Science
The U.S. Is Funding Fewer Grants in Every Area of Science and Medicine
In the past decade, the National Institutes of Health awarded top scientists $9 billion in competitive grants each year, to find cures for diseases and improve public health.
This year, something unusual happened…
This year, something unusual happened… Starting in January, the Trump administration stalled that funding. By summer, funding lagged by over $2 billion, or 41 percent below average.
But in a surprising turn, the N.I.H. began to spend at a breakneck pace and narrow this gap.
There was a catch, however: That money went to fewer grants.
Which means less research was funded in areas such as aging, diabetes, strokes, cancer and mental health.
Which means less research was funded in areas such as aging, diabetes, strokes, cancer and mental health.
National Institutes of Health competitive grant funding
To spend its budget, the N.I.H. made an unusual number of large lump-sum payments for many years of research, instead of its usual policy of paying for research one year at a time.
As a result of this quiet policy shift, the average payment for competitive grants swelled from $472,000 in the first half of the fiscal year to over $830,000 in the last two months.
While this might sound like a boon for researchers, it’s actually a fundamental shift in how grants are funded — one that means more competition for funding, and less money and less time to do the research.
In the past, the N.I.H. typically awarded grants in five annual installments.
Researchers could request two more years to spend this money, at no cost.
Under the new system, the N.I.H. pays up front for four years of work.
And researchers can get one more year to spend this money.
Which means that they get less money on average, and less time to spend it.
And because these fully funded grants commit all of their money up front, it means the agency’s annual budget is divided into fewer projects, instead of being spread among a larger number of scientific bets.
The new policy directive came from the White House’s Office of Management and Budget, which in the summer instructed the N.I.H. to spend half of its remaining funds to fully fund research grants. In the past, the agency would do so only in special circumstances.
The White House has said this would “increase N.I.H. budget flexibility” by not encumbering its annual budget with payments to previously approved projects. It has said it plans to continue this policy in 2026, while proposing to shrink the agency’s budget by $18 billion, or nearly 40 percent. (The Senate and House rejected the White House’s proposed budget cuts, but have not yet agreed on the agency’s budget.)
“My sense of it was that the administration wanted to clear the decks,” said Sarah Kobrin, a branch chief at the N.I.H.’s National Cancer Institute, who said she was sharing her views, not those of the institute.
The new policy is being carried out as the Trump administration has tightened its hold over federal science funding. Earlier this year, it delayed reviewing grants in order to vet research by political appointees, culled projects that mentioned D.E.I. and fired thousands of employees or pressured them to retire early. (The N.I.H. lost nearly 3,000 employees this year, or about 14 percent of its work force, based on a New York Times review of the agency’s shutdown contingency plans.)
“They brought everything to a stop,” Dr. Kobrin said.
Nonetheless, the N.I.H. managed to spend most of its budget by the end of the fiscal year. “My colleagues did an outstanding job to work their butts off to approve things,” said Theresa Kim, a program officer at N.I.H.’s National Institute on Aging.
Something similar happened at the National Science Foundation, which is the second-largest federal funder of research at U.S. universities, after the N.I.H.
The N.S.F. started the year with funding delays caused by the Trump administration, and it lost about a third of its employees in layoffs or forced retirements. The agency ended the year awarding 25 percent fewer new grants.
New grants awarded by the National Science Foundation, 2015–25
Facing a proposed $5 billion cut to its $9 billion budget, the N.S.F. fully paid off many of the grants that were on its books, a strategy that employees called “paying down the mortgage.” It also paid for nearly all new awards upfront (though, unlike at the N.I.H., not necessarily for less time and money).
To draw these conclusions, The Times used public data to analyze nearly every competitive grant — over 300,000 in all — that the N.I.H. and the N.S.F. awarded since 2015, and interviewed many employees at these agencies.
Here’s what we found:
1. Fewer grants in every area of science and medicine
Together, the N.I.H. and the N.S.F. had a nearly $60 billion annual budget for funding future breakthroughs in science and medicine, about a quarter of which is typically spent on new grants or competitive renewals.
