Federal grants must ‘demonstrably advance’ Trump’s agenda, president orders

Federal agencies must ensure political appointees sign off on all grants and that such awards comply with the administration policy, President Trump ordered on Thursday, which has federal employees in charge of that funding concerned about added bureaucracy and political interference. 

The executive order, dubbed Improving Oversight of Federal Grantmaking, suggested agencies have failed to properly coordinate their efforts and the federal grant process was so convoluted that only entities with extensive legal assistance could win the awards. As a result, Trump said, agencies are not funding the best proposals and federal dollars instead go to “unfocused research of marginal social utility.” 

Going forward, all agencies must designate a senior political appointee to be responsible for reviewing grants, at both the announcement and award stages, to ensure they are “consistent with agency priorities and the national interest.” The appointee can include subject matter experts in their reviews when warranted, Trump said. 

Those reviews should ensure awards are in line with “applicable law, agency priorities and the national interest.” Appointees must not defer to others in making final decisions, Trump ordered, but instead “use their own independent judgment."

One federal employee who works in grants management said the order was codifying processes the administration put in place earlier this year. The added layers of review were implemented in the name efficiency, the employee said, but in reality created more layers of bureaucracy. Additionally, the employee added, grant proposals are rejected by political appointees without any explanation.

“The review process at the department level is already so occluded with no transparency that I am definitely saddened to see that approach strengthened,” the grants official said. “Our recipients and the public deserve to know why certain awards aren’t approved. Hell, us as awarding officers would like to know.” 

Discretionary grants must "demonstrably advance” the president’s agenda. Specifically, Trump said, they may not go toward programs based on race, that support transgender individuals, that facilitate illegal immigration or that otherwise compromise American values. 

Trump called on agencies to improve coordination in awarding grants to “promote consistency and eliminate redundancy.” Grants are often written in an overly complicated way, Trump said, and he instructed agencies to use plain language that minimizes the need for legal and technical expertise from applicants. 

Agencies must also clarify that all discretionary grants going forward may be “terminated for convenience,” including when it no longer reflects the awarding agency’s priorities. While standard language in most federal grants allowed for terminations for awards that no longer meet agency priorities, the new language broadens that scope and eases its deployment. 

All future discretionary awards going forward must include the termination for convenience language, Trump said. The federal employee working on grants cautioned the termination for convenience clause could be “weaponized” for political purposes.

Additionally, going forward grantees must provide written explanations to the government, with specificity, each time they draw down from their awards. 

Trump specifically cited the National Institutes of Health, which has seen its grant awards reduced significantly under Trump as the White House has withheld agency funding, as a problematic grant funder. An employee there took issue with the funding reductions overall and with the new requirements for award justifications. 

“The studies cannot be looked at at the surface level,” the employee said. “They need to be read, and fully understood by those evaluating [whether] to cut funding or not. Not with a 500-word single paragraph.” 

The added review will pull employees away from their normal duties, a grants employee said. 

“The emphasis on reporting and justification will add to the workload of the subject matter experts at the field level, undoubtedly,” the official said.