Improving Oversight of Federal Grantmaking

               By the authority vested in me as President by the 
               Constitution and the laws of the United States of 
               America, and to improve the process of Federal 
               grantmaking while ending offensive waste of tax 
               dollars, it is hereby ordered:

               Section 1. Purpose. Every tax dollar the Government 
               spends should improve American lives or advance 
               American interests. This often does not happen. Federal 
               grants have funded drag shows in Ecuador, trained 
               doctoral candidates in critical race theory, and 
               developed transgender-sexual-education programs. In 
               2024, one study claimed that more than one-quarter of 
               new National Science Foundation (NSF) grants went to 
               diversity, equity, and inclusion and other far-left 
               initiatives. These NSF grants included those to 
               educators that promoted Marxism, class warfare 
               propaganda, and other anti-American ideologies in the 
               classroom, masked as rigorous and thoughtful 
               investigation.

               The harm imposed by problematic Federal grants does not 
               stop at propagating absurd ideologies. An unsafe lab in 
               Wuhan, China--likely the source of the COVID-19 
               pandemic--engaged in gain-of-function research funded 
               by the National Institutes of Health. The NSF gave 
               millions to develop AI-powered social media censorship 
               tools--a direct assault on free speech. Taxpayer-funded 
               grants have also gone to non-governmental organizations 
               that provided free services to illegal immigrants, 
               worsening the border crisis and compromising our 
               safety, and to organizations that actively worked 
               against American interests abroad.

               Even for projects receiving Federal funds that serve an 
               ostensibly beneficial purpose, the Government has paid 
               insufficient attention to their efficacy. For example, 
               a significant proportion of the results of federally 
               funded scientific research projects cannot be 
               reproduced by external researchers. Even at Harvard and 
               Stanford, once considered among America's most 
               prestigious universities, senior researchers have 
               resigned following accusations of data falsification. A 
               substantial portion of many Federal grants for 
               university-led research goes not to scientific project 
               applicants or groundbreaking research, but to 
               university facilities and administrative costs.

               The grant review process itself also undermines the 
               interests of American taxpayers. Writing effective 
               grant applications is notoriously complex, and grant 
               applicants that can afford legal and technical experts 
               are more likely to receive funds--which can then 
               further support these non-mission functions. In 
               addition, there is insufficient interagency 
               coordination and review by relevant subject matter 
               experts to reduce duplication. As a result, the best 
               proposals do not always receive funding, and there is 
               too much unfocused research of marginal social utility.

               In short, there is a strong need to strengthen 
               oversight and coordination of, and to streamline, 
               agency grantmaking to address these problems, prevent 
               them from recurring, and ensure greater accountability 
               for use of public funds more broadly. The Government 
               holds tax revenue in trust for the American people, and 
               agencies should treat it accordingly.

               Sec. 2. Definitions. For purposes of this order:

                   (a) The term ``agency'' has the meaning given to it 
               in section 551 of title 5, United States Code, except 
               that such term includes only agencies that have the 
               statutory authority to award, offer, or manage Federal 
               grants and does not include the Executive Office of the 
               President or any components thereof.
                   (b) The term ``agency head'' means the highest-
               ranking official or officials of an agency, such as the 
               Secretary, Administrator, Chairman, Director, 
               Commissioners, or Board of Directors, unless otherwise 
               specified in this order.
                   (c) The term ``Director'' means the Director of the 
               Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
                   (d) The term ``discretionary award'' or 
               ``discretionary grant'' means a grant that is a 
               ``discretionary award'' as that term is defined in 2 
               CFR 200.1. It does not include programs where 
               legislation establishes an entitlement to the funds on 
               the part of the recipient, such as block grants; those 
               awarded based on a statutory formula; or disaster 
               recovery grants.
                   (e) The term ``funding opportunity announcement'' 
               means a ``notice of funding opportunity'' as defined in 
               2 CFR 200.1, as it pertains to a discretionary award.
                   (f) The term ``grant'' means any ``grant agreement 
               or grant'' as defined in 2 CFR 200.1, ``cooperative 
               agreement'' as defined in 2 CFR 200.1, or similar award 
               of financial assistance, including foreign assistance 
               awards.
                   (g) The term ``regulation'' means an agency 
               statement of general or particular applicability and 
               future effect designed to implement, interpret, or 
               prescribe law or policy or describing the procedure or 
               practice requirements of an agency, including, without 
               limitation, regulations, interpretative rules, and 
               statements of policy.
                   (h) The term ``senior appointee'' means an 
               individual appointed by the President, a non-career 
               member of the Senior Executive Service, or an employee 
               encumbering a Senior Level, Scientific and 
               Professional, or Grade 15 position in Schedule C of the 
               excepted service.

