Post

Deleted, reposting to clarify: the NSF statement does not define "DEIA", I haven't used that term in the proposal for my current NSF project. I could guess what it means, but that's not my job. I would need to know what specific activities I'm not allowed to do before I change any plans.

"All NSF grantees must comply with these Executive Orders, and any other relevant Executive Orders issued, by ceasing all non-compliant grant and award activities. ... In particular, this may include ... any other grant activity that uses or promotes the use of DEIA principles and frameworks ..."

78 reposts296 likes

How is this going to work in terms of the NSF asking you to talk about how your proposal will broader participation in STEM to create a more diverse workforce? Seems like that could be used as an excuse to tank a lot of projects.

If my experience with legalese is relevant (questionable, but still), I'm afraid that they left it vague to get carte blanche denying anything they don't like. Of course, they'd have to review it. Which they can't possibly do. So they might just have put this together on a whim. Let's see.

Agree 💯! Our proposals have a statement of work and unless they contractually modify that SOW, then the work continues as is. I worry more about renewals, funding increments, and new programs. Mark my words: they will restrict more than just DEIA…. Shit will get real, like “we don’t like RNA”

Make them tell you, specifically, what you're not allowed to do. Don't make changes you guess that they want. Don't offer them a menu of things that you infer they might be telling you not to do. Do the work you proposed, and received funding to do, unless instructed otherwise in specific detail.

Academic researchers are, famously, hilariously overworked. When have you ever had time, much less inclination, to go to an administrator — at your funder or on your campus — and ask them how do conduct a project that's already been reviewed and funded? Why would you do that now?