The Impact of NIH's Growing Reliance on Upfront Multi-Year Funding

I had a difficult time wrapping my head around the implications of NIH increasing the number of new multi-year funded (MYF) awards, so I pulled together this brief overview in case it's helpful for others.

How Multi-Year Funding Works

For MYF awards funded in advance, NIH uses the current year's appropriation to fully cover multiple out-years of new grants. During the transition, that means NIH is paying for the back end of existing awards and the full front end of new ones at the same time.

With a flat (or shrinking) budget, that arithmetic forces fewer new awards in the near term — both in terms of the number of awards and total dollars — for roughly the next 3–4 years.

The Math

Assuming:

• 10% of new awards are MYF (paid in advance) in FY25
• 25% of new awards are MYF (paid in advance) in FY26 and onward

If the share of MYF awards in FY26 is higher than this, the drop in the number of new awards and total award dollars would be even steeper.

What This Means

Per New York Times analysis, NIH FY25 funding dropped about 13% relative to the 2015–2024 average, while the count of new awards dropped about 22% (with a growing share of FY25 dollars committed to future years through MYF awards).

Under a higher MYF share in FY26, those declines could approach something like:

• ~20% below baseline for total funding
• ~30% below baseline for the count of new awards

The Bottom Line

The shift to multi-year funding isn't inherently bad — it provides stability for funded researchers. But during the transition period, the budget math forces a significant reduction in new awards. Researchers and institutions need to plan for this constrained environment.