Federal Agencies Respond to “Gold Standard Science” Executive Order

In May 2025, President Trump issued the executive order “Restoring Gold Standard Science,” establishing nine core tenets for federally-funded research, including reproducibility, transparency, and unbiased peer review. The order mandated aggressive timelines: 30 days for the Office of Science and Technology Policy guidance and 60 days for agency implementation plans. Notably, the guidance encourages using artificial intelligence to streamline compliance and reduce administrative burden.

Nine federal agencies and departments have now released their implementation plans. The good news: agencies are largely reinforcing existing policies rather than introducing significant new compliance requirements. Key themes include expanding data repositories, eliminating embargo periods for immediate access, enhancing data management plans with specific timelines, and standardizing metadata formats for better interoperability.

The order has generated diverse responses from the scientific community. The Center for Open Science states that while the order references open science practices it champions, it expresses concern that its potential implementation by political appointees risks “introducing partisan and ideological interference” and could undermine the very principles it claims to support. In a recent editorial, WashU professor Michael Wysession and 19 editors-in-chief of the scientific journals of the American Geophysical Union argue that the order contains “false or misleading” assessments and threatens First Amendment rights by potentially censoring scientists whose findings contradict political agendas.

As it stands, none of the released plans address Section 7 of the Executive Order, which establishes senior political appointees as the sole arbiters of scientific integrity violations with the authority to correct information and recommend disciplinary action. But agencies acknowledge other significant implementation concerns: The National Science Foundation notes that achieving uniform metrics across diverse research fields “will be challenging” and that accepting negative results will require “cultural change” across academia, professional societies, and publishers. Commerce calls for the need for “more expansive, sustained, and coordinated mechanisms” for transparency. The complexity of measuring compliance with these principles beyond existing policies raises questions about how agencies will meaningfully evaluate adherence to Gold Standard Science tenets.

As we await additional agency plans, researchers should continue following established best practices. The Libraries’ ScholPub and Data Services teams remain available to meet WashU authors’ compliance needs with publication support and data management planning assistance.

Access the Implementation Plans

Department-Level Responses:

• Department of Commerce
• Department of Energy
• Department of Health and Human Services
• U.S. Department of Agriculture

Agency Responses:

• Consumer Product Safety Commission
• Food and Drug Administration (FDA/HHS)
• NASA
• National Institutes of Health (NIH/HHS)
• National Science Foundation

Note: Some agencies like the FDA and NIH operate under the Department of Health and Human Services, which has also issued its own department-wide response.