Higher education and research groups warned that a Trump administration proposal could shift how federal agencies review and oversee grants, potentially sidelining traditional peer review. The Office of Management and Budget’s plan would require political appointees to review new and existing research grants, and critics say that change would undermine scientific expertise in favor of policy-driven decisions. The proposal also includes restrictions that would prohibit the use of federal funds for certain DEI-related activities and gender-affirming care programs, according to the groups monitoring the rule. While the change may include additional limits affecting grant implementation, the proposal does not include an anticipated indirect cost reimbursement cap that colleges and universities had opposed. In related institutional risk, AAU President Barbara R. Snyder and other leaders said the revisions could materially alter long-standing principles underpinning federally supported research. Meanwhile, the American Council on Education contends the Uniform Guidance changes would align discretionary awards more closely with administration priorities. For research-intensive universities, the immediate operational concern is grant lifecycle uncertainty—whether agencies can terminate active awards deemed inconsistent with program goals or priorities—and how governance of review criteria will change across agencies once the rule is finalized.