This year, both agencies made far fewer competitive awards:
Competitive grants at the …
National Institutes of Health
National Science Foundation
The White House has said it is streamlining scientific funding by eliminating wasteful spending and cutting “woke programs” that “poison the minds of Americans.”
But the more than 3,500 fewer competitive grants from the N.I.H. this year touched every area of biology and medicine:
Competitive grants awarded by the National Institutes of Health
In practice, this means thousands of very competitive projects in areas like cancer, diabetes, aging, neurological disorders and public health improvements probably went unfunded in 2025.
Similarly, at the National Science Foundation, the roughly 3,000 fewer new grants encompassed reductions to every area of science (and the social sciences):
New grants awarded by the National Science Foundation
| Directorate | 2015-24 avg. | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Social, behavioral and economic sciences | 935 | 501 | -46% |
| Biology | 1,143 | 735 | -36% |
| Geosciences | 1,483 | 964 | -35% |
| STEM education | 1,087 | 758 | -30% |
| Computer science | 2,017 | 1,459 | -28% |
| Engineering | 1,755 | 1,461 | -17% |
| Math and physics | 2,512 | 2,094 | -17% |
| Technology and innovation | 757 | 657 | -13% |
| Office of the director | 132 | 205 | +55% |
| Total | 11,821 | 8,834 | -25% |
There were fewer new grants awarded in biology, geosciences, STEM education, computer science and engineering, math, physics, technology and innovation.
Only the office of the director awarded more new grants this year; it funds projects that don’t neatly fall into other categories. That growth was fueled by a previously established N.S.F. goal to expand fellowships at universities in regions that have historically received less federal funding.
The Trump administration has also taken the unusual step of canceling thousands of active health and science grants, citing a lack of overlap with its priorities.
The website Grant Witness has estimated that the administration canceled or froze 5,415 N.I.H. grants this year, of which roughly half have been reinstated through court cases or negotiations where universities have agreed to some of the administration’s demands. And it canceled or froze 1,996 N.S.F. grants, of which nearly a third have been reinstated, according to Grant Witness estimates.
2. More competition
It’s simple math: Fewer grants implies more competition for federal funding.
Take the category of research grants known as R01, the oldest and most prestigious grant that the N.I.H. awards. An acceptance or rejection can make or break a scientist’s career.
These grants fund topics such as studying the impact of e-cigarettes on brain health, modeling the movements of mice, or devising new methods to kill mosquitoes.
Last year, only one in six were funded. But this year, the agency awarded 24 percent fewer R01 grants.
R01 grants awarded by the National Institutes of Health
This means fewer scientists had their research funded. Last year, the N.I.H.’s National Cancer Institute funded R01 applications from new investigators that fell in the top 10 percent based on scoring by the agency. But by the end of fiscal year 2025, it funded only the top 4 percent.
“Nobody believes that a fourth-percentile and a fifth-percentile grant are clearly of different quality,” Dr. Kobrin said. “It’s just not that precise a measurement.”
3. A drop in grants mentioning diversity
The Trump administration has prioritized eliminating research that involves diversity, equity and inclusion, and has eliminated hundreds of keywords related to diversity on federal websites.
A Times analysis found a steep reduction in the share of competitive N.I.H. grants whose titles or abstracts included flagged D.E.I.-related keywords (such as “equity,” “racial minority” or “underserved patient”) on a list shared by N.I.H. employees.
Share of competitive N.I.H. grants that included flagged D.E.I.-related keywords
The data shows a big surge in these keywords after 2020, during the Biden administration.
While some of the decline in 2025 could be attributed to a change in the language that researchers use to describe their work, it also probably reflects a drop in research related to minority health. For example, the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities awarded 61 percent fewer competitive grants this year, the steepest decline at any arm of the N.I.H.
N.I.H. employees said they did not receive clear guidance on how to determine if a project was D.E.I.-related. Instead, they were sent spreadsheets of grants that had been flagged for not complying with the Trump administration’s priorities.
“We’re constantly hearing that things have been flagged,” Dr. Kobrin said.
