Harvard scores $46 million in federal grants as funding freeze begins to thaw

After months of uncertainty and financial strain, Harvard University began receiving millions in federal research grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) on Friday, marking a significant step towards stabilizing the University’s beleaguered research ecosystem.

The disbursements represent the first return of grant funds since a judge struck down the Trump administration’s sweeping freeze on September 3.The initial wave of funding covered approximately 200 grants, totaling $46 million, according to a spokesperson for Harvard. “We are pleased to see the disbursement of $46 million in research funding from the US Department of Health and Human Services, which we received just before noon today,” they told Harvard Crimson. They added that this is only a first step, with hopes that federal support will continue to be restored across all agencies.Also read: Harvard’s former President slams university’s compliance with Trump administrationThough significant, the returned grants represent only a fraction of Harvard’s more than 1,500 active NIH grants. The agency, the largest federal funder of Harvard research, provided $488 million in fiscal year 2024, over 70% of the University’s federal research funding.

A judicial reprieve

The resumption of funding follows US District Judge Allison D. Burroughs’ ruling that the Trump administration’s suspension of Harvard’s federal grants was unconstitutional.

Burroughs ordered agencies to reinstate the grants and resume payments that had been frozen since May, effectively halting funding for major projects across Harvard’s campuses.In the weeks following the ruling, researchers began receiving notices that their awards were being reinstated, but actual disbursement of funds did not occur until Friday, as reported by Harvard Crimson. While the White House had pledged to appeal the ruling, no legal action has been filed to date, leaving the University’s grant recovery unchallenged for now.

Impact on researchers and projects

The return of grant funding provides immediate relief to researchers on Harvard’s Longwood campus, where major projects had been scaled back or temporarily shuttered due to the freeze. Bridge funds and internal support had allowed some continuity, but the uncertainty prompted layoffs and delays, particularly at Harvard Medical School (HMS) and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health (HSPH). Officials warned that federal funding disruptions could cost Harvard upwards of $1 billion annually.Despite the partial restoration, Harvard’s long-term financial challenges persist. HMS Dean highlighted the necessity of cutting research spending by 20% in preparation for extended austerity, citing the endowment tax hike that will raise the rate to 8% — projected to cost the University more than $200 million per year. He explained, “Given the dark clouds hanging over, not only Harvard’s federal grant dollars, but all of NIH, reducing our research spending and focusing on our most critical research is the responsible thing for us and other institutions to do,” according to Harvard Crimson.

The broader implications

The restoration underscores the fragility of federal support for academic research, especially when funding becomes entangled with political priorities. NIH’s resumption of grant disbursements is limited to certain programs, and it remains unclear whether other federal agencies that had paused or terminated grants to Harvard will follow suit.For researchers, the reinstatement is both a reprieve and a reminder of the vulnerability of institutional research to policy shifts. “While $46 million is a crucial step forward, the path ahead remains uncertain,” one Harvard scientist noted to Harvard Crimson, reflecting a broader anxiety shared across the University.As Harvard navigates this complex financial landscape, the return of NIH funds is a critical but partial solution, highlighting the intersection of science, policy, and institutional resilience in a time where research funding is increasingly contingent on judicial and political outcomes.