A “malign foreign talent recruitment program” (MFTRP) is a specific, statutorily defined category under United States federal research-security law — not a general label for any international collaboration or overseas fellowship. The term comes from the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 (Public Law 117-167), and it now sits behind concrete pre-award and post-award certification requirements at NSF, NIH, and other federal research agencies. This page covers the statutory definition, who has to certify what and when, and what happens when a covered individual or institution doesn’t comply.
This is a narrower, more operational topic than CASRAI’s general foreign talent recruitment programme entry, which surveys the broader international policy landscape. Here, the focus is specifically on the US statutory definition, the disclosure mechanics, and the consequences that attach to it.
The statutory definition
The CHIPS and Science Act’s research-security provisions are codified at 42 U.S.C. § 19231 through 19237 (Title 42, Chapter 163, Subchapter VI, Part C). The operative definition of “malign foreign talent recruitment program” appears at 42 U.S.C. § 19237(4). In substance, it defines an MFTRP as any program, position, or activity that provides compensation — cash, in-kind compensation including research funding, promised future compensation, complimentary foreign travel, non-de-minimis gifts, honorific titles, career-advancement opportunities, or other remuneration — directly from a foreign country of concern (or an entity based in, funded by, or affiliated with one) to a targeted individual, in exchange for the unauthorized transfer of intellectual property, materials, data products, or other nonpublic information owned by a US entity.
The statute lists specific features that make a program fall into this category, including where the individual is required to:
- Recruit trainees or researchers on the foreign sponsor’s behalf
- Establish a “shadow” laboratory or company abroad that duplicates their US-funded work
- Accept a formal faculty or staff position at a foreign institution
- Continue the arrangement without the ability to terminate it except in extraordinary circumstances
- Perform work that duplicates the individual’s existing federal research and development award
The Act also carves out specific exclusions so the prohibition doesn’t sweep in ordinary international scholarship: it does not restrict scholarly presentations or publishing of scientific information that isn’t otherwise controlled under existing law, and it does not restrict participation in international conferences or exchanges built on open, reciprocal exchange of scientific information aimed at advancing international scientific understanding. The CHIPS and Science Act entry covers the Act’s broader Title VI research-security scope; the NSPM-33 entry covers the earlier 2021 presidential memorandum this title builds on.
The prohibition and the certification requirement
42 U.S.C. § 19231(b)(3) directs federal research agencies to prohibit research and development awards from being made where a covered individual named in the proposal is participating in an MFTRP. 42 U.S.C. § 19232(a) then operationalizes that prohibition through a two-part certification:
- Individual certification — each “covered individual” listed on a proposal (typically senior/key personnel) must certify that they are not a party to a malign foreign talent recruitment program.
- Institutional certification — the applicant institution must certify that each covered individual it employs has been made aware of this requirement and has complied with it.
This isn’t a one-time, pre-award-only step. Agencies require certification at proposal submission and, for active awards, on an ongoing basis throughout the award period — see the agency-specific implementation below. The underlying prohibition has applied to covered awards since May 20, 2024.
How agencies have implemented it: NSF and NIH
NSF formalized its implementation through Important Notice No. 149 (“Updates to NSF Research Security Policies”), published June 30, 2025 and updated through November 2025, with most components effective December 2, 2025. It requires the Authorized Organizational Representative to certify pre-award, each individual senior/key person to certify individually, and — for awards issued on or after May 20, 2024 — an annual post-award certification submitted through Research.gov by PIs and co-PIs. NSF has stated it intends to extend the post-award certification to all senior/key personnel at a future date. The same notice also covers a related but distinct requirement: research-security training tied to CHIPS Act Section 10634 (42 U.S.C. § 19234).
NIH moved later. Its Common Forms mandate (Guide Notice NOT-OD-26-018) took effect for due dates on or after January 25, 2026, and requires an ORCID iD linked to the applicant’s eRA Commons account, displayed in the Common Form’s Persistent Identifier field, alongside a certification that the individual is not participating in an MFTRP. NIH initially ran a warning-only enforcement period, extended once through NOT-OD-26-033 (issued February 4, 2026, extended through May 7, 2026), before eRA system validations became hard errors on May 8, 2026 (NOT-OD-26-079) — meaning a non-compliant submission is now blocked outright rather than merely flagged. See CASRAI’s NIH Other Support Template guide for how this certification interacts with NIH’s broader foreign-disclosure requirements on Other Support and Current and Pending Support.
Other CHIPS-Act-covered agencies (DOE, NASA, DOD, and others) are implementing the same underlying statutory requirement, but NSF and NIH have published the most fully documented, agency-wide certification mechanics as of this writing. Research administrators supporting investigators with awards or pending proposals across multiple agencies should confirm the specific notice each agency has issued rather than assuming NSF’s or NIH’s mechanics transfer directly.