“Nobody wants to acknowledge what they were flagged for.”
4. Fewer fellowships for future scientists
The government provides critical funds for training new scientists through graduate student, postdoctoral and early-career fellowships and grants.
The N.S.F. has run a prestigious graduate research fellowship program since 1952. It funds three years of research for around 2,000 of the country’s top science graduate students.
Number of graduate research fellowships awarded by the National Science Foundation
This year, it awarded 536 fewer such fellowships. The government originally planned to eliminate 1,000 fellowships, but later added about 500 more after facing protests from scientists and academics.
The cut affected most fields, with fellowships in four areas — life sciences, psychology, STEM education and social sciences — being cut by more than half. Fellowships in computer science, an administration priority, grew by almost 50 percent.
National Science Foundation graduate research fellowships
| Field | 2015-24 avg. | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life sciences | 516 | 214 | -59% |
| Psychology | 117 | 56 | -52% |
| STEM education | 29 | 14 | -52% |
| Social sciences | 159 | 79 | -50% |
| Math | 90 | 56 | -38% |
| Geosciences | 122 | 84 | -31% |
| Engineering | 575 | 406 | -29% |
| Chemistry | 176 | 154 | -13% |
| Materials research | 58 | 63 | +9% |
| Physics | 139 | 166 | +19% |
| Computer science | 141 | 208 | +48% |
| Total | 2,121 | 1,500 | -29% |
There were also months of delays in publishing the fellowship application for next year, and new eligibility restrictions that exclude second-year Ph.D. students from applying, which may lower the numbers of fellowships in future years.
“This is an incredibly shortsighted and regressive change,” said Kevin Johnson, a former program director at N.S.F.’s geosciences directorate, because second-year graduate students are usually better prepared to conduct research.
“It sends a signal to future potential applicants that science is not supported and is not valued,” he said.
Early-career scientists are usually more reliant on federal funding because they have few alternatives to fund their research and training. Many go on to work in industry afterward, further fueling the economy.
In a 1945 report that led to the creation of the N.S.F., Vannevar Bush, who directed military research and development during World War II, argued that the government should invest in training the next generation of scientists to ensure American scientific progress.
But many experts worry that the recent funding cuts and budget reductions may threaten America’s role as a global scientific leader.
“I personally know many scientists in my field leaving the United States altogether,” Mr. Johnson said.
About the Data
For grants from the National Institutes of Health, we downloaded data from N.I.H. RePORTER from fiscal year 2015 onward, and filtered out intramural projects, R&D contracts, interagency agreements, subprojects and grants administered by other entities. We looked only at grants labeled as new (type 1) or competitive renewals (type 2, 4C and 9) that were awarded during the fiscal year. (We did not include noncompetitive renewal grants, which are ongoing annual payments to research awarded in past years.)
For grants from the National Science Foundation, we downloaded data from the N.S.F.’s award search website from fiscal year 2015 onward. We analyzed both standard grants, where all of the money is committed up front, and continuing grants, where the money is paid in annual increments. (We did not include annual payments made to grants that were awarded in prior years.) For grants that were awarded in past years, we used USASpending.gov to identify when each grant was awarded. Data for the graduate research fellowship program was retrieved from the program’s award listing.
All dollar figures are adjusted to August 2025 dollars, and the data is updated as of Nov. 25, 2025.
Science
After rash of overdose deaths, L.A. banned sales of kratom. Some say they lost lifeline for pain and opioid withdrawal
Nearly four months ago, Los Angeles County banned the sale of kratom, as well as 7-OH, the synthetic version of the alkaloid that is its active ingredient. The idea was to put an end to what at the time seemed like a rash of overdose deaths related to the drug.
It’s too soon to tell whether kratom-related deaths have dissipated as a result — or, really, whether there was ever actually an epidemic to begin with. But many L.A. residents had become reliant on kratom as something of a panacea for debilitating pain and opioid withdrawal symptoms, and the new rules have made it harder for them to find what they say has been a lifesaving drug.
