Congressional investigators say Harvard University’s affiliated nonprofit could allow foreign research funding to bypass normal disclosure channels, while a separate federal review examines what the Education Department has described as incomplete and inaccurate foreign-funding reports.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
Congressional investigators are scrutinizing an affiliated nonprofit used by Harvard University to receive certain international research funding, raising questions about whether the structure can obscure foreign money that federal law requires universities to disclose.
The nonprofit, Harvard Global, can serve as a recipient for some research grants that Harvard itself cannot directly accept because of legal or financial restrictions. Lawmakers examining the arrangement contend that money benefiting the university must still be reported under federal foreign-funding rules, regardless of which legal entity initially receives it.
Investigations by the House Education and Workforce Committee and the U.S. Department of Education have separately raised concerns about the completeness of Harvard’s foreign-funding disclosures, according to Just the News.
House Education and Workforce Committee Chairman Tim Walberg, R-Mich., accused the university of deliberately creating an entity capable of avoiding disclosure requirements.
“Harvard created an entity in a blatant attempt to get around federal foreign funding disclosure laws. That’s unacceptable, especially given Harvard’s history of failing to comply with these requirements. The American people deserve to know where foreign money is flowing on our college campuses,” Walberg said in a statement announcing the committee’s findings.
Harvard disputes that characterization.
A university spokesperson told Just the News that Harvard complies with federal standards governing international research and works with federal agencies when particular collaborations present national-security concerns.
“Harvard follows national security standards and guidance set by the federal government for its international collaborations. Additionally, where appropriate, federal agencies who are best able to assess real-time national security risks work with Harvard to put in place agency approved risk mitigation measures for federally funded research,” the spokesperson said in an email.
“Harvard disagrees with the report’s mischaracterizations that fail to reflect the University’s documented record of compliance, cooperation, and commitment to protecting and advancing U.S. interests, national security, and global standing,” the spokesperson added.
The disclosure requirements at issue are contained in Section 117 of the Higher Education Act.
Universities receiving federal financial assistance generally must report gifts and contracts from a foreign source totaling more than $250,000 from that source during a calendar year. The obligation can also apply when funds move through another legal entity but ultimately provide a benefit to the university.
That provision is central to the congressional inquiry because Harvard Global exists separately from Harvard University while participating in projects associated with the institution.
Harvard Global was established in February 2012 and lists operations in Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Israel, South Africa, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and the United States.
Its creation predates the more aggressive federal enforcement of Section 117 that has since brought Harvard under scrutiny on multiple occasions.
The Education Department opened its latest inquiry in April 2025 after determining that Harvard had submitted what the agency described as “incomplete and inaccurate disclosures” concerning foreign financial relationships.
The department issued a formal records request seeking additional information from the university. That investigation remains ongoing.
“As a recipient of federal funding, Harvard University must be transparent about its relations with foreign sources and governments. Unfortunately, our review indicated that Harvard has not been fully transparent or complete in its disclosures, which is both unacceptable and unlawful,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said when the request was announced.
“This records request is the Trump Administration’s first step to ensure Harvard is not being manipulated by, or doing the bidding of, foreign entities, which include actors who are hostile to the interests of the United States and American students.”
Foreign money flowing directly to Harvard is also substantial.
According to the congressional findings, Harvard has reported receiving more than $600 million in foreign funding covered by Section 117, the largest amount attributed to any U.S. university.
Lawmakers are examining those financial relationships alongside Harvard researchers’ collaborations with Chinese institutions connected to Beijing’s defense establishment.
The House Select Committee on China participated in the latest congressional investigation and identified more than 140 academic publications co-authored by Harvard-affiliated researchers and scholars associated with Chinese universities known collectively as the “Seven Sons of National Defense.”
The Pentagon and other U.S. officials have identified the Seven Sons as universities playing important roles in China’s defense research and military modernization.
The collaborations were also reported by Fox News.
The House report argues that such research relationships should receive greater scrutiny because knowledge generated through joint academic work could contribute to Chinese military technological development.
The committees have not accused Harvard of illegally transferring classified information or established that all of the more than 140 jointly authored papers involved military applications.
Instead, lawmakers contend that the scope of Harvard’s collaboration with institutions connected to China’s defense sector creates national-security risks requiring stronger oversight and greater transparency.
Harvard has not been accused in the congressional report of criminal wrongdoing involving Harvard Global.
The dispute centers on whether the university’s reporting practices provide regulators, lawmakers and the public with a complete accounting of foreign money that benefits Harvard, including funds routed through affiliated entities.
That distinction is especially significant because Harvard is the largest reported recipient of foreign funding among American universities.
Congressional investigators argue that if money benefiting a university can be routed through a separate nonprofit without appearing in the university’s Section 117 disclosures, federal officials could lack an accurate picture of which foreign governments or organizations are financing American academic research.
Harvard maintains that it follows federal national-security requirements and has cooperated with agencies charged with assessing risks associated with international partnerships.
The competing claims are now being examined through both congressional oversight and the Education Department’s continuing records investigation, as federal officials seek a fuller accounting of Harvard’s foreign financial relationships and its research partnerships with institutions linked to China’s military establishment.
Original article
Comments