Read Time:3 Minute, 11 Second

For many years, Johns Hopkins University (JHU) has been among the top beneficiaries of funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), a division of the US Department of Health and Human Services that provides grant funding to prestigious universities nationwide. In fiscal year 2024, Johns Hopkins University received approximately $857 million in direct grant funding from the NIH, and an additional 64% for indirect costs, totaling about $1.022 billion. NIH’s budget is essential for biomedical and public health research, which is crucial for saving lives in America. Investment in the NIH produces significant economic returns, including supporting more than 400,000 jobs and roughly $93 billion in economic activity in the U.S. However, recent federal cuts have alarmed researchers nationwide, with many institutions forced to withdraw hundreds of millions of dollars in funding.

One grant recipient from JHU, Dr. Tom Carpino, who recently completed his Ph.D. in infectious disease epidemiology, has been researching the stigma surrounding mpox (previously known as monkeypox) while gathering data on testing and vaccination rates. Carpino was awarded an NIH grant worth $48,974 to support his work—at least, that’s what he thought. Last week, when he checked his email, he was surprised to find an NIH award letter stating that his grant had been terminated, effective March 10, 2025.

“I was confused at first,” Carpino admitted. The letter explained that the termination was due to NIH’s policy shift: “It is the policy of NIH not to prioritize research activities that focus on gaining scientific knowledge about why individuals are hesitant to be vaccinated and/or exploring ways to improve vaccine interest and commitment no longer effectuates agency priorities.”

Carpino clarified that his research does not focus on those topics. “Vaccination is one piece of the puzzle when you’re studying an infectious disease. Without talking about vaccination, you’re not looking at the full picture,” he said. The loss of the grant has had devastating consequences for Carpino, as it covered his tuition, research funds, and livelihood.

Johns Hopkins researchers are not alone in facing funding challenges. USAID, the U.S. Agency for International Development, has also made significant cuts, affecting Johns Hopkins’ global health affiliate, Jhpiego. For over 50 years, Jhpiego has worked to improve health outcomes worldwide, supporting efforts to combat diseases like HIV, malaria, and tuberculosis in low-resource communities. Jhpiego and the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health have been hit hard by recent USAID budget reductions, which have led to the termination of over 80% of its programs.

As a result, JHU has had to scale back its USAID-funded activities both domestically and internationally, leading to the loss of over 2,200 jobs—1,975 in 44 countries and 247 in the U.S., primarily in Baltimore. Another 107 employees will be furloughed. USAID was the largest funding source for both Jhpiego and the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs (CCP), making these cuts particularly severe.

“Today is a profoundly difficult day for our colleagues and for our university,” said Ron Daniels, president of Johns Hopkins University. “Over more than five decades, our colleagues have brought the benefits of research, discovery, and clinical care to mothers, children, and families at home and around the world. We remain immensely grateful for all they have done for the communities in which they have worked.”

Leslie Mancuso, president and CEO of Jhpiego, echoed these sentiments, emphasizing the need to adapt to the shifting landscape of global health. “The unwavering commitment of our team to mothers, children, and families remains steadfast. Now more than ever, we must innovate and work alongside our partners to ensure access to essential, high-quality care.”

Despite the setbacks, Johns Hopkins plans to continue its life-saving work globally and is actively seeking new partnerships to help support its mission.

Happy
Happy
0 %
Sad
Sad
0 %
Excited
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
Angry
0 %
Surprise
Surprise
0 %

Average Rating

5 Star
0%
4 Star
0%
3 Star
0%
2 Star
0%
1 Star
0%

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous post British vs. American English: How One Language Became Two
Next post Threading the Needle: How Fashion Wears Its Politics on Its Sleeve