Robert Wallace started using kratom a few years ago for his knees. For decades he had been in pain, which he says stems from his days as a physical education teacher for the Glendale Unified School District between 1989 and 1998, when he and his students primarily exercised on asphalt.
In 2004, he had arthroscopic surgery on his right knee, followed by varicose vein surgery on both legs. Over the next couple of decades, he saw pain-management specialists regularly. But the primary outcome was a growing dependence on opioid-based painkillers. “I found myself seeking doctors who would prescribe it,” he said.
He leaned on opioids when he could get them and alcohol when he couldn’t, resulting in a strain on his marriage.
When Wallace was scheduled for his first knee replacement in 2021 (he had his other knee replaced a few years later), his brother recommended he take kratom for the post-surgery pain.
It seemed to work: Wallace said he takes a quarter of a teaspoon of powdered kratom twice a day, and it lets him take charge of managing his pain without prescription painkillers and eases harsh opiate-withdrawal symptoms.
He’s one of many Angelenos frustrated by recent efforts by the county health department to limit access to the drug. “Kratom has impacted my life in only positive ways,” Wallace told The Times.
For now, Wallace is still able to get his kratom powder, called Red Bali, by ordering from a company in Florida.
However, advocates say that the county crackdown on kratom could significantly affect the ability of many Angelenos to access what they say is an affordable, safer alternative to prescription painkillers.
Kratom comes from the leaves of a tree native to Southeast Asia called Mitragyna speciosa. It has been used for hundreds of years to treat chronic pain, coughing and diarrhea as well as to boost energy — in low doses, kratom appears to act as a stimulant, though in higher doses, it can have effects more like opioids.
Though advocates note that kratom has been used in the U.S. for more than 50 years for all sorts of health applications, there is limited research that suggests kratom could have therapeutic value, and there is no scientific consensus.
Then there’s 7-OH, or 7-Hydroxymitragynine, a synthetic alkaloid derived from kratom that has similar effects and has been on the U.S. market for only about three years. However, because of its ability to bind to opioid receptors in the body, it has a higher potential for abuse than kratom.
Public health officials and advocates are divided on kratom. Some say it should be heavily regulated — and 7-OH banned altogether — while others say both should be accessible, as long as there are age limitations and proper labeling, such as with alcohol or cannabis.
In the U.S., kratom and 7-OH can be found in all sorts of forms, including powder, capsules and liquids — though it depends on exactly where you are in the country. Though the Food and Drug Administration has recommended that 7-OH be included as a Schedule 1 controlled substance under the Controlled Substances Act, that hasn’t been made official. And the plant itself remains unscheduled on the federal level.
That has left states, counties and cities to decide how to regulate the substances.
California failed to approve an Assembly bill in 2024 that would have required kratom products to be registered with the state, have labeling and warnings, and be prohibited from being sold to anyone younger than 21.
It would also have banned products containing synthetic versions of kratom alkaloids. The state Legislature is now considering another bill that basically does the same without banning 7-OH — while also limiting the amount of synthetic alkaloids in kratom and 7-OH products sold in the state.
“Until kratom and its pharmacologically active key ingredients mitragynine and 7-OH are approved for use, they will remain classified as adulterants in drugs, dietary supplements and foods,” a California Department of Public Health spokesperson previously told The Times.
On Tuesday, California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced that the state’s efforts to crack down on kratom products has resulted in the removal of more than 3,300 kratom and 7-OH products from retail stores. According to a news release from the governor’s office, there has been a 95% compliance rate from businesses in removing the products.
(Los Angeles Times photo illustration; source photos by Getty Images)
Newsom has equated these actions to the state’s efforts in 2024 to quash the sale of hemp products containing cannabinoids such as THC. Under emergency state regulations two years ago, California banned these specific hemp products and agents with the state Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control seized thousands of products statewide.
Since the beginning of 2026, there have been no reported violations of the ban on sales of such products.
“We’ve shown with illegal hemp products that when the state sets clear expectations and partners with businesses, compliance follows,” Newsom said in a statement. “This effort builds on that model — education first, enforcement where necessary — to protect Californians.”