               Sec. 3. Strengthening Accountability for Agency 
               Grantmaking. (a) Each agency head shall promptly 
               designate a senior appointee who shall be responsible 
               for creating a process to review new funding 
               opportunity announcements and to review discretionary 
               grants to ensure that they are consistent with agency 
               priorities and the national interest. For the avoidance 
               of doubt, this process shall not guarantee any 
               particular level of review or consideration to funding 
               applicants except as consistent with applicable law. As 
               consistent with applicable law, this review process 
               shall incorporate, at a minimum:

(i) review and approval of agency funding opportunity announcements by one 
or more senior appointees or their designees;

(ii) continuation of existing coordination with OMB;

(iii) to the extent appropriate to the subject matter of the announcements, 
review by designated subject-matter experts as identified by the agency 
head or the agency head's designee;

(iv) review of funding opportunity announcements and related forms to 
ensure that they include only such requirements as are necessary for an 
adequate evaluation of the application and are written in plain language 
with a goal of minimizing the need for legal or technical expertise in 
drafting an application;

(v) interagency coordination to determine whether the subject matter of a 
particular funding opportunity announcement has already been addressed by 
another agency announcement and, if so, whether one of the announcements 
should be modified or withdrawn to promote consistency and eliminate 
redundancy;

(vi) for scientific research discretionary grants, review by at least one 
subject matter expert in the field of the application, who may be a member 
of the grant review panel, the program officer, or an outside expert; and

(vii) pre-issuance review of discretionary awards to ensure that the awards 
are consistent with applicable law, agency priorities, and the national
interest, which shall involve in-person or virtual discussion of 
applications by grant review panels or program offices with a senior 
appointee or that appointee's designee.

                   (b) Agency heads shall designate one or more senior 
               appointees to review discretionary awards on an annual 
               basis for consistency with agency priorities and 
               substantial progress. Such review shall include an 
               accountability mechanism for officials responsible for 
               selection and granting of the awards.
                   (c) Until such time as the process specified in 
               subsection (a) of this section is in place, agencies 
               shall not issue any new funding opportunity 
               announcements without prior approval from the senior 
               appointee designated under subsection (a) of this 
               section, except as required by law.

               Sec. 4. Considerations for Discretionary Awards. (a) 
               Senior appointees and their designees shall not 
               ministerially ratify or routinely defer to the 
               recommendations of others in reviewing funding 
               opportunity announcements or discretionary awards, but 
               shall instead use their independent judgment.

                   (b) In reviewing and approving funding opportunity 
               announcements and discretionary awards, as well as in 
               designing the review process described in section 3(a) 
               of this order, senior appointees and their designees 
               shall, as relevant and to the extent consistent with 
               applicable law, apply the following principles, 
               including in any scoring rubrics used to assess grant 
               proposals:

(i) Discretionary awards must, where applicable, demonstrably advance the 
President's policy priorities.

(ii) Discretionary awards shall not be used to fund, promote, encourage, 
subsidize, or facilitate:

 (A) racial preferences or other forms of racial discrimination by the 
grant recipient, including activities where race or intentional proxies for 
race will be used as a selection criterion for employment or program 
participation;

 (B) denial by the grant recipient of the sex binary in humans or the 
notion that sex is a chosen or mutable characteristic;

 (C) illegal immigration; or

 (D) any other initiatives that compromise public safety or promote anti-
American values.

(iii) All else being equal, preference for discretionary awards should be 
given to institutions with lower indirect cost rates.

(iv) Discretionary grants should be given to a broad range of recipients 
rather than to a select group of repeat players. Research grants should be 
awarded to a mix of recipients likely to produce immediately demonstrable 
results and recipients with the potential for potentially longer-term, 
breakthrough results, in a manner consistent with the funding opportunity 
announcement.

(v) Applicants should commit to complying with administration policies, 
procedures, and guidance respecting Gold Standard Science.

(vi) Discretionary awards should include clear benchmarks for measuring 
success and progress towards relevant goals and, as relevant for awards 
pertaining to scientific research, a commitment to achieving Gold Standard 
Science.

