The Prevent Halting of Active Research Act of 2025 (PHARA Act of 2025) would require the National Institutes of Health, through the Secretary of Health and Human Services, to immediately release and spend funding owed under existing NIH grant and cooperative agreements, and to pay pending reimbursement requests as quickly as possible. It also bars NIH from canceling agreements when the awardee is engaged in active and ongoing research.
For future NIH grants and cooperative agreements, the bill requires the inclusion of a termination clause. That clause would limit termination to material breach, changed circumstances, or mutual agreement of all parties, and would require at least 90 days’ written notice plus an attempt to amend the agreement before termination. The bill further prohibits NIH from terminating new agreements on the ground that they no longer advance program goals or agency priorities, and directs HHS to revise the relevant federal regulation to conform to that restriction.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would constrain NIH’s discretion over grant administration by requiring prompt release of obligated funds, limiting the agency’s ability to suspend or cancel active research awards, and narrowing the grounds on which future awards may be terminated. It would also amend the regulatory framework governing federal grant agreements by directing revision of 2 C.F.R. 200.340(a), affecting NIH grant recipients, cooperative agreement partners, and the agency’s internal funding and termination practices.
Sentiment
The bill’s introduction and broad list of Democratic cosponsors suggest strong support among its sponsors for protecting ongoing biomedical research and ensuring federal research funding is honored. No committee hearing transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no recorded floor or committee debate in the supplied materials. Based on the text alone, the measure appears framed as a response to concerns about funding freezes or abrupt terminations of NIH-supported research.
Contention
The main point of contention is the bill’s limitation on NIH’s ability to terminate or withhold grant funding, especially the prohibition on ending agreements because they no longer align with program goals or agency priorities. Supporters are likely to view these restrictions as necessary to protect scientific continuity and prevent disruption to ongoing studies, while critics may argue they unduly reduce agency flexibility, oversight, and responsiveness to changing priorities or circumstances. The requirement to release all funding and pay pending reimbursements immediately may also be seen as a significant constraint on administrative discretion.