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 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 February 2026. The state with the largest percentage decrease was Alaska, which lost 36.7% 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 84% 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, Wyoming and Utah also saw their federal science workforces decrease by more than a quarter between September 2024 and February 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 2025. 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 2025, however, most areas around the country experienced decreases in the amount of federal science funding they received.
The majority of states, 36 out of 50, had a decrease in the funding they received in project grants from science agencies. Mississippi, for example, received 85.6% less funding from project grants issued by science agencies in fiscal 2025 than the previous year. The state’s 3rd congressional district, home to Mississippi State University and parts of the city of Jackson, accounted for most of this decrease. In fiscal 2024, the National Institute of Standards and Technology obligated more than $1 billion in project grants within the district, but that funding fell by 99% in fiscal 2025. In Colorado, which saw its project grant funding decrease by 69.6% in fiscal 2025, a large decrease in NIST obligations in the 1st congressional district and in FEMA funding in the 6th district together accounted for about three-quarters of the state’s decrease. These two districts together cover much of Denver and its suburbs.
In states such as North Carolina, Michigan and Alabama, however, the amount of project grant funding received from science agencies more than doubled in fiscal 2025. In North Carolina, more than 60% of the increase was due to obligations from NIST in the state’s 2nd district, which totaled more than $1 billion in fiscal 2025, up from less than $300,000 in fiscal 2024. The majority of this increased NIST funding was a grant to the state government intended to help it develop a plan to expand broadband access. In Michigan and Alabama as well, an increase in 2025 of more than $1 billion in NIST funding related to expanding broadband access drove much of the overall increase in project grant funding.
At the more local level, around two-thirds of congressional districts experienced a decrease in the amount of project grant funding from science agencies. Alaska, with its single, at-large congressional district, was the only state which had no districts that experienced a decrease in project grant funding in 2025. The district with the largest percentage decrease in 2025 was Virginia’s 8th district, located in the Washington, D.C., suburbs. Among the top 10 congressional districts by percentage decrease in project grant funding were also four districts in Texas, and districts in Colorado, Utah 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. Thirty two states experienced decreases in their R&D contract funding between fiscal 2024 and fiscal 2025. In Arkansas, for example, R&D contract funding decreased by 96%, going from $4.3 million in fiscal 2024 to less than $200,000 in fiscal 2025. Rhode Island, West Virginia and Kansas also saw decreases of more than 75% in their research and development contract funding in fiscal 2025.
Kentucky, New Mexico and Mississippi, on the other hand, received more than double the research and development contract funding in fiscal 2025 than they did in fiscal 2024. In all three 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.