Wits scrambles to lessen fallout from Trump’s funding cuts
“It is impossible to rescue this whole operation. Nobody has that amount of money.”
Wits University researchers are scrambling to manage the fallout from the decision by US President Donald Trump to slash funding to South Africa. Photo: Ihsaan Haffejee / GroundUp
- Wits University is scrambling to manage the effects on health research of the decision by US President Donald Trump to slash funding to South Africa.
- Wits has estimated that the funding cuts could reduce its overall research output - measured in publications, clinical trials, and other academic activities - by up to 30%.
- The Wits Reproductive Health Institute at the Wits Health Consortium is especially hard hit.
As President Cyril Ramaphosa meets US president Donald Trump in Washington, Wits University is scrambling to lessen the fallout from Trump’s decision to cut US government funding to South Africa.
US government funding cuts have plunged health research into crisis, with faculties such as those at Wits and the University of Cape Town bearing the brunt of the impact. South Africa had three sources of funding:
- Direct US government funding through USAid, which Trump stopped on 20 January. This funding largely supported services such as HIV clinics and treatment programmes, but also research in some instances. At Wits this resulted in the retrenchment of over 500 staff.
- In February, the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) abruptly paused grants, which were mostly focused on strengthening the public health system and on disease surveillance, some of which is allocated to research. This could affect about 1,700 employees at the Wits Health Consortium (WHC) alone. Funding has been reinstated until the end of September, but a further 1,000 staff are likely to be retrenched at that point.
- Funds from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) are dedicated solely to medical research and fostering global scientific collaboration. South Africa is the single largest national recipient of NIH funding outside of the US itself. Its high prevalence of HIV and TB, combined with good infrastructure and medical expertise, make it an optimal location for conducting large clinical trials. According to Lynn Morris, Deputy Vice-Chancellor of Research and Innovation at Wits, the situation with NIH grants remains “heavily in flux”, creating an atmosphere of immense uncertainty amongst researchers.
Terminating research grants mid-cycle often violates legally binding contracts. These contracts are especially important when clinical trials are involved, as the university has an ethical responsibility to participants in the study – whether in treatment programmes or vaccine trials.
So far, a major research grant for an HIV vaccine has been completely terminated.
Awards involving collaborative research between South African and American universities were also withdrawn in terms of a new policy on 1 May. One such project, led by Wits in partnership with Harvard University, aimed to introduce portable MRIs to under-resourced, rural environments, initially focusing on dementia, with the broader aim of strengthening overall access to advanced medical care.
Another research project collaboration, between Wits and Brown University, aimed to assess environmental influences on rural to urban migration, and the resulting health effects on migrants. This project had been highly recommended for funding, but it was not approved - a decision believed to be linked to the freeze on US research funding.
Wits has estimated that the funding cuts could reduce its overall research output — measured in publications, clinical trials, and other academic activities — by up to 30%. This will be felt across faculties, with research in health science the most affected. Of the Wits Health Consortium’s grant income of R3.5-billion, 42% comes from US government funded agreements.
The Wits Reproductive Health Institute is the hardest hit at the WHC, as it received grants from all three agencies: USAid, CDC, and NIH.
Already seven NIH-funded WHC studies have been terminated. Five were joint projects which have been reinstated under their lead researchers, but with an explicit provision to exclude South African researchers. The other two grants, led by WHC itself, have not been reinstated.
Some South African researchers have been able to maintain partnerships with US colleagues, as private American funders, such as the Bill & Melinda Gates and Rockefeller Foundations, continue their support.
On the government side, three initiatives are at work to lessen the effects of the US cuts:
- The South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC) is talking to the National Treasury, through the Department of Health, about alternative sources of funding. SAMRC Head of Communications Tendani Tsedu said the SAMRC was also talking to philanthropic organisations, business and the EU to strengthen existing partnerships to maintain critical research functions. “Encouragingly, some organisations have already expressed interest in supporting this initiative,” he said.
- Discussions about addressing the shortfalls created by the US funding cuts between universities and the Department of Higher Education and Training began in April. Last week universities submitted applications for funding to address the shortfall to department.
- In a brief on 2 May, Blade Nzimande, Minister of Science, Technology and Innovation, announced the establishment of a working group tasked with advising the minister on how to future-proof the national research system. Ministerial spokesperson Veli Mbele confirmed that this group would work together with the two other initiatives, but no further details have been forthcoming.
In a reply to Parliament during question-time on 8 May, Deputy President Paul Mashatile added that the government is also exploring the possibility of funding from the National Lotteries Commission to address the shortfalls.
Meanwhile Wits is battling to prioritise what funding is left.
“The unfortunate truth at the moment is that it is impossible to rescue this whole operation. Nobody has that amount of money,” says Morris. She emphasises that many US-based collaborators are “as horrified about this as we are, because they are affected by this too”.
This article was originally published on GroundUp.
© 2025 GroundUp. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.