NEA Grant Changes Redraw the Picture of American Art
Public domain image from RawPixel.com
Over the past two weeks, the arts world has been reeling from the Trump Administration’s heavy handed involvement. In addition to the news about the Kennedy Center, earlier this month, the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) announced significant changes to its grant funding priorities and process for FY2026. These changes appear to be in direct response to the President’s attention on the arts community and the spate of Executive Orders targeting DEI and transgender Americans.
As part of these changes, Challenge America Grants, which, since 2001 have explicitly supported underserved communities - which looks pretty “DEI” on its face, but included less obvious populations such as rural areas with limited arts access - have been cancelled without fanfare or explanation, other than “to focus NEA staff resources on the Grants for Arts Projects category.”
As for the Grants for Arts Projects (GAP), the big news was two-fold - the emphasis on America250/Semiquincentennial related projects got some early press, particularly given the Administration’s broader focus on America250. However, in the scheme of things, this is entirely predictable. FY2026 encompasses July 4, 2026 - the height of America250 commemoration - and the NEA has been part of the U.S. Semiquincentennial Commission as part of the original Obama era legislation.
More difficult to parse are some of the updated legal requirements. These include all of the standard terms that any previous grant applicant is likely familiar with, including all civil rights laws, plus an explicit requirement that “The applicant will comply with all applicable Executive Orders while the award is being administered.”
This is not in and of itself surprising - the NEA is part of the executive branch and therefore Executive Orders apply to its activities. However, the language goes on to explicitly require that “The applicant will not operate any programs promoting ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ (DEI) that violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws, in accordance with Executive Order No. 14173.” and that “The applicant understands that federal funds shall not be used to promote gender ideology, pursuant to Executive Order No. 14168….”
This language has understandably upset many in the arts community, with 463 artists signing onto a letter to the NEA protesting the grant changes and arts organizations expressing frustration about how to interpret the very broad language to determine what constitutes DEI. For example, it is unclear whether the prohibition is on any work that might be considered to reflect the values of diversity, equity and inclusion, regardless of the reason it was programmed and the artistic merit, or if it only applies if programming was selected with that intent. Further, the guidelines seem to encompass a grantee’s entire slate of programming, not just the programs that might be funded with an NEA grant award.
With these uncertainties, potential grant applicants - including organizations who have applied for and received funding on a regular basis and who depend on it for their programming - are in a bind. Do you apply and hope that whomever is ultimately in charge of assessing compliance agrees with your assessment that your programming is simply great art without a DEI message? Do you not apply and rely more heavily on state, local, and private funding? Both scenarios are almost certainly going to result in less programming overall, hurting organizations, artists, and ultimately audiences.
Some other things to look out for with the GAP process:
Organizations who had already submitted applications for a previously announced February 13, 2025 deadline will have to completely resubmit following the new guidelines published this month. Which is fun.
Deadlines for applications have changed overall and not all third party grant aggregation sites have updated their listings, so keep a close eye on that and go straight to the source when planning your timeline.
There are new limits on applications for GAP awards and Our Town grants, so if you’re looking at both, be mindful of the restrictions.
Ultimately, there will almost certainly be legal challenges related to some of the vague language in the new guidelines, especially if institutions rely on granted funds and get it pulled back based on speech restrictions imposed by the federal government. The First Amendment is going to get a workout over the next few years. But eventual litigation doesn’t help organizations make decisions now. For that, grant reliant organizations need savvy advisors who understand the grant landscape and who understand the organization and its level of risk aversion.
Attorney advertising for informational purposes only; not intended as legal advice.