Despite the state’s actions, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors is still considering whether to regulate kratom, or ban it altogether.
The county Public Health Department’s decision to ban the sale of kratom didn’t come out of nowhere. As Maral Farsi, deputy director of the California Department of Public Health, noted during a Feb. 18 state Senate hearing, the agency “identified 362 kratom-related overdose deaths in California between 2019 and 2023, with a steady increase from 38 in 2019 up to 92 in 2023.”
However, some experts say those numbers aren’t as clear-cut as they seem.
For example, a Los Angeles Times investigation found that in a number of recent L.A. County deaths that were initially thought to be caused by kratom or 7-OH, there wasn’t enough evidence to say those drugs alone caused the deaths; it might be the case that the danger is in mixing them with other substances.
Meanwhile, the actual application of this new policy seems to be piecemeal at best.
The county Public Health Department told The Times it conducted 2,696 kratom-related inspections between Nov. 10 and Jan. 27, and found 352 locations selling kratom products. The health department said the majority stopped selling kratom after those inspections; there were nine locations that ignored the warnings, and in those cases, inspectors impounded their kratom products.
But the reality is that people who need kratom will buy it on the black market, drive far enough so they get to where it’s sold legally or, like Wallace, order it online from a different state.
For now, retailers who sell kratom products are simply carrying on until they’re investigated by county health inspectors.
Ari Agalopol, a decorated pianist and piano teacher, saw her performances and classes abruptly come to a halt in 2012 after a car accident resulted in severe spinal and knee injuries.
“I tried my best to do traditional acupuncture, physical therapy and hydrocortisone shots in my spine and everything,” she said. “Finally, after nothing was working, I relegated myself to being a pain-management patient.”
She was prescribed oxycodone, and while on the medication, battled depression, anhedonia and suicidal ideation. She felt as though she were in a fog when taking oxycodone, and when it ran out, ”the pain would rear its ugly head.” Agalopol struggled to get out of bed daily and could manage teaching only five students a week.
Then, looking for alternatives to opioids, she found a Reddit thread in which people were talking up the benefits of kratom.
“I was kind of hesitant at first because there’re so many horror stories about 7-OH, but then I researched and I realized that the natural plant is not the same as 7-OH,” she said.
She went to a local shop, Authentic Kratom in Woodland Hills, and spoke to a sales associate who helped her decide which of the 47 strains of kratom it sold would best suit her needs.
Agalopol currently takes a 75-milligram dose of mitragynine, the primary alkaloid in kratom, when necessary. It has enabled her to get back to where she was before her injury: teaching 40 students a week and performing every weekend.
Agalopol believes the county hasn’t done its homework on kratom. “They’re just taking these actions because of public pressure, and public pressure is happening because of ignorance,” she said.
During the course of reporting this story, Authentic Kratom has shut down its three locations; it’s unclear if the closures are temporary. The owner of the business declined to comment on the matter.
When she heard the news of the recent closures, Agalopol was seething. She told The Times she has enough capsules of kratom for now, but when she runs out, her option will have to be Tylenol and ibuprofen, “which will slowly kill my liver.”
“Prohibition is not a public health strategy,” said Jackie Subeck, executive director of 7-Hope Alliance, a nonprofit that promotes safe and responsible access to 7-OH for consumers, at the Feb. 18 Senate hearing. “[It’s] only going to make things worse, likely resulting in an entirely new health crisis for Californians.”
Science
There were 13 full-service public health clinics in L.A. County. Now there are 6
Because of budget cuts, the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health has ended clinical services at seven of its public health clinic sites.
As of Feb. 27, the county is no longer providing services such as vaccinations, sexually transmitted infection testing and treatment, or tuberculosis diagnosis and specialty TB care at the affected locations, according to county officials and a department fact sheet.
The sites losing clinical services are Antelope Valley in Lancaster; the Center for Community Health (Leavy) in San Pedro, Curtis R. Tucker in Inglewood, Hollywood-Wilshire, Pomona, Dr. Ruth Temple in South Los Angeles, and Torrance. Services will continue to be provided by the six remaining public health clinics, and through nearby community clinics.
