*Record Scratch*
*Freeze Frame*
You’re probably wondering how we ended up in this situation. If you are, head to the article before this one.
Now that you are all caught up, let’s get into how these executive orders and the loss of federal funding affect the museum field.
With the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) defunded and the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) facing the same fate, the museum field is bracing for impact. These funding sources are vital for operations, programming, and collection care, and their loss threatens museums' ability to serve their communities. We interviewed museum professionals from different types of museums to understand how these changes impact museums of different sizes and types, as well as their strategies to navigate shifting federal priorities.
A Coup De Main on Museums
The immediate effects of the executive order to freeze federal grants and loans left many museums scrambling to manage their operations amid growing uncertainty. David Cole, the president and CEO of the Science History Institute, says they are “in a bit of a holding pattern” for now. Operational challenges are compounded by the lack of communication and clarity from federal agencies. Museums with grant applications in progress are left in limbo, unsure whether their projects will be funded. This has forced some institutions to delay expenditures or reconsider planned initiatives. Other museums have been informed that their IMLS grants have been terminated. As mentioned in the previous article, IMLS grants function on a reimbursement basis, meaning these museums will not receive repayment for funds already spent.
Patricia O’Toole, the Chief Financial & Operating Officer at the Toledo Museum of Art, shared that their NEH application for matching funds was selected, but the award period was changed, and additional follow up with NEH was required. She noted they were messaging NEH weekly and though they eventually heard back, the grant was subsequently cancelled.
As institutions adapt to these immediate challenges, professionals highlight the difficulty of maintaining programs, staffing, and collections care. While some museums are turning to private donors and foundations to offset potential losses, this transition requires time and significant effort. The lack of warning surrounding these changes has made it particularly difficult for museums to plan effectively, leaving many in a state of financial and operational uncertainty.
One-Two Punch For University Museums
University museums, often reliant on federal funding, face their own set of challenges. While many private university museums might not feel the direct impact of these shifts right away, there is growing anxiety about potential changes to federally determined work-study programs, which could affect student workers. Additionally, the proposed tiered tax up to 21% on endowment income looms large over universities with significant endowments, threatening to impact their budgets severely and, by extension, their museum programs.
For private institutions like the University of Richmond Museums, federal funding has historically played a less significant role. However, Orianna Cacchione, the Deputy Director and Curator at the University of Richmond Museums, has expressed concern for potential changes to federally supported work-study programs, which many university museums rely on to employ student workers. She said these positions provide critical support for day-to-day operations while offering students valuable professional experience. A cut to work-study budgets could strain both students and institutions, forcing museums to find alternative solutions or reduce services.
Larger research-focused universities, such as the University of Kansas, are feeling the effects more severely. Jennifer Talbott, the Deputy Director for Operations and Innovation at the Spencer Museum of Art, explained that federal funds often trickle down from larger pools of research funding, leaving institutions like theirs particularly vulnerable to broad reductions in federal support. The Spencer Museum of Art, for instance, has several federally funded grant positions as well as federal work study employees, creating uncertainty about the future of these roles. When students qualify, Federal Work Study grants pay for three quarters of the student staff’s position. The Spencer remains hopeful that the allocated grant funding will be honored moving forward. Without this support, grant-funded staff positions could be eliminated entirely, disrupting long-term planning and the program’s impact. These funding uncertainties are prompting university museums to reconsider their long-term strategies.
The Cans (or Cannots) Down the Road
The long-term implications of freezing federal grants and loans and defunding key agencies for museums extend beyond immediate financial challenges. One significant consequence is the reduced accessibility to cultural and educational resources. Museums play a critical role in offering the public access to history, art, and culture, and as federal funding shrinks, the ability to host inclusive and diverse programming may decline. Without consistent funding, institutions may struggle to maintain free or affordable access, potentially alienating visitors who rely on these spaces for learning and leisure. The loss of federal support could lead to a scaling back of educational initiatives, community outreach programs, and collaborative projects, which are often tied to grants from agencies like the NEA, NEH, and IMLS.
Talbott and Cacchione both noted that many grants are transformative, funding projects that build institutional capacity or support critical areas like conservation and storage. Losing this funding could stall innovation and discourage museums from taking on ambitious projects that serve their communities. Cacchione said, “It’s really hard to find significant support for basic museum operations, for example, expanding or upgrading storage space. It’s a lot easier to secure donor support for exhibitions, acquisitions, or even positions.” Federal grants often fill in funding gaps for the aspects of museum work that are not as glamorous to donors.
Another concern is the possibility of the administration exploring alternative strategies to bypass the legality of getting rid of the federal funding agencies like IMLS, NEH, and NEA. Many museum professionals have shared concerns over possible changes to guidelines or imposing new requirements that could create administrative hurdles that complicate access to federal funding. New requirements and guidelines such as changing language in grant applications, with restrictions on terms like DEI potentially influencing how proposals are written and evaluated. Talbott described the language used in a recently submitted NEH application might be rejected under evolving federal priorities. Such constraints could limit these institutions’ ability to pursue programming and exhibitions addressing critical social issues.
Cutting the Cord
IMLS, NEH, and NEA have been vital lifelines for museums, channeling millions of dollars annually into projects that support education, preservation, and public programming. According to The American Alliance of Museums (AAM), in 2024 the Office of Museum Services (OMS) received 1,005 applications requesting more than $203 million from IMLS, reflecting the need for federal funding for museums across the country. AAM also reports that NEH awarded 738 grants totaling more than $100 million to institutions across the US, including museums and NEA provides more than 150 awards to museums and museum-related projects, totaling around $7 million.
These grants play a critical role in ensuring that smaller and mid-sized museums can sustain their operations. Federal support often enables these institutions to pursue initiatives that they would otherwise be unable to afford. For instance, NEH funding frequently covers collections care, such as cataloging and conservation work. Similarly, NEA grants make it possible to develop programs showcasing diverse artistic traditions.
The potential loss of NEH and NEA funding poses serious risks to the museum sector. Small museums, which often rely heavily on federal grants, may be forced to scale back their programming or, in some cases, close their doors altogether. Larger institutions might reduce investment in experimental or community-centered projects, narrowing their impact on the public. The lack of funding for collections care could also jeopardize the preservation of historically significant materials, leaving cultural artifacts at greater risk of deterioration. In addition, the absence of federal funding may create challenges for museums striving to remain accessible. Many museums use grants to offer free or reduced admission, ensuring that their programs and exhibits reach underserved communities. Without this support, ticket prices may rise, potentially limiting access for those who cannot afford to pay.
The importance of these federal funding agencies to museums cannot be overstated. These grants have long enabled institutions to carry out their educational and cultural missions, preserving the past while engaging with contemporary audiences.
Sailing into Uncharted Waters
As we navigate this uncertain period for museum funding, it’s essential to recognize the collective power of individual and institutional action. Museum professionals have expressed a need to explore alternative funding strategies and advocate for sustained public investment. However, the uncertainty surrounding federal support poses a persistent challenge to strategic planning and the preservation of museums’ core missions. Some museums, in anticipation of changing federal priorities, decided to not apply for any federal funding in the past year. They have focused their efforts on foundation grants and fundraising. Although they are not feeling an immediate impact, it is unclear whether the loss of federal funding will create more competition for these types of funding in the future.
As we reflect on the challenges ahead, it’s clear that sustaining our cultural institutions will require a united effort. Whether through grassroots advocacy, supporting innovative models of fundraising and income, or simply visiting your local museum, every action matters. Together, we can help protect and preserve the vital role that museums play in our lives and communities.