Why It Matters

Northeastern University could lose millions in operational funding as it faces the Trump administration’s 15 percent cap on NIH indirect cost rates and cuts to research grants

As a global research university, Northeastern also navigates new congressional restrictions on international research collaboration that could disrupt long-standing partnerships. The university’s $50,000 payment to Lewis-Burke reflects a sector-wide mobilization—top universities have doubled their lobbying spending in 2025 to combat funding cuts.

The challenge is clear: convince Congress to reject the administration’s funding cuts and indirect cost caps while navigating new research security restrictions. A legislative solution would mean preserving current indirect cost formulas and blocking proposed NSF and NIH budget reductions.

By the Numbers

Northeastern University has been a consistent player in federal advocacy for over two decades, filing 241 lobbying disclosures since 2003. The university’s fourth quarter 2025 $50,000 payment to Lewis-Burke Associates LLC continues a partnership that began in 2013.

The university splits its advocacy between substantial in-house lobbying—spending $7.3 million since 2010—and specialized external firms. Beyond Lewis-Burke, Northeastern added Congressional Solutions Inc. and CT Group in 2021 for defense appropriations, and hired Holland & Knight LLP in 2024 for higher education regulatory matters.

Universities dramatically increased lobbying spending in 2025, with top institutions spending approximately double their 2024 levels. At least 15 universities, including MIT, Duke, Brown, and Yale, hired new lobbying firms after exclusively using in-house lobbyists in 2024.

The Agenda

Northeastern lobbies on federal research funding, appropriations for science agencies, and higher education policy. The university specifically focuses on securing federal dollars through the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, and Department of Energy, while advocating on workforce development in emerging technologies like artificial intelligence and biotechnology.

The university’s lobbying intensified amid congressional debates over indirect cost rates for research grants. Representative Jake Auchincloss warned that proposed caps would cost Massachusetts’s research sector $2 billion. Northeastern advocates on legislation including the NSF AI Education Act of 2025 and the National Biotechnology Initiative Act.

Research security restrictions affecting international collaboration represent another priority, with the university navigating complex regulations limiting partnerships with certain foreign entities through legislation like the Protecting American Research and Talent Act.

Broader Context

The Trump administration froze or ended approximately 5,300 NIH and NSF research grants totaling over $5 billion, while proposing a 57% cut to the National Science Foundation. Most consequentially, the NIH unilaterally capped indirect cost rates at 15%—a policy change projected to reduce funding to higher education institutions by $5.24 billion in FY2025.

Universities are responding with a sector-wide lobbying surge. The nation’s top universities have spent around $24 million lobbying Washington in the first nine months of 2025—more than double their 2024 spending.

However, Congress is resisting. The House approved a budget bill rejecting Trump’s request to slash NSF funding, and Congress included language that would maintain the current system of calculating indirect costs at the NSF and Department of Energy.

Between The Lines

Massachusetts Congressman Jake Auchincloss has forcefully opposed proposed caps on NIH indirect cost rates, warning of a $2 billion cost to his state’s research sector. Several bills align with Northeastern’s research strengths, including the NSF AI Education Act and National Biotechnology Initiative Act.

Peer institutions show unified advocacy. Brown University lobbies on research security and NSF/NIH appropriations, while Drexel University focuses on similar funding and defense research priorities.

Competitive Landscape

Lewis-Burke Associates LLC represents multiple elite research universities pursuing nearly identical federal advocacy agendas. Brown University shows lobbying on BIOSECURE Act provisions and NIH appropriations—a near-perfect overlap with Northeastern’s priorities.

The competitive landscape reveals a unified front rather than differentiated positioning. Universities share collective concerns about protecting federal research funding, defending indirect cost rates, and navigating research security regulations.

The Bottom Line

Northeastern University’s $50,000 payment to Lewis-Burke Associates LLC continues a long-standing partnership focused on federal research funding. The engagement reflects a sector-wide surge in university lobbying as research institutions face unprecedented pressure from federal funding cuts and new compliance demands. Congress shows some bipartisan resistance to the administration’s research funding reductions, creating potential openings for Northeastern’s advocacy efforts.

Access the Legis1 platform for comprehensive political news, data, and insights.

Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article