(vii) To the extent institutional affiliation is considered in making 
discretionary awards, agencies should prioritize an institution's 
commitment to rigorous, reproducible scholarship over its historical 
reputation or perceived prestige. As to science grants, agencies should 
prioritize institutions that have demonstrated success in implementing Gold 
Standard Science.

                   (c) Nothing in this order shall be construed to 
               discourage or prevent the use of peer review methods to 
               evaluate proposals for discretionary awards or 
               otherwise inform agency decision making, provided that 
               peer review recommendations remain advisory and are not 
               ministerially ratified,
               routinely deferred to, or otherwise treated as de facto 
               binding by senior appointees or their designees. 
               Further, nothing in this order shall be construed to 
               create any rights to any particular level of review or 
               consideration for any funding applicant except as 
               consistent with applicable law.

               Sec. 5. Revisions to the Uniform Guidance. (a) The 
               Director shall revise the Uniform Guidance and other 
               relevant guidance to streamline application 
               requirements and to further clarify and require all 
               discretionary grants to permit termination for 
               convenience, including when the award no longer 
               advances agency priorities or the national interest, 
               but subject to appropriate exceptions, including 
               agreements entered into in furtherance of international 
               trade agreements or those awarded by the Department of 
               Commerce under title XCIX of the William M. (Mac) 
               Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for 
               Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116-283), the CHIPS Act of 
               2022 (Public Law 117-167), or division F of the 
               Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117-
               58).

                   (b) The Director shall further revise the Uniform 
               Guidance and other relevant guidance to appropriately 
               limit the use of discretionary grant funds for costs 
               related to facilities and administration.

               Sec. 6. Implementation and Termination Clauses. (a) 
               Within 30 days of the date of this order, each agency 
               head shall review the agency's standard grant terms and 
               conditions and submit a report to the Director 
               detailing:

(i) whether the agency's standard terms and conditions for discretionary 
awards permit termination for convenience and include the termination 
provisions described in 2 CFR 200.340(a), including the provisions that an 
award may be terminated by the agency ``if an award no longer effectuates 
the program goals or agency priorities'' or, in the case of a partial 
termination by the recipient, if the agency ``determines that the remaining 
portion of the Federal award will not accomplish the purposes for which the 
Federal award was made'';

(ii) whether the agency's standard terms and conditions for discretionary 
foreign assistance awards permit termination based on the national 
interest; and

(iii) the approximate number of active discretionary awards at the agency, 
as well as the approximate percentage of funding obligated under those 
awards that contains termination provisions allowing for termination under 
the circumstances described in subsection (i) of this section.

                   (b) Each agency head shall, to the maximum extent 
               permitted by law and consistent with relevant Executive 
               Orders or other Presidential directives, take steps to 
               revise the terms and conditions of existing 
               discretionary grants to permit immediate termination 
               for convenience, or clarify that such termination is 
               permitted, including if the award no longer advances 
               agency priorities or the national interest. Each agency 
               head shall ensure that such terms are included in all 
               future discretionary grants and likewise shall take 
               steps to revise all applicable regulations binding on 
               or incorporated in discretionary grant terms and 
               conditions to require such terms. Agency heads shall 
               take action to incorporate these new terms and 
               conditions into all future amendments to grant awards.
                   (c) To the extent practicable and consistent with 
               applicable law, agency heads shall insert in future 
               discretionary grant agreements terms and conditions 
               that:

(i) prohibit recipients from directly drawing down general grant funds for 
specific projects without the affirmative authorization of the agency; and

(ii) require grantees to provide written explanations or support, with 
specificity, for requests for each drawdown.

               Sec. 7. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order 
               shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or 
the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget 
relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

                   (b) This order shall be implemented consistent with 
               applicable law and subject to the availability of 
               appropriations.
                   (c) This order is not intended to, and does not, 
               create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, 
               enforceable at law or in equity by any party against 
               the United States, its departments, agencies, or 
               entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any 
               other person.
                   (d) If any provision of this order, or the 
               application of any provision to any person or 
               circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of 
               this order and the application of its provisions to any 
               other persons or circumstances shall not be affected 
               thereby.
                   (e) The costs for publication of this order shall 
               be borne by the Office of Management and Budget.
               
                DONALD J. TRUMP

               THE WHITE HOUSE,

                   August 7, 2025.