PHARA Act of 2025

Bill Number

H.R. 4007

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Health

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-06-12: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Last Updated

2025-11-19T09:06:45Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

The "Prevent Halting of Active Research Act of 2025" (PHARA Act) seeks to protect ongoing medical and scientific research funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). It mandates the immediate release of frozen funds for existing grants, prevents abrupt cancellations of active research projects, requires clear rules for ending future grants, and blocks terminations based solely on changes in government priorities.

Key Provisions

• Immediate Release of Funds (Section 2): The Secretary of Health and Human Services, through the NIH Director, must:
• Promptly release and spend all obligated funds under existing grant or cooperative agreements.
• Fully carry out these agreements.
• Quickly pay any outstanding reimbursement requests.
• Prohibit cancellation of agreements where recipients are actively conducting research.
• Termination Clauses in New Agreements (Section 3): All NIH grants or cooperative agreements signed after the bill's enactment must include a termination clause allowing ending only for:
• A serious violation (material breach) by a party.
• Significant unforeseen changes in conditions.
• Agreement by all parties.
• The party ending the agreement must give at least 90 days' written notice and first try to renegotiate terms with other parties.
• Prohibition on Terminations for Policy Shifts (Section 4): NIH cannot end new grants, in full or part, if the research no longer aligns with current program goals or agency priorities. The Secretary must update federal regulations (specifically, 2 CFR 200.340(a), which governs grant terminations) to reflect this rule.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Protection for Active Grants: Introduces a outright ban on canceling ongoing research grants, which was not previously required, ensuring funds already committed are spent without interruption.
• Standardized Termination Rules: Mandates specific clauses in future agreements with notice periods and amendment attempts, adding procedural safeguards not uniformly required before.
• Limits on Agency Discretion: Explicitly forbids using shifts in "program goals or agency priorities" as grounds for termination, amending regulations to reduce NIH's flexibility in reallocating funds based on evolving policy needs. This overrides parts of existing federal grant rules that allow broader termination authority.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: NIH and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will face reduced ability to pause or redirect funds mid-project, potentially limiting budget adjustments during fiscal constraints or policy changes. This could increase administrative burdens for compliance and regulatory updates.
• On Citizens and Researchers: Provides stability for scientists, universities, hospitals, and other grant recipients by safeguarding active projects from sudden cuts, allowing uninterrupted medical research that benefits public health (e.g., disease studies or drug development). It may prevent delays in breakthroughs that affect everyday health outcomes.
• On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, but could stabilize U.S.-funded international research collaborations if grants involve foreign partners, ensuring consistent support without abrupt withdrawals tied to domestic priorities.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• NIH and HHS Officials: Directly responsible for implementing fund releases, agreement enforcement, and regulatory changes.
• Research Institutions and Scientists: Universities, medical centers, and individual researchers receiving NIH grants, who gain protections against funding disruptions.
• Taxpayers and the Public: Indirectly benefit from sustained research investments, though it may limit government flexibility in reallocating public funds.
• Congressional Sponsors: Primarily Democratic members focused on health and science policy, indicating advocacy for research continuity amid potential administrative uncertainties.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal Implications: Strengthens contract-like protections for grant recipients by limiting arbitrary terminations, potentially leading to more litigation if disputes arise over "material breach" or "change in circumstances." The required regulatory revision ensures uniform application but could face challenges if seen as overly restrictive on executive branch discretion.
• Constitutional Implications: Aligns with Congress's power to control appropriations (under Article I), reinforcing that once funds are authorized, they cannot be easily withheld without legislative approval. It does not raise major separation-of-powers issues but curtails agency authority derived from existing statutes.
• Political Implications: Responds to concerns over potential executive actions freezing research funds (e.g., during budget disputes or policy shifts), promoting long-term stability in federal science funding. It may spark debate on balancing research autonomy against fiscal accountability, with broader effects on how future administrations manage NIH's $40+ billion annual budget.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Watson Coleman, Bonnie [D-NJ-12]

Cosponsors (62)

Rep. Thompson, Bennie G. [D-MS-2], Rep. Lynch, Stephen F. [D-MA-8], Rep. Johnson, Henry C. "Hank" [D-GA-4], Rep. Fields, Cleo [D-LA-6], Rep. Sewell, Terri A. [D-AL-7], Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large], Rep. Schakowsky, Janice D. [D-IL-9], Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-1], Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-12], Rep. Doggett, Lloyd [D-TX-37], Rep. Pettersen, Brittany [D-CO-7], Rep. Cherfilus-McCormick, Sheila [D-FL-20], Rep. Scholten, Hillary J. [D-MI-3], Rep. Bell, Wesley [D-MO-1], Rep. Keating, William R. [D-MA-9], Rep. Lee, Summer L. [D-PA-12], Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-6], Rep. Moore, Gwen [D-WI-4], Rep. Moulton, Seth [D-MA-6], Rep. Pocan, Mark [D-WI-2], Rep. Latimer, George [D-NY-16], Rep. Garcia, Robert [D-CA-42], Rep. Davis, Danny K. [D-IL-7], Rep. McIver, LaMonica [D-NJ-10], Rep. Barragán, Nanette Diaz [D-CA-44], Rep. Veasey, Marc A. [D-TX-33], Rep. García, Jesús G. "Chuy" [D-IL-4], Rep. Hayes, Jahana [D-CT-5], Rep. Landsman, Greg [D-OH-1], Rep. Beatty, Joyce [D-OH-3], Rep. Lofgren, Zoe [D-CA-18], Rep. Carter, Troy A. [D-LA-2], Rep. Mfume, Kweisi [D-MD-7], Rep. Fletcher, Lizzie [D-TX-7], Rep. Matsui, Doris O. [D-CA-7], Rep. Magaziner, Seth [D-RI-2], Rep. Stanton, Greg [D-AZ-4], Rep. Mullin, Kevin [D-CA-15], Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, Alexandria [D-NY-14], Rep. Larson, John B. [D-CT-1], Rep. Kelly, Robin L. [D-IL-2], Rep. Swalwell, Eric [D-CA-14], Rep. Johnson, Julie [D-TX-32], Rep. Garcia, Sylvia R. [D-TX-29], Rep. Foster, Bill [D-IL-11], Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9], Rep. Gonzalez, Vicente [D-TX-34], Rep. Krishnamoorthi, Raja [D-IL-8], Rep. Carson, André [D-IN-7], Rep. Thanedar, Shri [D-MI-13] and 12 more

Recent Actions

• 2025-06-12: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
• 2025-06-12: Introduced in House
• 2025-06-12: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Prevent Halting of Active Research Act of 2025 — issued 2025-06-12 — PDF (4 pages)