Over the past several weeks, many of you joined SSP in responding to the U.S. Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) proposed revisions to the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance).
When the proposal was released, SSP’s Board of Directors issued a public statement expressing concern about its potential impact on scholarly publishing, research communication, and the broader research ecosystem. Shortly afterward, our Advocacy Committee convened a Town Hall that brought together colleagues from scholarly societies, publishers, libraries, research institutions, university presses, and service providers to discuss the proposal, share perspectives, and identify areas of common concern. The discussion reinforced the importance of informed, constructive engagement and provided context and direction for SSP’s comment.
SSP’s comment focuses on the practical consequences the proposed rule could have across the scholarly communication ecosystem, including:
- The potential impact of requiring prior approval for publication-related costs, including article processing charges and other publication expenses.
- The importance of scholarly publishing infrastructure, including peer review, editorial processes, preservation, metadata, accessibility, and discoverability, is an essential component of the federal research enterprise.
- The effects that new administrative requirements could have on researchers, institutions, scholarly societies, publishers, and infrastructure providers.
- The role of professional society memberships, conferences, and scholarly publications in supporting research dissemination, collaboration, standards development, and scientific progress.
- The importance of ensuring that federally funded research can be effectively disseminated, preserved, discovered, and accessed so that public investments in research achieve their intended impact.
We want to thank everyone who participated. Despite the unusually short deadline, according to Regulations.gov, nearly 497,000 comments were submitted during the public comment period. That level of engagement demonstrates the significance of this proposal to researchers, institutions, professional societies, publishers, libraries, and many others across the research ecosystem.
Although the public comment period has now concluded, SSP’s work in this area continues. Our Advocacy Committee will use the insights gained through this process to help strengthen SSP’s approach to future policy issues affecting scholarly publishing.
We are grateful to everyone who participated in the Town Hall, shared resources, submitted comments, and contributed their perspectives. Your engagement helped inform our work and demonstrated the value of bringing the scholarly publishing community together around issues that affect us all.
Thank you for your continued support of SSP and our shared commitment to advancing scholarly communication.
