Impacts of NSF firings come into focus as scientists weigh next steps

US scientists are figuring out their next steps and expressing mounting concerns in the aftermath of the National Science Foundation’s move on Feb. 18 to fire about 10% of its permanent workforce.

“When you fire the NSF workforce and they start being spread too thin, their ability to champion science that is new, to identify science that has a lot of potential, their ability to come up with good panels, their ability to help junior scholars is going to get lost,” says Paulette Vincent-Ruz, a chemistry education professor at New Mexico State University whose research relies on NSF funding. “Science is going to stagnate.”

According to the NSF website, the agency provides 25% of the federal support that US universities receive for basic research, including the salaries of students and postdoctoral researchers. It also funds a number of education programs for students from kindergarten to 12th grade.

The NSF was already understaffed, says one former program officer affected by the firings, who would speak to C&EN only under the condition of anonymity because they plan to appeal their termination from the agency.

Now those whom the firings spared are strategizing to determine how to distribute all the work that their former colleagues would have shared, says a current program director, who insisted on anonymity out of fear of retaliation.

One fired NSF employee on an expert appointment and two fired program directors, all of whom would speak to C&EN only under the condition of anonymity to avoid backlash or retaliation, say the termination notice came while many were in the middle of setting up review panels, finding reviewers, or working on solicitations—all key aspects of reviewing and awarding grants.

“It’s taking an enormous amount of effort to reassign everything that these brilliant people did,” the current program director says over Signal, a secure messaging service. “We are working through deep, deep grief.”

What happened?

The NSF fired 168 of its roughly 1,700 employees across the agency’s eight directorates. But some initial statistics shared with C&EN by one of the former program directors suggest that some directorates may have been affected more than others.

An NSF spokesperson did not respond to a question about whether the agency’s directorates were equally affected, nor did they provide any additional information about the firings. They only confirmed the number of employees who were fired and that the firings were a way to comply with a Feb. 11 executive order directing agencies to implement large-scale reductions in the federal workforce.

According to the former NSF expert employee and former program director, 65 of the 168 were employees on expert appointments, hired by the NSF on an intermittent, part-time basis for their subject matter knowledge. The remaining 103 were newly hired, recently transferred, and recently promoted individuals, all of whom the government classifies as probationary. But Reuters has reported that 84 were experts and 86 were probationary employees.

The NSF’s probationary period typically lasts 1 year, during which time these employees have fewer civil service protections.

But according to the two former program directors and one current program officer, some of the fired employees had already completed the agency’s probationary period and should have been considered permanent employees. The current program officer, who also insisted on anonymity because they fear retaliation, says the NSF extended the probationary period of these employees without notice before the layoffs.

The former NSF expert questioned the legality of that move, citing part of the Code of Federal Regulations that says probationary periods cannot be extended.

But apart from the controversy around probationary periods, the reduction in the agency’s workforce didn’t surprise many of its staff. According to the current program officer, the NSF has been transparent about the fact that reductions in workforce were coming.

So when a 9:00 a.m. email announcing a last-minute hybrid meeting arrived in the inbox of one of the recently fired program directors, they knew what would come next, they tell C&EN.

The meeting, held an hour later, was run by members of the NSF’s senior leadership, including its chief management officer and chief science officer. Director Sethuraman Panchanathan was notably absent.

According to transcripts of the meeting reviewed by C&EN, those running the meeting explained to the affected employees that the agency had been “directed by [the Donald J. Trump] administration” to remove all probationary employees. The NSF decided to remove the experts on its own initiative, however.

Anna Kelly, a White House spokesperson, recently told Reuters that the layoffs occurring across federal agencies are the administration’s way of “delivering on the American people’s mandate to eliminate wasteful spending and make federal agencies more efficient, which includes removing probationary employees who are not mission critical.”

The White House did not respond to a request for additional comment by press time.

Because NSF experts are at-will employees, the NSF did not provide a reason for their termination. But NSF leadership said the reason the probationary employees were being terminated was that their performance has not demonstrated that further employment would be in the public interest.

“We considered that complete bullshit,” says one of the fired program directors, who was still in their probationary period. “Myself and everyone that I know in that room are dedicated to their jobs.” In fact, a week prior, this person received an exemplary midterm performance review from their manager.

The Office of Personnel Management, which is directing the mass layoffs across the federal government, told the NSF it could give either performance or misconduct as reasons for firing the employees, according to the meeting transcripts and all former NSF employees C&EN spoke with. Being fired for misconduct would prevent former workers from filing for unemployment benefits.

Both former program directors say they plan to appeal their termination, a move they say the NSF leadership in the meeting encouraged employees to make. Meanwhile, multiple workers’ unions have filed lawsuits seeking to block the mass firings of probationary employees at the various federal agencies.

On Feb. 20, a US district judge denied a temporary restraining order sought by five unions 8 days prior.

Another lawsuit was filed on Feb. 20 by different unions, including the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), which represents 800,000 federal and DC government workers. “This administration has abused the probationary period to conduct a chaotic, ill-informed, and politically-driven firing spree,” AFGE national president Everett Kelley says in a press release.

What’s next?

While these cases make their way through the courts, those who were fired “are out of a job, out of work, without essentially any support,” says one of the former program directors, who points out that probationary employees don’t get severance. But while the layoffs primarily harm those now out of a job, the former program directors say they will also cause damage across the entire country.

And in the meeting, the NSF leadership said the Feb. 18 workforce reduction is only one of several the agency plans to do.

The loss of staff “will severely impact research and innovation across the United States, especially for some of those topics where NSF is the majority of the funding,” one of the former program directors says.

Michael Findlater, a chemistry professor at the University of California, Merced, who has an NSF proposal pending, says that news of the layoffs, as well as recent funding freezes and postponed review panels, has been enormously stressful for him and his colleagues. “My NSF proposal is critical for me to maintain my research group, as I have several other smaller awards that are ending this year too,” he says. “Many groups will be in a similar position, waiting to learn if they can keep their doors open, people employed, and research ongoing.”