National Science Foundation Staff Axed By Trump Fear For US Scientific Future

Feature With the National Science Foundation cutting staff to comply with President Trump's order for sweeping federal government layoffs, concerns are growing over the impact of these layoffs on America's role in scientific and technological research. 

And it's not just outside observers raising the alarm; both former and remaining NSF employees we spoke to expressed deep concerns following Tuesday's terminations, telling us they fear the changes will disrupt the agency in performing its mission to foster innovation in America. The cuts affected about 10 percent of its workforce, with many blindsided by the move, which some say may have violated federal regulations.

The NSF confirmed the layoffs to The Register in an email, saying it had dismissed 86 employees classified as probationary, and 84 part-time expert appointees. The agency says it has "approximately 1,500 federal employees and 200 scientists from research institutions in temporary positions."

The layoffs were made to comply with the President's "workforce optimization" executive order, issued last week leading to widespread staffing cuts within the federal government. These cost-saving measures are being steered by Elon Musk's DOGE, a Trump-blessed unit that has been earmarking government contracts, agencies, and programs to cancel and dismantle as well as officials, some of whom regulate and investigate the SpaceX billionaire's companies, to lay off.

For those unfamiliar with the National Science Foundation's role, the agency does not conduct its own research but serves as a federal funding body, allocating public money to support universities, institutions, and small businesses in advancing scientific progress, education, and innovation across the United States.

There is no guarantee that the US will continue to lead in scientific innovation, and without innovation, talent and resources will naturally flow elsewhere

Those caught up in the terminations not only included scientific experts who vet the latest research to see if it's worth funding, but also the managers of huge research grant portfolios - such as Karl Rockne, the NSF's now-former program director for environmental engineering. Prior to Tuesday, Rockne was responsible for managing more than $100 million distributed across 250 projects. Now he's unsure what the future of US scientific research will look like under a slimmed-down NSF.

"Much of modern life would not be possible without the scientific innovation that NSF investments supported," Rockne told The Register. "There is no guarantee that the US will continue to lead in scientific innovation, and without innovation, talent and resources will naturally flow elsewhere."

"Many people in the research community supported by the program I managed … have voiced grave concern that the future of American science is at risk," Rockne added. 

Scrambling

Other current and former NSF staff we spoke to, all of whom asked to remain anonymous, expressed similar sentiments regarding not only the future of US scientific research that relies on government funding, but also the future of the NSF itself. 

Morale has plummeted as directors are scrambling to combine their research portfolios with those of their ejected colleagues. Trust in the leadership of NSF Director Sethuraman Panchanathan has eroded. Multiple sources told us he didn't even bother to show up to a Zoom call where employees were terminated, a move several described as cruel. 

Panchanathan, a Trump appointee who took charge of the NSF in 2020, has reportedly been called on to resign by some remaining NSF employees. One remaining staff member told us they sympathize with Panchanathan's compliance with Trump's order since resistance would simply lead to him being replaced, but expressed dissatisfaction that he caved without any seeming attempt to fight. 

Another staffer who was caught up in the firings questioned why Lynne Parker, principal deputy director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, didn't try to save the NSF's computer science team from decimation by Trump's executive order. Parker previously served as division director for Information and Intelligent Systems inside the Computer and Information Science and Engineering (CISE) Directorate at the NSF and was the founding director of the National Artificial Intelligence Initiative Office. Twenty-four members of the CISE directorate were let go, we're told. 

"The CISE Directorate plays a critical role in the nation's computing research ecosystem, supporting nearly 80 percent of fundamental computing research at US universities," the Computing Research Association said in a statement following the terminations.

"Cutting CISE's workforce not only disrupts this essential research but also jeopardizes the future of American leadership in computing."

Neither Panchanathan nor Parker have responded to questions. 

That lack of resistance could also be a sign of things to come for the future of the NSF, where considerable budget cuts have been predicted. A non-governmental source who asked to remain anonymous told us they've seen one scenario that would include potentially cutting the foundation's workforce by as much as half and shrinking its budget from the $10 billion-plus requested for FY 2025 to just $3 billion next year.

If such an extreme reduction comes to pass, some wonder how the NSF would continue to meaningfully function as an enabler of scientific endeavor.

