DOGE used ChatGPT to cancel over 1,400 NEH humanities grants
DOGE reportedly used ChatGPT to terminate over 1,400 National Endowment for the Humanities grants worth more than USD 100 million, selecting grants for cancellation based on proximity to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion frameworks. The decision to rely on an AI chatbot's automated responses instead of expert scholarly review, combined with allegations of targeting grants related to specific races, religions, and other protected characteristics, prompted lawsuits from cultural and educational organizations.
What happened
Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) operatives used ChatGPT to conduct an audit of over 1,400 active National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) grants. Two DOGE employees uploaded short project summaries to ChatGPT with the prompt: 'Does the following relate at all to D.E.I.? Respond factually in less than 120 characters. Begin with Yes or No.'
Based on ChatGPT's 120-character outputs, NEH issued immediate termination notices to hundreds of institutions without expert review. Targeted projects included a documentary on Jewish slave labour during the Holocaust, the digitisation of Appalachian historical records, and archives of Indigenous languages. Over USD 100 million in funding was clawed back.
Reported impact
At least USD 100 million in funding was terminated, causing some institutions to face bankruptcy, stop projects, and fire staff. The NEH itself saw roughly 70 percent of its staff placed on administrative leave or fired.
Index analysis
ChatGPT was used to tag complex historical and cultural research based on a narrow list of keywords like 'BIPOC,' 'LGBTQ,' and 'gender,' rather than expert review. The AI's outputs were treated as sole basis for terminating previously approved grants, raising questions about automation bias in government decision-making.
According to discovery in a 2026 lawsuit, DOGE and NEH staff used Signal with auto-delete enabled to communicate about the process, allegedly violating the Federal Records Act and hiding the decision-making rationale. The AI selections allegedly targeted grants based solely on race, national origin, ethnicity, religion, gender, or sexual orientation.
Governance controls
DOGE operated as an outside advisory body, allowing its staff to bypass federal hiring rules and conflict-of-interest laws. The incident highlights the absence of regulatory requirements to prevent AI from being used to circumvent Congressional spending authority and traditional scholarly review processes.
Classification
Sources and evidence
This record was researched and written by the Index, based on the following original reporting.