Skip to Content

One Bad NOFO?

Home » AI news » One Bad NOFO?

September 2025 | AI News Desk

“One Bad NOFO?” Study Warns of Weak AI Governance in U.S. Federal Grantmaking

Introduction : Why this innovation matters globally

Artificial intelligence is no longer confined to tech labs or Silicon Valley startups—it is everywhere. Governments are using AI in healthcare, defense, climate research, education, and infrastructure. Universities and nonprofits increasingly rely on federal grants to fund projects that integrate AI into their work.

But with this rapid adoption comes a critical question: Who ensures AI is used responsibly when taxpayer money funds it?

History has taught us that when new technologies spread without governance, the results can be dangerous. Think of early nuclear research without safety protocols, or social media platforms launched without moderation frameworks. AI carries similar risks: bias in algorithms, violations of privacy, opaque decision-making, and potential misuse.

A recent paper, provocatively titled “One Bad NOFO?” (Notice of Funding Opportunity), shines a spotlight on this problem. The research shows that while U.S. federal agencies are enthusiastic about promoting AI in grantmaking, they often fail to include clear governance requirements in their funding notices.

This gap means billions of taxpayer dollars could be fueling AI research and applications without adequate safeguards—a red flag for ethics, accountability, and public trust.

Key Facts: What the Research Shows

  1. What is a NOFO?
    • A Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) is an official grant announcement by U.S. federal agencies.
    • It describes the purpose, eligibility, evaluation criteria, and compliance rules for applicants.
  2. Study Findings
    • Many NOFOs mention AI positively (e.g., encouraging applicants to use AI).
    • Few NOFOs set clear rules for how grantees should address:
      • Transparency: Explaining how AI systems work.
      • Privacy: Protecting sensitive data.
      • Accountability: Defining who is responsible if AI causes harm.
    • In other words: AI is promoted but not governed.
  3. Why This Matters
    • Federal grants are a major driver of research in universities and nonprofits.
    • If governance standards are weak, projects could unintentionally cause:
      • Algorithmic bias in social programs.
      • Privacy violations in health research.
      • Unethical surveillance technologies.
  4. Examples Highlighted
    • Some grant notices encouraged AI use in healthcare but did not mention HIPAA compliance.
    • Others promoted AI in education research without requiring bias audits or student data protections.
    • A few mentioned “ethical AI” but provided no definitions or benchmarks.

Impact: Why Weak Governance is a Red Flag

1. For Researchers & Universities

  • Lack of clear guidance creates confusion. Should applicants include ethical AI frameworks? Or will reviewers ignore them?
  • Universities risk reputational damage if federally funded projects spark controversy over bias or misuse.

2. For Government & Public Trust

  • Taxpayer money could fund AI projects that undermine privacy or fairness.
  • Without governance, oversight bodies (Congress, watchdog groups) may question the legitimacy of federal grantmaking.
  • Could erode public trust in both government and AI technologies.

3. For Industry & Startups

  • Startups often rely on university partnerships for grants. Weak rules mean inconsistent standards across the ecosystem.
  • Companies may face backlash later when scaling AI products initially developed under loosely regulated grants.

4. For Society at Large

  • AI touches sensitive areas: healthcare, education, criminal justice.
  • Weak governance could lead to systemic harm, reinforcing inequality or endangering civil liberties.

Expert Quotes & References

  • Lead Author of the Study (paraphrased):

“AI isn’t just another research tool—it has profound social consequences. Grantmaking must require transparency, privacy, and accountability from day one.”

  • Former NSF Program Officer:

“Federal grants shape the direction of science. If we’re not embedding governance requirements now, we risk building a future AI landscape riddled with ethical blind spots.”

  • Brookings Institution Report on AI Governance (2024):
    • Warned that governments must set procurement and funding standards or risk “AI governance gaps” undermining national innovation strategies.

Broader Context: Linking This to Global Trends

  1. AI & Regulation
    • The European Union’s AI Act explicitly sets standards for “high-risk AI applications.”
    • By contrast, U.S. grantmaking appears more promotional than regulatory.
  2. AI & Education
    • Universities worldwide are adopting AI in classrooms and labs. Without federal guidance, standards for AI ethics education remain inconsistent.
  3. AI & Defense
    • Military AI projects often bypass transparent governance, citing national security. This raises additional concerns about oversight in federally funded AI.
  4. AI & Healthcare
    • AI promises faster drug discovery and better diagnostics, but privacy and consent issues remain critical.
    • Grant-funded healthcare AI must address these to maintain public trust.
  5. AI & Global Equity
    • If U.S. federal grants lack governance, smaller nations may adopt similar weak standards.
    • Conversely, stronger U.S. governance could set a global benchmark for responsible AI funding.

Closing Thoughts: Building Smarter AI Governance

The “One Bad NOFO?” study is a wake-up call. Federal grantmaking is not just about writing checks—it’s about setting the rules of the game.

AI is too powerful, too consequential, to be promoted without guardrails. The next generation of grant notices must:

  • Define clear transparency requirements.
  • Mandate privacy protections.
  • Require accountability frameworks from applicants.
  • Establish review panels with AI ethics expertise.

As AI becomes embedded in every field—medicine, climate science, education, defense—governance must keep pace. Otherwise, innovation risks outpacing responsibility.

The call to action is clear: AI governance should be written into the DNA of every federal grant. Without it, taxpayer money could fuel not just innovation, but unintended harm.

The future of AI will be defined not only by algorithms, but by the values we choose to fund.

#AIInnovation #FutureTech #GlobalImpact #ResponsibleAI #DigitalTransformation #EthicalAI #AIGovernance #PublicTrust #Transparency #AIUpdate

📌 This article is part of the “AI News Update” series on TheTuitionCenter.com, highlighting the latest AI innovations transforming technology, work, and society.

BACK