Employees of federal science agencies work in every state around the country, providing health care, managing public lands, supporting farmers, predicting the weather and many other tasks.
Federal workforce changes
In almost every state, the largest science agency is the Veterans Health Administration, which provides health care to veterans at more than 1,000 facilities. One exception is Montana, where the largest federal science agency is the U.S. Forest Service, which manages nine National Forests covering millions of acres across the state. The Forest Service is also the largest agency in Idaho, which is similarly home to millions of acres of national forest. The National Institutes of Health is the largest science agency in Maryland, home to the agency’s headquarters.
Amid federal workforce cuts and disruptions to funding for scientific research and environmental preservation, there was a decrease in the number of federal scientific employees working in every state between September 2024 and August 2026. The state with the largest percentage decrease was Alaska, which lost 25.6% of its federal science workforce. Decreases at four federal public lands agencies—the Forest Service, National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management and Fish and Wildlife Service—accounted for 78% of the total decrease in the state. These agencies manage about 60% of the land in Alaska, and a decrease in the federal workforce leaves fewer people to provide services for visitors to public lands and conduct maintenance to ensure safety and effective land management.
Decreases in federal employment can reach far beyond the individual employees who leave their jobs since federal employees and public lands are also an integral part of Alaska’s economy. Federal jobs often pay more than other jobs in the state and they infuse money into the economy. Other industries important to Alaska’s economy, such as oil, resource development and tourism, are intertwined with public lands and rely on the work of federal employees. In 2023, for example, visitors to Alaska’s national parks supported over 20,000 jobs in the state and resulted in $2.3 billion in benefits to the state’s economy.
Other Western states, including Idaho, Montana, Colorado and Utah also saw their federal science workforces decrease by more than 15% between September 2024 and August 2026. Decreases at public land agencies were also the primary drivers of the overall decreases in the federal workforce in these states, which, like Alaska, have large public lands including national parks and national forests. The state with the smallest percentage decrease was Connecticut. While Connecticut was the only state that saw an increase in its overall federal workforce during the same period, the state’s science workforce still decreased by more than 5%.
Federal funding changes
Federal funding for science, as measured by project grants and research and development contracts issued by science agencies, also experienced changes in 2026. The amount of federal funding to states and communities can vary for many reasons. Areas with large universities, for example, may receive more scientific research funding or grant programs may target specific locations such as rural or coastal communities. Between 2024 and 2026, however, most areas around the country experienced decreases in the amount of federal science funding they received.
The majority of states, 45 out of 50, and the District of Columbia saw a decrease in the amount of funding they received in project grants from science agencies. Wyoming, for example, received 89% less project grant obligations issued by science agencies in fiscal 2026 than in fiscal 2024. The primary diver of this overall decrease in Wyoming was a decrease in project grant funding from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which awarded the state $342.9 million in 2024 but obligated a negative amount of funding in fiscal 2026. The Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation both awarded zero dollars in project grant funding to Wyoming in 2026, down from an average of $23 million in 2024.
Similarly, West Virginia and Nevada both experienced a decrease of 83.7% in their science grant funding in 2026. In West Virginia, both of the state’s congressional districts experienced decreases, and all four of Nevada’s congressional districts similarly received less project grant funding in 2026 than in 2024. In both states, a large decrease in project grant funding from NIST was a significant driver of the decrease.
In North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Iowa, however, the amount of project grant funding received from science agencies was greater in 2026 than in 2024. Georgia, for example, received $1.2 billion more project grant funding from science agencies in 2026, an increase of 88.2%. This increase was primarily due to a $1.5 billion increase in project grant funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to the state’s 5th congressional district, which encompasses most of Atlanta. North Carolina also saw an increase of $1.2 billion in 2026. This increase was similarly driven by significant FEMA funding to the state’s 2nd district.
At the more local level, the vast majority of congressional districts experienced a decrease in the amount of project grant funding they received from science agencies, with only around 50 districts experiencing an increase. The district with the largest percentage decrease in 2026 was Virginia’s 6th district. The top 10 congressional districts by percentage decrease in project grant funding also included districts in Texas, Colorado, Ohio and California.
A similar pattern occurred in contract funding issued by science agencies for scientific research and development. This contract funding goes to a variety of organizations, including small businesses, nonprofits and public and private universities. 41 states saw decreases in their R&D contract funding between fiscal 2024 and fiscal 2026. Nevada, for example, saw a decrease of 94.7% in the R&D contract funding it received from science agencies in 2026. Washington and North Dakota also saw decreases of more than 80%. Three states—Arkansas, Maine and Vermont—received zero contract funding in fiscal 2026, compared with an average of more than $2 million in fiscal 2024.
Mississippi, on the other hand, received more than triple the research and development contract funding in fiscal 2026 than in fiscal 2024. States such as Florida, Ohio, New Jersey and Kentucky also saw increased R&D contract funding in 2026. Across these states, an increase in research and contract development funding from NASA was the main driver of this increase.
Why this matters
Decreases in federal science employees and funding can have a significant impact on communities. Fewer staff members in a VA medical center, USDA field office or national park can disrupt services to the public. Decreases in federal science funding also stretch beyond a specific grant or contract recipient because every $1 in federal science funding returns more than $2 in economic benefits. Decreased funding means fewer of those benefits are realized.
The impact of these cuts also reaches across location and demographics. Seniors, veterans and those with chronic illnesses are harmed by the reduced investment in public health and biomedical research. Cuts to public land agencies affect all those who work in, enjoy or depend on the outdoors, including a large percentage of the population in many Western states. Small businesses, nonprofits and universities that rely on federal funding to employ staff, support lab work or bring products to market are left with limited resources and options.