The National Science Foundation’s Office of Inspector General (NSF OIG) has lost the practical ability to investigate research misconduct allegations involving NSF-funded work, according to NSF’s own FY2027 budget justification and corroborating reporting from Science and Retraction Watch. This is a change in operating reality, not a change in law: NSF OIG’s statutory misconduct-investigation authority under 45 CFR Part 689 has not been revoked. What has changed is that the office no longer has the investigative staff to exercise it.
For background on how NSF OIG is structured and what it is supposed to do under normal conditions, see CASRAI’s explainer, NSF OIG: How the National Science Foundation’s Inspector General Works. This article covers only what changed in 2025-2026 and what it means for anyone currently navigating an NSF-funded misconduct allegation.
What happened
Inspector General Allison Lerner, who had led NSF OIG since 2010, left the office on March 1, 2025, retiring through the federal government’s Deferred Resignation Program (the “fork in the road” offer extended government-wide early in 2025). Megan Wallace, previously the office’s assistant inspector general for investigations, became acting Inspector General. Deputy Inspector General Ken Chason also departed the office. Neither departure was disputed or contested publicly by NSF OIG; an office spokesperson confirmed the Deferred Resignation Program as the mechanism for Lerner’s exit.
The leadership turnover was one visible piece of a larger staffing contraction. According to NSF’s FY2027 congressional budget justification, NSF OIG has eliminated approximately 22 positions — roughly a 24% reduction in the office’s staff — since January 2025. Science’s investigative reporting, corroborated by Retraction Watch’s ongoing coverage of federal research-integrity staffing, found that the Office of Investigations component of NSF OIG lost its investigative-scientist staff entirely: several investigators left for positions at other federal agencies, and others separated through the Deferred Resignation Program. The budget document itself describes the resulting condition as “workforce challenges” that have left the office unable to carry out research-misconduct investigations.
What NSF OIG does with misconduct allegations now
Per NSF’s own budget-justification language, NSF OIG is no longer conducting research-misconduct investigations itself. Allegations it receives are instead referred to the grantee institution — the university, research institute, or other awardee employing the researcher — to investigate under that institution’s own research-misconduct policy. If the institution’s inquiry finds misconduct, its report goes back up through NSF OIG to NSF senior management, which adjudicates the case and any resulting findings or sanctions, rather than NSF OIG conducting or overseeing the investigation as it has historically done under 45 CFR Part 689’s inquiry/investigation/adjudication framework.
NSF and NSF OIG have reportedly discussed NSF itself reassuming the delegated misconduct-investigation authority that NSF OIG has held for decades, but according to Science’s reporting, NSF is not in a position to take on that mission in the near term either. That leaves a practical gap: the office that was purpose-built and statutorily authorized to investigate NSF-funded research misconduct no longer has the staff to do so, and no alternative federal investigative body has yet stepped into that specific role.
Why this matters for research institutions and PIs
- Institutions carry more of the investigative burden by default. A grantee’s own research-integrity office is now the practical first (and often only) investigative body for an NSF-funded misconduct allegation, even in cases that would previously have drawn a direct NSF OIG inquiry. Institutional research-integrity officers should expect NSF OIG referrals rather than NSF OIG-led investigations for the near future.
- NSF OIG’s other functions continue. This shift is specific to research-misconduct investigations under 45 CFR Part 689. Grant-fraud investigations, audits of NSF awards, and OIG Work Plan activity are separate functions within the office and are not described in the reporting or budget document as similarly affected — see CASRAI’s guide on how an OIG audit of a research grant works for how that distinct process operates.
- Timelines for existing cases are uncertain. Neither NSF nor NSF OIG has published a transition plan describing how allegations already in the pipeline when the staffing losses occurred are being handled, or how long the institution-refer-then-NSF-adjudicate model is expected to remain in place.
- This is a capacity problem, not a legal one. No regulation has been rescinded and no formal delegation of authority away from NSF OIG has been finalized as of this writing; institutions should not assume any reduced compliance obligation on their own end.
What is and isn’t confirmed
The staffing figures (approximately 22 positions, about a 24% reduction since January 2025) come directly from language in NSF’s FY2027 budget justification, a primary NSF document. The account of Office of Investigations losing its investigative-scientist staff, and of allegations now being referred to grantee institutions rather than investigated by NSF OIG, is drawn from Science’s exclusive reporting, which has been corroborated by Retraction Watch’s coverage of the same story. CASRAI has not independently verified figures beyond what these sources report, and has not seen a formal NSF OIG policy statement describing the referral process in the level of procedural detail an institution would need for compliance planning — institutions with an active or anticipated NSF-related misconduct matter should confirm current practice directly with NSF OIG rather than relying on secondary reporting.
Related CASRAI resources
- NSF OIG: How the National Science Foundation’s Inspector General Works — the statutory structure this article assumes as background.
- How an OIG Audit of a Research Grant Works — the separate, unaffected audit function.
- OIG Work Plan
- OIG Reports