No time

The NSF informed employees of the termination meeting just one hour before it began. Everyone invited to the meeting could see the full list of affected employees because acting NSF HR director Star Anderson included all their names in the "To" field of the email, based on copies viewed by The Register. The invitation provided no explanation for the meeting, only stating that it involved all probationary employees and expert appointees.

After the meeting, those fired were given just two hours to download their files and transition their research portfolios.

"This was not nearly enough time to transition their research portfolios to ensure efficient and cost-effective continuity of service," Rockne told us. 

• Trump can't quickly or easily kill the CHIPS Act, but he can fire the workers funded by it
• Does DOGE have what it takes to actually tackle billions in US govt IT spending?
• NASA's on-again, off-again job cuts – what's the plan?
• Trump teases 25% semiconductor tariffs that will go 'substantially higher'

Beyond the sudden nature of the firings, every NSF employee we spoke to raised the same concern: Many staff members who should have been safe from the cuts were let go, and many had no idea they were at risk.

Several employees who were fired had been at the NSF for more than one year, but less than two, according to sources. Employees told us that the NSF had traditionally followed a one-year probationary period, as set out in federal civil service regulations, which state that probation is supposed to last for one year and "may not be extended." That is to say, those fired employees thought they were out of probation. That's a crucial detail because DOGE has targeted probationary workers; those out of that status felt mildly safer.

However, a current NSF employee said the Office of Personnel Management, aka OPM, just now determined the NSF had incorrectly applied the one-year probation rule to its workers. That regulation only applies to competitive service employees, while most NSF staff are classified as "excepted" employees - a category that lacks standard civil service protections and allows for longer probationary periods.

Thus, several employees signed contracts when hired indicating they would have a one-year probationary period, after which they would transition to tenured, permanent staff. Then when it came to laying staff off this week, the agency's HR staff applied the OPM's determination, that various ex-probationary workers should still be on their probation and thus should be selected for termination.

In other words, everyone at the NSF who was caught up in the firing that had been at the agency between 12 and 24 months appears to have had their original employment contract, with its one-year probation period, violated.

How are the latest US administration's changes affecting your science and technology work, whether you're private or public sector? Let us know in confidence. Contact us here.

We're told that most employees who were at NSF between 12 and 24 months were unaware they had been effectively removed from being permanent tenured employees and put back on probation until they were told as such on the call in which they were fired. None had received paperwork from HR indicating they had their probation periods extended, which should have been shared with them via an SF-50 personnel action form, according to our sources.

To justify the decimation, employees on the call were apparently told they had been flagged for poor performance — a claim many dispute, citing positive performance reviews. However, termination letters shared with The Register make no mention of performance, leaving those affected with no clear reason for their dismissal.

The NSF declined to answer questions about the adjustment of probationary periods for affected employees. 

Where does this leave the future of US science leadership?

The United States has a long history of leading scientific breakthroughs - according to Rockne, more than 250 Nobel laureates have won awards thanks to NSF-funded research. 

With the loss of program managers, analysts, scientists, and administrators, the NSF's ability to oversee grants and issue new funding is at risk. Unspent funds don't stay with the agency — they return to the Treasury, where the Trump administration may label it as money saved by DOGE's cost cutting. 

Without support, our future STEM workforce will suffer, with major economic impact to the USA

That may ultimately backfire. According to Rockne, the NSF's mission is not only to fund science work, but also scientific literacy. The funding for such work pays considerable economic dividends for the US economy. 

"A key mechanism for doing this is supporting future generations of STEM educators," Rockne told us. "Without support, our future STEM workforce will suffer, with major economic impact to the USA."

The former NSF program director noted the global education market is huge, and that higher education in the United States is a massive service export for the nation. 

"US Higher Ed is 7th among service exports, with a massive positive trade balance resulting from the [billions] spent each year by foreign students in the US," Rockne said. "The world clearly wants what the US offers."

"If one were concerned about the balance of trade, strengthening US higher education, in my opinion, is essential because it is one of the brightest spots in foreign trade balance," Rockne told us.  

If the potential NSF budget cuts move forward, the impact could be significant. Cutting funding for short-term savings could come at the cost of long-term investment in American science and innovation. ®