The changes are the result of about $50 million in funding losses, according to official county statements.
“That pushed us to make the very difficult decision to end clinical services at seven of our sites,” said Dr. Anish Mahajan, chief deputy director of the L.A. County Department of Public Health.
Mahajan said the department selected clinics with relatively lower patient volumes. Over the last month, he said, the department has sent letters to patients about the changes, and referred them to unaffected county clinics, nearby federally qualified health centers or other community providers. According to Mahajan, for tuberculosis patients, particularly those requiring directly observed therapy, public health nurses will continue visiting patients.
Public health clinics form part of the county’s healthcare safety net, serving low-income residents and those with limited access to care. Officials said that about half of the patients the county currently sees across its clinics are uninsured.
Mahajan noted that the clinics were established decades ago, before the Affordable Care Act expanded Medi-Cal coverage and increased the number of federally qualified health centers. He said that as more residents gained access to primary care, utilization at some county-run clinics declined.
“Now that we have a more sophisticated safety net, people often have another place to go for their full range of care,” he said.
Still, the closures have unsettled providers who work closely with local vulnerable populations.
“I hate to see any services that serve our at-risk and homeless community shut down,” said Mark Hood, chief executive of Union Rescue Mission in downtown Los Angeles. “There’s so much need out there, so it always is going to create hardship for the people that actually need the help the most.”
Union Rescue Mission does not receive government funding for its healthcare services, Hood said. The mission’s clinics are open not only to shelter guests, up to 1,000 people nightly, but also to people living on the streets who walk in seeking care.
Its dental clinic alone sees nearly 9,000 patients a year, Hood said.
“We haven’t seen it yet, but I expect in the coming days and weeks we’ll see more people coming through our doors looking for help,” he said. “They’re going to have to find help somewhere.” Hood said women experiencing homelessness are especially vulnerable when preventive care, including sexual and reproductive health services, becomes harder to access.
County officials said staffing impacts so far have been managed through reassignment rather than layoffs. Roughly 200 to 300 positions across the department have been eliminated amid funding cuts, officials said, though many were vacant. About 120 employees whose positions were affected have been reassigned; according to Mahajan, no one has been laid off.
The clinic closures come amid broader fiscal uncertainty. Mahajan said that due to the Trump administration’s “Big Beautiful Bill,” Los Angeles County could lose $2.4 billion over the next several years. That funding, he said, supports clinics, hospitals and community clinic partners now absorbing patients who previously went to the clinics that closed on Feb. 27.
In response, the L.A. County Board of Supervisors has backed a proposed half-cent sales tax measure that would generate hundreds of millions of dollars annually for healthcare and public health services. Voters are expected to consider the measure in June.
Science
Mobile clinic brings mammograms to women on Skid Row
Sharon Horton stepped through the door of a sky-blue mobile clinic and onto a Skid Row sidewalk. She wore a yellow knit beanie, gold hoop earrings and the relieved grin of a woman who has finally checked a mammogram off her to-do list.
It had been years since her last breast cancer screening procedure. This one, which took place in City of Hope’s Cancer Prevention and Screening mobile clinic, was faster and easier. The staff was kind. The machine that X-rayed her breast was more comfortable than the cold hard contraption she remembered.
Relatively speaking, of course — it was still a mammogram.
“It’s like, OK, let me go already!” Horton, 68, said with a laugh.
The clinic was parked on South San Pedro Street in front of Union Rescue Mission, the nonprofit shelter where Horton resides. Within a week, City of Hope, a cancer research hospital, would share the results with Horton and Dr. Mary Marfisee, the mission’s family medical services director. If the mammogram detected anything of concern, they’d map out a treatment plan from there.
Naureen Sayani, 47, a resident of Union Rescue Mission, left, discusses her medical history with Adriana Galindo, a medical assistant, before getting a mammogram on last week.
(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)
“It’s very important to take care of your health, and you need to get involved in everything that you can to make your life a better life,” said Horton, who is looking forward to a forthcoming move into Section 8 housing.