Consequences of participation or non-compliance
The statute and its implementing agency policies attach consequences at both the award level and, functionally, the submission level:
- Award ineligibility. Under 42 U.S.C. § 19231(b)(3), an agency is directed not to make an award where a covered individual named in the proposal is participating in an MFTRP.
- Mid-award action. 42 U.S.C. § 19233(a)(3) authorizes an agency, on learning that a covered individual is participating in an MFTRP, to require the individual’s substitution or removal from the award, reduce the award’s funding amount, or suspend or terminate the award outright.
- Submission-level blocking. As NIH’s May 2026 rollout shows, agencies are increasingly enforcing this through hard system validations — a proposal that fails the certification simply cannot be submitted, rather than being accepted and flagged for later review.
- False-certification exposure. Certifications made to a federal agency in connection with a grant application are subject to the general federal prohibition on false statements to the government (18 U.S.C. § 1001); a knowingly false MFTRP certification is not just a compliance failure but a potential predicate for separate federal liability, independent of whatever the funding agency itself does to the award.
- Institutional exposure. Because institutions certify awareness and compliance on behalf of their covered individuals, a pattern of non-disclosure can implicate the institution’s own certification, not just the individual researcher’s.
Neither 42 U.S.C. § 19232 nor § 19233 explicitly legislates debarment or suspension under the government-wide debarment regulations at 2 CFR Part 180, but agencies retain their existing, independent debarment authority; an MFTRP finding that also involves a broader pattern of nondisclosure or fraud can feed into a debarment referral through those separate, pre-existing mechanisms rather than through the MFTRP statute itself.
What “foreign country of concern” means here
The MFTRP definition turns on the foreign sponsor being a “foreign country of concern” (or an entity based in, funded by, or affiliated with one). The CHIPS and Science Act defines this term elsewhere in Title VI and applies it consistently across the Act’s various disclosure and security provisions — NSF’s implementing guidance identifies the People’s Republic of China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea as the core covered countries, plus any other country the Secretary of State separately designates. The same “country of concern” concept underpins the Act’s separate Foreign Financial Disclosure Reporting requirement, which is a distinct disclosure obligation from MFTRP certification and covers a different trigger ($50,000 or more in gifts, contracts, or other support from a country of concern) — the two shouldn’t be conflated when advising an investigator on what applies to their specific situation.
Frequently asked questions
Is every foreign talent recruitment program an MFTRP?
No. The Act’s prohibition targets programs meeting the specific statutory definition above — tied to a foreign country of concern and to unauthorized transfer of IP, data, or other nonpublic information in exchange for compensation. Legitimate international collaborations, visiting scholar arrangements, and open scholarly exchange are not automatically swept in, and the Act explicitly protects ordinary scholarly presentation, publication, and reciprocal international exchange.
Who has to certify they are not part of an MFTRP?
“Covered individuals” — generally senior/key personnel named on a federal research proposal — must certify individually. The applicant institution separately certifies that it has made those individuals aware of the requirement and that they’ve complied.
Is the certification a one-time, pre-award step?
No. Depending on the agency, certification is required at proposal submission and again on an ongoing or annual basis for active awards — NSF, for example, requires an annual post-award certification through Research.gov for PIs and co-PIs.
Does this apply the same way at NSF and NIH?
Both implement the same underlying statutory requirement, but on different timelines and through different mechanics — NSF’s certification structure has been in place since its Important Notice No. 149 rollout in late 2025, while NIH’s Common Forms-based certification became a hard submission requirement in May 2026. Always check the specific agency notice currently in effect rather than assuming one agency’s process applies to another.
What happens if an investigator was in a qualifying program before applying for federal funding?
The statutory prohibition is not applied retroactively to research and development awards made or applied for before an agency established its implementing policy, but a current, ongoing MFTRP relationship at the time of certification is what the certification itself addresses — research administrators should treat any past or ongoing foreign talent program relationship as something to review against the current definition before a covered individual certifies, rather than assuming it’s automatically excluded.
Related CASRAI resources
- Foreign talent recruitment programme — the broader, multi-jurisdiction concept
- CHIPS and Science Act — the Act’s full Title VI research-security scope
- NSPM-33 — the 2021 presidential memorandum this title implements and extends
- Research security — the umbrella federal policy area
- Research Security Officer (RSO)
- Undue foreign influence
- ORCID iD for NIH Senior/Key Personnel
- NIH Other Support Template: Foreign Disclosure and Certification Rules
- Export Control Reform and Research Security
