The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine is facing renewed criticism after a consumer advocacy group released a report alleging the institution is using federal funding to support politically charged initiatives.
The report, published by Consumers’ Research and labeled a “Woke Alert,” examines a range of projects, workshops, and grants tied to topics such as transgender youth, diversity programs, policing, and climate policy. The group argues that these efforts reflect a consistent ideological direction rather than neutral scientific inquiry.
At the center of the criticism is funding. According to the report, roughly 70 percent of the organization’s budget comes from federal sources. That financial connection is being used to question whether taxpayer dollars are supporting work that critics view as advocacy rather than research.
Consumers’ Research points to several examples. Among them are workshops focused on the health and well-being of transgender youth and publications examining disparities affecting LGBTQ adolescents. The report also highlights multiple initiatives centered on diversity, equity, and inclusion within science and higher education, including grant programs aimed at increasing representation in biomedical research.
Policing research is another focal point. The report references a committee formed after the 2020 protests that examined racial disparities in the criminal justice system, as well as studies discussing the impact of policing on certain communities. Critics argue these efforts reflect a predetermined perspective, while supporters would likely frame them as attempts to analyze documented social issues.
Climate-related work is also cited. The National Academies has published studies addressing climate change and, in some cases, exploring ways to increase public engagement on the issue. Critics included in the report suggest this crosses into advocacy, particularly when tied to policy discussions or external funding sources.
That outside funding has drawn additional scrutiny. The report notes partnerships with organizations such as the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative and funding connections to the Bezos Earth Fund. Some analysts argue these relationships raise questions about influence, especially when research outputs intersect with policy debates or legal efforts tied to those funders’ priorities.
Roger Pielke Jr., a policy scholar referenced in the report, suggested the institution has shifted over time from operating strictly at Congress’s direction to acting more independently, including through partnerships that may carry their own perspectives.
The National Academies has long operated as a congressionally chartered body tasked with providing scientific advice and research. Supporters of its work generally point to its role in producing peer-reviewed studies and convening experts across disciplines. Critics, as reflected in this report, argue that its recent output reflects a more defined ideological tilt.