Horton was one of the first patients of a new women’s health initiative from UCLA’s Homeless Healthcare Collaborative at Union Rescue Mission. Staffed by third-year UCLA Medical School students and led by Marfisee, a UCLA assistant clinical professor of family medicine, the clinic treats mission residents as well as unhoused people living in the surrounding neighborhood.
The new cancer screening project arrives at a time of dire financial pressures on county public health services.
Citing rising costs and a $50-million reduction in federal, state and local grant and contract income, the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health on Feb. 27 ended services at seven of 13 public clinics that provide vaccines, tests and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases and other services to housed and unhoused county residents.
Although Union Rescue Mission’s own funding comes mainly from private sources and is less imperiled by public cuts, the 135-year-old shelter expects the need for its services to rise, Chief Executive Mark Hood said.
Even as unsheltered homelessness declined for the last two years across Los Angeles County, the unsheltered population on Skid Row — long seen as the epicenter of the region’s homelessness crisis — grew 9% in 2024, the most recent year for which census data are available.
For many local women navigating daily concerns over housing, food and personal safety, “their own health is not a priority,” Marfisee said.
Those whose problems have become too serious to ignore face daunting obstacles to care. Marfisee recalled one patient who came to her with a lump in her breast and no identification.
In order to get a mammogram, Marfisee explained, the woman first needed to obtain a birth certificate, and then a state-issued identification card. Then she needed to enroll in Medi-Cal. After that, clinic staff helped her find a primary care physician who could order the imaging test.
Given the barriers to preventative care, homeless women die from breast cancer at nearly twice the rate of securely housed women, a 2019 study found. Marfisee’s own survey of the mission’s female residents found that nearly 90% were not up to date on recommended cancer screenings like mammograms and pap smears, which detect early cervical cancer.
To address this gap, Marfisee — a dogged patient advocate — reached out to City of Hope. The Duarte-based research and treatment center unveiled in March 2024 its first mobile cancer screening clinic, a moving van-sized clinic on wheels that it deploys to food banks and health centers, as well as to companies offering free mammograms as an employee benefit.
“In true Dr. Mary fashion, she saw the vision,” said Jessica Thies, the mobile screening program’s regional nursing director. After working through some logistical hurdles, the mission and City of Hope secured a date for the van’s first visit.
The next challenge was getting the word out to patients. Marfisee and her students walked through the surrounding neighborhood, went cot to cot in the women’s dorm and held two informational sessions in December and January to answer patients’ questions.
At the sessions, the team walked through the basics of who should get a mammogram (women age 40 or older, those with a family history of breast cancer) and the procedure itself. (“Like a tortilla maker?” one woman asked skeptically after hearing a description of the mammography unit.)
The medical students were able to dispel rumors some women had heard: The test doesn’t damage breast tissue, nor do the X-rays increase cancer risk. Others questioned a mammogram’s value: What good was it knowing they had cancer if they couldn’t get follow-up care?
On this latter point, Marfisee is determined not to let patients fall through the cracks.
Thirteen patients received mammograms at the van’s first visit on Wednesday. Within a week, City of Hope will contact patients with their results and send them to Marfisee and her team. She is already mentally mapping the next steps should any patient have a situation that requires a biopsy or further imaging: working with their case manager at the mission, calling in favors, wrangling with any insurance the patient might have.
“It’ll be a good fight,” Marfisee said, as residents in the adjacent cafeteria carried trays of sloppy joes and burgers to their lunch tables. “But we’ll just keep asking for help and get it done.”
-
World7 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts1 week agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Wisconsin3 days agoSetting sail on iceboats across a frozen lake in Wisconsin
-
Denver, CO1 week ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Maryland4 days agoAM showers Sunday in Maryland
-
Louisiana1 week agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Florida4 days agoFlorida man rescued after being stuck in shoulder-deep mud for days
-
Oregon5 days ago2026 OSAA Oregon Wrestling State Championship Results And Brackets – FloWrestling