Ryder Christ
SANTA BARBARA, Calif. — Universities across the country are grappling with the loss of millions of dollars in research funding due to cuts by the Trump administration.
At UC Santa Barbara, hundreds of students and researchers held a “Kill the Cuts, Save Science” protest on campus earlier this month, rallying against the funding reductions.
An estimated $10 billion to $12 billion in research funding has been slashed across various federal agencies, including the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Science Foundation (NSF), and through direct cuts to institutions such as Harvard University for noncompliance with federal directives.
The cuts have disrupted research in areas such as cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, HIV, and, locally, mental health care for transgender youth.
Among those affected is Dr. Miya Barnett, associate professor of clinical psychology at UCSB’s Gevirtz Graduate School of Education. She received a $416,299 grant from the NIH in late 2024 to develop a mental health training program for lay health workers supporting racially diverse transgender youth and their families. The grant was abruptly terminated in March 2025.
“I can’t say I was surprised because we’d seen what was happening,” Barnett said. “I was devastated.”
After nearly two years of preparation, the project was halted just as it was about to launch focus groups and begin collecting data.
“We were doing a lot of work to get the project up and running,” she said. “We were right at the point where we were going to start bringing participants in and conducting focus groups with them.”
Barnett, who has transgender family members, said her motivation was both personal and professional.
“I’ve seen the impact of discrimination and the need for access to mental health services—and really the need to treat the whole family,” she said.
Only $26,629 of the grant had been spent when the NIH withdrew its support.
“So the amount that was spent is just lost to us and to the government,” she said. “It wasn’t very efficient to take the money away.”
Describing the sudden end of her project, Barnett offered a metaphor: “This pizza was prepared. It had all of the employees working on it, and then it was just ripped out of the oven. It can’t be made for delivery.”
NIH grants are highly competitive and subject to a rigorous, peer-reviewed selection process. Although her project was small compared to other NIH-funded research, Barnett said it marked a crucial step toward improving mental health access for a deeply underserved population.
Her project is one of several at UCSB affected by the cuts. Another project, focused on the link between trauma and substance use within LGBTQ communities, particularly among minorities, also lost its $416,567 NIH grant recently.
“People are very worried about what this means for science in general, for research, and for all of the American people who would benefit from health research,” Barnett said.
She emphasized that the impact goes beyond the loss of data. Graduate students who were involved in the project now face a lack of vital training opportunities, and more than two years of work could go to waste.
Despite the setback, Barnett remains committed to her mission.
“Even though we lost this NIH funding, I join researchers across the country who are doubling down in our commitment to making sure that the next generation of scientists is trained and that families are still being served,” she said. “If that means finding foundation grants or figuring out other ways to do it, that’s where we’re at.”
Reaction From Local Politicians
Former state Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson criticized the Trump administration’s decision to cut federal research grants, calling the move ‘shortsighted’ and ‘mean-spirited,’ with serious consequences for public health and the local economy.
“There was nothing really obscure about these grants. They all get serious vetting,” Jackson said. “This is so shortsighted. Frankly, I think it’s mean-spirited. UCSB alone is responsible for about $2 billion toward our county’s economy through research, startups and academic programs.”
Sari Dominguez, who ran for State Assembly against Democratic incumbent Gregg Hart, defended the administration’s review of federally funded projects. She cited cost concerns and ideological differences and said President Trump is responding to public calls for greater scrutiny.
“I think this is just a way to really look at things again,” Dominguez said. “They are cutting back, but that doesn’t mean grants won’t be re-reviewed or reissued at a later time.”
Jackson said some of the affected research, including studies on Alzheimer’s disease, artificial pancreas development and climate innovation, are vital to U.S. leadership in science and technology.
“These are the kinds of things that keep America at the cutting edge,” she said. “To take a chainsaw to a hangnail is really going to cost our economy.”
The grant cancellations have also sparked debate over whether the cuts are part of a broader rollback of diversity, equity and inclusion — or DEI — initiatives.
“I think this is an attempt to take over control of our universities,” Jackson said. “Leveling the playing field through DEI isn’t giving people an unfair advantage — it’s making sure everyone can compete.”
Dominguez disagreed, arguing that DEI programs have led to more division than progress.
“I think DEI and all these other terms are causing more divisiveness than they are really leveling the playing field,” she said. “We did vote Trump in, and we knew what this was about.”
While both commentators acknowledged the issue is far from settled, Jackson said she worries about long-term damage to research and education, while Dominguez called the cuts a necessary course correction in federal priorities.
