There have been recurring concerns about the status and approach to federal research spending over the past 18 months. The National Science Foundation (NSF) has begun answering some of the questions raiseed, announcing its new approach to allocating research funding in an open letter on September 10. The letter is a high-level overview, and the foundation intends to roll out more information as their plans and programs develop. The letter also highlights some important through lines pointing to a different approach to how funding is allocated and decisions are made.
NSF is adopting a new, more intentional and portfolio-driven approach aimed at identifying and providing ROI on research funding, though the mechanism of return is not explicitly defined. The letter also references OSTP’s New Golden Age report and White House budget priorities memo, so NSF’s plans are an extension of broader administration priorities.
The letter emphasizes that NSF’s support for foundational science is linked to national economic competitiveness, security, and quality of life. It is too early to tell if these themes will be part of NSF’s evaluation criteria, but it is likely researchers and institutions should consider the overarching motivation and approach when crafting proposals. The TBED community may wish to note multiple elements of the new approach which may require different approaches to selecting and supporting companies leveraging federally funded research.
Broadly, NSF intends to match funding levels and processes to the stage of scientific discovery. Funding for discovery-focused research will address basic scientific questions without addressing later-stage technology development. Translational funding programs will close the gap between basic research and later-stage technology development and may leverage industry participation, something NSF has traditionally shied away from requiring. NSF also plans to fund “infrastructure investments” aimed at cutting-edge research capabilities that exceed those of individual institutions.
NSF states an intent to approach different aspects of its portfolio with funding mechanisms that match the timing, specifications, and requirements of the project. NSF will provide smaller funding amounts to discovery-stage projects proposed by individual researchers that can be completed quickly, accompanied by shorter application and decision processes. Alternately, the letter is also direct about supporting ambitious projects with funding arrangements lasting more than five years. The longer timeline is linked to the $1.5 billion NOFO released on August 17, 2026, which will fund foundational research in 12 priority areas.
NSF plans to take a more active role in identifying major multidisciplinary research projects dubbed Frontier Initiatives. Frontier Initiatives will be led by staff within the NSF Director’s office. Frontier Initiative leads will focus on identifying issues and opportunities that impact the desired outcomes and coordinating efforts across the broader scientific enterprise. The four initial Frontier Initiatives are:
1) Future of Intelligence
2) Frontier of Quantum Phenomena
3) Advanced Materials and Matter
4) Foundation of Biological Design
NSF is also leaning into artificial intelligence. NSF will not only fund AI research but also work to advance adoption of AI tools across scientific disciplines and build partnerships with AI companies.
Funding opportunities driven by national, strategic priorities may take the form of milestone-based funding, prizes, or grand challenges. These mechanisms may require non-federal participation. The letter also refers to “new kinds of institutions,” and provides the recently announced X-Labs initiative, university-industry centers, and institutes that fuse foundational and applied research as examples.
NSF intends to retain merit review for grants but anticipates using other approaches to select certain awards. One model mentioned is dubbed the “Golden Ticket,” which will allow individual reviewers to champion proposals outside the panel review process. The letter identifies that certain proposals may be “too divisive” to meet panel consensus, and NSF hopes to attract “higher quality” reviewers by offering them more independence in award decisions.
NSF intends to make the portfolio-based approach a model for the federal government across agencies. The letter also states that “industry and philanthropy play a growing role in both basic and applied research.” However, it doesn’t describe how industry and philanthropy will be involved or what types of organizations within the larger categories will fill those roles.
The letter emphasizes that the new approach is intended to complement established research frameworks and institutions, though without an increase in overall funding, how new models are prioritized, and resources are allocated remains to be seen. TBED organizations should track the rollout of NSF’s new approach to understand whether internal strategies and programs need to adapt and where other agencies may be headed.