resources. The U.S. needs more scientists, engineers, and other technical talent. These firings will cause many of them to leave the field.
In conversations with NPR, numerous NSF employees—both those terminated and those still with the agency—expressed fears of retaliation for speaking on the matter. Many of the affected employees were program officers responsible for vital tasks such as grant evaluation and funding decisions.
The terminations first impacted probationary employees, who enjoy less job security, as well as “intermittent experts” hired for specific expertise. Termination notices categorized these layoffs as decisions based on performance. However, several dismissed employees claimed to have exemplary records, raising concerns about the legitimacy of the performance evaluations mentioned in their notices.
Alarming allegations surfaced indicating that some permanent staff were reclassified as probationary without justification earlier this year, following directives from the White House Office of Personnel Management. One terminated program officer, who had resigned from a tenured faculty position to join the NSF, expressed frustration at being misled. “These are some of the hardest-working people I’ve ever met, and everyone is trying to be the very best stewards of tax dollars we can be,” they stated.
With fewer employees, uncertainties loom over the NSF’s ability to efficiently review grants and allocate funding, ultimately affecting future scientific discoveries and societal advancements. Mary Feeney, a public policy researcher at Arizona State University, commented on the negative implications of these firings:
These arbitrary firings and failure of leadership directly impact the agency’s ability to evaluate and fund good science.
The firings come amid a tumultuous time for the NSF as it grapples with changes from the new administration. Earlier this year, the agency paused grant reviews to assess compliance with presidential directives concerning diversity, equity, and inclusion. Employees are anticipating potential budget cuts and further layoffs in the coming months, creating a sense of uncertainty and concern for the future of NSF and its mission.
