The Institute for Museum and Library Services (IMLS), the only federal agency dedicated to supporting libraries and museums, is now accepting applications for its 2026 grant cycle. But this time, the guidelines have taken a "chilling" political turn under President Donald Trump's administration.
For the first time in its history, IMLS is explicitly welcoming projects that align with Trump's vision for America, including those that promote an appreciation for the country through "uplifting and positive narratives." This includes initiatives that focus on American exceptionalism, patriotism, and a whitewashed narrative of American history. The agency cites two executive orders as inspiration: one that attacks the Smithsonian Institution for its "divisive, race-centered ideology," and another that calls for the end of what it sees as anti-Christian rhetoric.
Former IMLS leaders, including those from both parties, have expressed concern that funded projects could encourage a distorted view of American history. They fear that accepting grants could also lead to scrutiny and control from the administration, which has already used its power to audit Smithsonian exhibits and scrutinize universities over their diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices.
"This is not what IMLS is about," said Giovanna Urist, a former senior program officer at the agency. "We're not supposed to be about promoting a specific ideology or agenda. We're supposed to be about preserving our country's core values and promoting civic pride."
The new guidelines have been widely criticized by experts and institutions, who worry that they could compromise the independence and trustworthiness of libraries and museums. The Institute spokesperson claimed that the new guidelines are simply informative and do not insert politics into the grant process.
However, former IMLS leaders and experts from various associations argue that the administration is trying to shape the narrative of American history and suppress dissenting voices. "It's clear the administration wants a whitewashed story," said Crosby Kemper III, a lifelong conservative Republican who led the agency under Trump. "And that's wrong."
The impact of these changes has already been felt, with institutions struggling to understand how they will be perceived if they accept grants. The American Historical Association and other experts are calling for greater transparency and clarity from the IMLS on its new guidelines.
As the 2026 grant cycle begins, institutions must navigate this uncertain landscape, weighing the potential benefits of funding against the risk of compromising their independence and values.
For the first time in its history, IMLS is explicitly welcoming projects that align with Trump's vision for America, including those that promote an appreciation for the country through "uplifting and positive narratives." This includes initiatives that focus on American exceptionalism, patriotism, and a whitewashed narrative of American history. The agency cites two executive orders as inspiration: one that attacks the Smithsonian Institution for its "divisive, race-centered ideology," and another that calls for the end of what it sees as anti-Christian rhetoric.
Former IMLS leaders, including those from both parties, have expressed concern that funded projects could encourage a distorted view of American history. They fear that accepting grants could also lead to scrutiny and control from the administration, which has already used its power to audit Smithsonian exhibits and scrutinize universities over their diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices.
"This is not what IMLS is about," said Giovanna Urist, a former senior program officer at the agency. "We're not supposed to be about promoting a specific ideology or agenda. We're supposed to be about preserving our country's core values and promoting civic pride."
The new guidelines have been widely criticized by experts and institutions, who worry that they could compromise the independence and trustworthiness of libraries and museums. The Institute spokesperson claimed that the new guidelines are simply informative and do not insert politics into the grant process.
However, former IMLS leaders and experts from various associations argue that the administration is trying to shape the narrative of American history and suppress dissenting voices. "It's clear the administration wants a whitewashed story," said Crosby Kemper III, a lifelong conservative Republican who led the agency under Trump. "And that's wrong."
The impact of these changes has already been felt, with institutions struggling to understand how they will be perceived if they accept grants. The American Historical Association and other experts are calling for greater transparency and clarity from the IMLS on its new guidelines.
As the 2026 grant cycle begins, institutions must navigate this uncertain landscape, weighing the potential benefits of funding against the risk of compromising their independence and values.
so i'm reading about the IMLS accepting grants that are basically pushing a super patriotic agenda 
sounds like they're trying to whitewash american history which is straight up wrong 
i mean what's next? funding projects that only celebrate founding fathers with no diverse perspectives? or maybe museums that erase the contributions of indigenous peoples and immigrants? this feels like a huge problem for our institutions & community, we need more transparency not less 
and now they're changing the rules to make it all about promoting american exceptionalism 
like who gets to decide what's "uplifting" or "positive"? it feels like they're trying to control what we can and can't say 
plus i'm worried that institutions will start censoring themselves just to avoid scrutiny 
i mean, isn't the point of museums and libraries to be about preserving our history and culture, not promoting a specific ideology? 
It feels like they're trying to spin history to fit their own agenda. That doesn't sound right to me 
. Libraries and museums are supposed to be about learning and sharing knowledge, not promoting a specific ideology. What if the projects funded by IMLS start to distort the truth? 
We need more transparency and clarity from them on how these new guidelines will work. It's like they're trying to suppress dissenting voices, which is not what our country is about 
. The IMLS is now promoting a specific narrative of America's history? That sounds like a total setup to me 
This whole thing smells like an agenda push by the administration. I'm not buying it for a second 
.
. Our institutions are supposed to be about preserving knowledge and truth, not serving as propaganda machines 
.
. This is exactly what we should be worried about – government control over our educational institutions and cultural institutions 
. It's like they're trying to shape our minds and silence any opposing views 
. Libraries and museums are supposed to be neutral spaces where people can learn and explore, not promote some specific ideology. The fact that they're now explicitly welcoming projects that align with Trump's vision for America sounds like a recipe for disaster 
.
. What if this means that only certain perspectives are allowed? Like, what about the Native American or immigrant experiences? 
I'm worried that our country's history is going to get watered down to just a bunch of feel-good patriotic nonsense 
. And what's up with the Smithsonian audit? That's like, totally not cool 
It's like, no thanks! The IMLS should be about preserving our history and promoting civic pride, not peddling a super biased agenda.