Skip to content

URochester’s vice president for research addresses sweeping shifts in federal research policy and their implications for the University.

Portrait of Steve Dewhurst, Vice president for research and chief research officer
Steve Dewhurst (University of Rochester photo / J. Adam Fenster)

As World War II was coming to an end, it was abundantly clear that universities were sources of critical science and technology. When President Franklin D. Roosevelt sought to fuel American prosperity in peacetime, he turned to his science advisor, Vannevar Bush, who provided the answer in his report, “Science, The Endless Frontier”: keep funding basic research and have universities conduct it.

Bush’s report became a blueprint for the modern research university and sparked an entirely new US research ecosystem, including the creation of the National Science Foundation (NSF).

Today, universities like the University of Rochester are trying to find their footing in a vastly different landscape. Federal policies, funding models, and public expectations are pushing universities away from basic research toward economically driven science. In other words, measurable outcomes—such as innovation and national competitiveness—are favored over discovery, which is less predictable but could yield world-changing results.

In his Leadership Conversations talk, Steve Dewhurst, the vice president for research and chief research officer at URochester, offered a frank assessment of the current and continuously evolving climate (shaped by more than 200 executive orders) and how the University is responding.

Here are five takeaways.

1. Major funding challenges loom large.

Indirect or “facilities and administrative” costs are effectively what universities pay for lab maintenance, building utilities, and other infrastructure needs, and they were the first serious pain point Dewhurst called attention to.

Typically, universities recoup indirect costs through a portion of federal grant awards. There’s an expectation that the federal Office of Management and Budget will revise its Uniform Guidance to cap reimbursements at 15 percent (at least 35 percent less than what was common). If the cap is enforced, URochester and others would need to absorb tens of millions of dollars in annual costs.

“Our government relations team and others are very engaged in explaining why we think [a 15 percent indirect cost cap] would be a very bad idea, but it’s a possibility.”

Dewhurst speculated on the possible adoption of the FAIR Model, a cumbersome and still fairly costly methodology for indirect cost reimbursement.

A second notable concern is the new National Institutes of Health (NIH) policy of forward or multi-year funding. Previously, multi-year NIH grants were funded year by year, but now, funding is provided in a single lump sum. The result means fewer NIH grants each year. Case in point, URochester saw its R01 awards go from 41 (2024) to 15 (2025).

Dewhurst also shared data from a New York Times article on NSF funding showing a 50 percent reduction in overall funding, where not all disciplines lost equally. The point here was that, over the next several years, it will be very difficult to get federal funding in many areas where URochester has people actively doing research.

2. URochester will respond with resilience.

Despite the financial and policy turbulence, Dewhurst offered some bright spots worth celebrating, including URochester joining the prestigious ranks of Nathan Shock Centers of Excellence in the Basic Biology of Aging and a URochester-led STELLAR (Science, Technology, and Engineering of Laser and Laser Applications Research) project being named a finalist in the NSF’s “innovation engines” competition.

Still, many members of URochester’s research family are stressed, scared, and possibly angry. And many are likely wondering what to do now. Dewhurst gave an unflinching path forward, starting with a call to act with “productive urgency,” a phrase he borrowed from Brené Brown, a research professor of social work at the University of Houston.

“We have to make tough decisions—that’s the nature of the environment we’re in right now. But we need to be intentional about priorities and strategic about what we do.”

He went on to encourage researchers to pull together and keep submitting grant proposals, stressing the need for resilience and that faculty be ready to pivot and go where the funding is.

Graduate students are also feeling the squeeze of the current research ecosystem, mainly through changes in indirect costs mentioned earlier. The University—which spends $10 to $15 million annually on graduate education—is planning to begin charging graduate tuition directly to research grants to sustain these programs, which Dewhurst noted, almost all of URochester’s peers already do. It’s a move Dewhurst is discussing in great detail with the Faculty Senate, although many details still needing to be resolved. Nevertheless, Dewhurst assured that URochester is not dropping graduate education.

Stephen Dewhurst: A door, left open

How the University of Rochester’s vice president for research built a career on curiosity, collaboration, and access. “Making yourself available is super important,” Dewhurst says. “People are more likely to come talk to you if they find you approachable.”

3. Now’s the time to invest in research.

Investing in research now might seem like building a home next to an active volcano, but Dewhurst doesn’t see it that way. Here, he highlighted the four transdisciplinary centers that received URochester funding, noting that even the center leads were surprised that—given the research climate—the University was still funding their work. A big reason for the continued funding is that the University committed to creating new transdisciplinary centers years ago as part of Boundless Possibility, URochester’s 2030 strategic plan.

“We may feel that we’re in very difficult times, but in a way, those are the most important times to continue to invest.”

Dewhurst added the recruitment of more talented researchers—giving a shout-out to new Eastman School of Music faculty member Dennis DeSantis ’05E (DMA)—and continued improvements to URochester’s physical environment among essential investments in the University’s future. Regarding the latter, he noted the need for a new Transformational Sciences and Engineering Building to replace Hutchison Hall, which opened in 1971.

But is now really the time for major capital investment? It’s a complicated answer, but in short, yes. Projects of this magnitude unfold over years, not fiscal quarters, so a lot can change in terms of policy and funding. Additionally, URochester is betting on areas of strength and growth, where funding potential remains strong. Dewhurst acknowledged that this isn’t without risk, but the cost of not doing this is a scarier prospect.

4. Humanities are central, not peripheral.

In a world of research funding that is increasingly driven by science and technology, humanities faculty, understandably, have concerns about where they fit and how that’s being accounted for at URochester. Dewhurst immediately pointed to the disproportionate number of undergraduate students taking courses across the humanities and social sciences.

“There’s something at the University of Rochester that is, at its core, a relatively small liberal arts school with a lot of other stuff wrapped around it.”

Dewhurst doesn’t see the boundary between STEM and humanities disciplines as being as bright as people might think. He underscored the point by highlighting the Department of Health Humanities and Bioethics, which has close ties to the Humanities Center on the River Campus. He also pointed to AI and the role URochester can play in ensuring it remains an ethically adherent technology. (Not to mention two of the new transdisciplinary centers grounded in the humanities: SoundSpace and EXTRAA.)

In sum, the humanities are part of URochester’s DNA and, therefore, integrated in its pursuits in humanistic innovation.

5. Research matters. Storytelling is essential.

Why does research matter? More and more, research universities like URochester are being put in a position to demonstrate how and why research is a public good. But it doesn’t always fit into a nice, tidy elevator pitch.

Dewhurst brought up the example of Lasik surgery, made possible by chirped-pulse amplification (CPA), the Nobel Prize–winning technology developed at URochester. CPA wasn’t developed to solve a problem. It started with a serendipitous observation. A graduate student at the University of Michigan suffered an accidental injury to his eye from a laser. It was the quintessential “aha moment.”

“It’s a very odd way to get to an incredibly important thing that changes the world. That unexpected discovery is why we fund research.”

In a research landscape that has become less accommodating to following curiosity, it’s more important to share what that curiosity begets. Sometimes the means justify the end. A person in the 1960s could have listened to President John F. Kennedy say he wanted to put a man on the moon, and think, “What’s the point? Why bother?” But that person wouldn’t have been thinking about all the technology and knowledge that would need to be created to achieve that goal—and that is why you bother.

The sentiments that best frame the moment did not come from Dewhurst, but Nobel Prize–winning physicist and chemist Marie Curie: “We must have perseverance and above all confidence in ourselves. We must believe that we are gifted for something and that this thing must be attained.”