Trump's Pick to Lead NSF Would Be First Non-Scientist Director
March 16, 2026 · 2 min read
Jared Klein
The National Science Foundation may soon be led by someone who has never run a lab, published a paper, or held a faculty appointment. President Trump's nomination of Jim O'Neill — an investor, former HHS deputy secretary, and Peter Thiel associate — to serve as NSF director marks a sharp departure from the agency's 75-year tradition of scientist-led leadership.
The nomination, referred to the Senate HELP Committee on March 2, arrives at a precarious moment. The NSF has been without a permanent director since Sethuraman Panchanathan resigned last April, a period during which the agency cut hundreds of research grants and the administration proposed slashing its budget by billions.
What O'Neill's Background Signals
O'Neill served as HHS deputy secretary starting June 2025 and briefly as acting CDC head before being removed in February 2026. His private-sector career centers on technology investment: he was managing director of Thiel's Mithril Capital Management and CEO of the Thiel Foundation. He held senior HHS positions during the George W. Bush administration but has no record of scientific research or academic leadership.
The administration has signaled it wants NSF to pivot toward "near-term technological applications such as artificial intelligence and quantum information science," a framing that concerns university research leaders who fear basic research funding will be deprioritized.
Why PIs Should Pay Attention Now
The Biophysical Society is already lobbying on FY2027 topline numbers, requesting $9.9 billion for NSF, $51.3 billion for NIH, and $9.5 billion for DOE's Office of Science — all above current levels. Whether those numbers survive depends heavily on who occupies the director's chair and what review culture they impose.
Senate confirmation is far from certain. Initial reactions from HELP Committee members have been skeptical, and O'Neill's lack of scientific credentials gives opponents clear grounds for opposition.
For researchers and grant seekers navigating an already turbulent federal funding landscape, the confirmation process is worth tracking closely. The NSF directorship shapes everything from program priorities to merit review standards — and the person who fills it will define the agency's direction for years. Tools like Granted can help track how these policy shifts affect specific funding opportunities as they evolve.
In-depth analysis of this story and its implications for grant seekers is available on the Granted blog.