The Trump administration’s pursuit of cuts to medical research grants would imperil a funding stream that generated over $915 million in economic activity in Alabama last year, a new study shows.

The report by United for Medical Research found National Institutes of Health grants to researchers in Alabama totaled $380.3 million, supporting 4,411 jobs and having a total economic impact of $915.9 million in the state in fiscal year 2024.

That’s just a share of the $36.94 billion in NIH grants awarded to researchers in the 50 states plus the District of Columbia. That led to 407,782 jobs and $94.58 billion in new economic activity nationwide, according to the report.

“We urge Congress and the Trump Administration to work together to ensure that America’s long-standing and highly successful biomedical innovation ecosystem, which has a strong and well-funded NIH at its center, remains the envy of the world,” UMR President Caitlin Leach said in a news release.

By far the largest recipient in the state was the University of Alabama at Birmingham, where researchers collected 615 NIH awards, totaling $334.4 million in fiscal year 2024.

Among the NIH-funded programs at UAB is one of just nine cystic fibrosis research centers in the United States. Along with the Cystic Fibrosis Care Center at the Children’s Hospital of Alabama and UAB Hospital, the interdisciplinary center, “fosters an innovative and direct link between basic scientists and clinicians focused on treating and curing CF,” according to the report.

The five Alabama institutions that received the most NIH funding last year were:

• University of Alabama System
• Auburn University
• University of South Alabama
• Tuskegee University
• CFD Research Corp.

The report comes at a time when the National Institutes of Health, the primary funding source for medical research in the United States, has come under fire from the Donald Trump administration.

The administration moved in February to cap grant payments for “indirect costs” of research – things like facility and administrative fees. Those are distinct from grant-funded “direct costs” like researchers’ salaries and laboratory supplies, and some institutions receive far more financial support from the former than from the latter.

Nearly two dozen states and organizations supporting research institutions have sued to block the cap, and earlier this month, a federal judge issued an injunction to put the cuts on hold while the suits proceed.

Alabama is not among the states suing over the cuts, AL.com has reported.

The report presents a case that beyond improving health, NIH-funded research supports local economies by creating direct and indirect jobs, funding procurement of research materials, spinning off businesses and encouraging private investment.

“There is no better investment than one that saves lives, supports local economies and drives America’s global leadership in biomedical innovation,” Leach said. “When Congress invests strongly and consistently in the NIH, all three of those things happen.”

United for Medical Research describes itself as a coalition of research institutions, patient and health advocates, and private industry that seeks, “strong and sustainable increases in funding for the National Institutes of Health.”