House Appropriations Committee Holds NIH Oversight Hearing

On March 17, the House Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education (LHHS) Appropriations Subcommittee held an oversight hearing on the National Institutes of Health (NIH) with testimony from Director Jay Bhattacharya. The hearing comes after Bhattacharya testified in front of the Senate Health, Education, and Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee in February (see previous coverage).

Bhattacharya, who has also been serving as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Acting Director since February in addition to his role as NIH Director, fielded questions on a variety of topics, including the Trump Administration’s delays in grant distribution, indirect costs, leadership vacancies and staff reductions, public trust in science, and national security. LHHS Subcommittee Chair Robert Aderholt (R-AL) opened the hearing with comments on the public’s lack of trust in the NIH and encouraged Bhattacharya to continue to prioritize replicability in NIH research, arguing it would help to rebuild public trust in the agency.

On the other side of the aisle, Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) used her opening remarks to raise several concerns about recent actions taken by NIH under the Trump Administration, from unprecedented cancellations of grants and staff reductions to delayed spending of fiscal year (FY) 2026 funding. Ranking Member DeLauro highlighted the detrimental impacts of front-loading payments for multi-year grants, which NIH started doing in FY 2025, which reportedly resulted in 2,000 fewer grants being awarded in 2025.

Ranking Member DeLauro also commented on the White House Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) delay in releasing FY 2026 funding (see previous coverage), which finally stated happening just prior to the hearing, presumably as a result of pressure from the Subcommittee. “Research is a public good,” she stated. “It must not be manipulated as a political weapon to serve a partisan goal.” While other Congressional Representatives raised similar concerns about the delay of funding, including Rep. Stephanie Bice (R-OK) who later pressed the issue, Bhattacharya claimed that these concerns were “political noise” and that he planned to have all appropriated funds released to researchers in a timely manner.

Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) questioned Bhattacharya on the NIH payline decrease, to which Bhattacharya claimed that, while the payline had decreased to “8 to 10 percent,” it was largely due to an influx of applications prompted by the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to submit applications. Bhattacharya told the Subcommittee that finding a way to reduce AI-generated applications is a priority for the agency. He reiterated a commitment to supporting scientific research and, when prompted by Rep. Hoyer, agreed that “NIH research is the basis of almost every single important biomedical advancement in this century and much of the last century.”

Bhattacharya’s prepared remarks largely centered on NIH going where the “great ideas” are. To this end, the Director suggested separating facility competitions from grant funding to allow smaller universities and colleges more opportunities to receive NIH awards. Further, he pointed to the Trump Administration’s proposal to cap indirect costs at 15 percent as another way to improve competitive fairness between institutions (see previous coverage).

The hearing later moved to concerns about the agency’s ability to operate without permanent institute directors in place. In response, Bhattacharya indicated that the agency has plans to onboard new institute directors in the upcoming months to fill those leadership gaps in addition to plans to restore some of their lost staff, many of which were unexpectedly terminated in mass layoffs last year (see previous coverage). Ranking Member DeLauro also expressed uncertainty over Bhattacharya’s ability to serve as both the NIH Director and CDC Acting Director. It’s unclear whether the Administration intends to nominate a new CDC Director anytime soon.

Lastly, Bhattacharya fielded questions about national security and protecting U.S. federally-funded scientific research. He acknowledged concerns, specifically relating to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and stated that he was in the process of developing a framework to address these concerns with the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). Further, he argued that universities needed stronger policies to protect research from foreign interference. While he stated that the NIH doesn’t “want burdensome regulations to stop research,” he stated that improving oversight was a major priority for the Administration.

A full recording of the hearing can be viewed here. Stay tuned for COSSA’s continued coverage of the NIH.