The U.S. research ecosystem is facing a new kind of stress test: less funding, more expectations.
From federal laboratories to university research centers, institutions are being asked to do more with less. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) proposed a controversial cap on indirect costs. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is facing massive staff reductions. Even the FDA has scaled back essential programs like milk quality control testing. With each headline, one reality becomes clearer: science is being squeezed—and safety is at risk of getting squeezed out.
And that raises an ethical dilemma.
When budgets get tight, cutting safety programs may seem like an easy, short-term fix. But the consequences—legal, financial, human—can be devastating and irreversible. Behind every injury is a researcher, a student, a discovery delayed or lost.
In this environment, leaders face a stark question: What does it really cost to deprioritize safety? And what can be done to protect people and progress without breaking the bank?
This blog explores practical, research-backed strategies that allow laboratories to sustain safety excellence, even when resources are limited. We'll outline approaches for prioritizing risks, reallocating costs, collaborating across departments, and most importantly—upholding our ethical responsibility to protect every individual who steps into a lab.
Because when science thrives, it’s not in spite of safety—it’s because of it.
1. Prioritize High-Impact Safety Risks
Not all safety programs have the same level of urgency. When budgets are tight, labs must assess which programs offer the greatest protection against serious harm and legal or reputational fallout.
A structured risk impact matrix can help decision-makers prioritize safety resources effectively. Key considerations include:
- Mission criticality – Does this safety function enable essential operations?
- Health and safety risk – Could this failure lead to injury, illness, or death?
- Regulatory requirements – Would scaling back violate legal obligations?
- Reputational impact – How would a failure here affect public trust or funding?
Labs might find that some certifications or inspections can be adjusted temporarily, while functions like hazardous waste management and PPE provision should remain protected at all costs.
2. Shift and Share Costs Creatively
In times of financial constraint, it’s essential to rethink how costs are distributed across the institution.
Rather than absorbing all safety costs centrally, research leaders can:
- Transfer indirect costs to direct users – Have departments or principal investigators pay directly for services like biosafety cabinet certifications or radiation surveys.
- Implement cost-sharing models – Spread the cost of shared services like PPE fit testing or hazardous waste pickup across all lab users.
- Create internal service centers – Charge internal users institutional rates for safety services to sustain operations.
This approach protects core programs while promoting a sense of ownership and shared accountability.
3. Build a Culture of Collaborative Safety
In a decentralized funding environment, safety cannot be the sole responsibility of a single department. It must be a shared value.
Strategies to build a collaborative culture include:
- Forming cross-departmental safety committees – Pool expertise and coordinate responses.
- Establishing Laboratory Safety Teams (LSTs) – Empower lab personnel to take the lead on training, inspections, and continuous improvement.
- Sharing best practices – Encourage peer learning and transparency through regular safety meetings and reporting systems.
By spreading safety responsibility across the institution, labs can maintain vigilance even when full-time oversight isn’t possible.
4. Communicate the True Cost of Incidents
Cutting safety may save money on paper—but the real cost of an incident can be catastrophic.
Consider these hidden expenses:
- Medical bills and workers’ comp
- Lost productivity
- Regulatory fines
- Legal fees
- Reputational harm
According to the National Safety Council, the average cost of a medically consulted injury in the workplace exceeds $40,000. Fatalities cost over $1.3 million. In research environments, accidents can derail projects, damage equipment, and trigger audits or shutdowns.
Effective lab leaders make these costs visible when discussing budget priorities. Safety isn’t overhead—it’s protection against catastrophe.
5. Lead with Ethics—and Evidence
Finally, maintaining safety under pressure is not just a logistical challenge—it’s a moral one.
We ask researchers, students, and technicians to take risks in pursuit of knowledge. In return, we owe them environments that are as safe as possible, not as cheap as possible.
This is especially critical at institutions training the next generation of scientists. The culture they learn in school is the one they’ll take into industry. And in most industries, safety isn’t optional—it’s expected.
As one safety director put it: "We want to send employees home as safely as they arrived. It’s a mindset we need to instill long before they walk through our doors."
Final Thoughts
When funding shrinks, research institutions face hard choices. But compromising on safety isn’t a solution—it’s a setup for disaster. The cost of an accident far outweighs the cost of prevention.
With creative cost strategies, shared responsibility, and a steadfast commitment to ethics, laboratories can continue to deliver groundbreaking science—safely.
Because every breakthrough begins with a safe place to explore.