After months of outcry over whether the United States government is unfairly targeting foreign-born researchers over purported security breaches, President Donald Trump’s science adviser is launching an effort to strengthen national policies on research security.

The National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) is working to help establish government-wide requirements for what information researchers need to disclose in order to receive federal research grants. Presidential science advisor Kelvin Droegemeier, who chairs the NSTC, outlined details in an open letter to US scientists on 16 September.

Recent tensions between the US and Chinese governments have spilled over into the research community. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and other federal agencies have been investigating foreign-born scientists, many of Chinese origin , for allegedly violating rules such as those requiring the disclosure of payments from other governments. The leaders of many US scientific organizations have pushed back against the crackdown. They argue that the government must balance national security against the free exchange of information, to help ensure that the United States can continue to attract top-flight scientific talent from abroad.

In his letter, Droegemeier describes how the NSTC is attempting to tackle the issue. In May it formed a committee to explore issues including research security. That panel is collecting “an array of examples in which our research enterprise was exploited or compromised”, the science adviser wrote.

Droegemeier told Nature it was too early to say how many people that federal agencies have investigated for potential security breaches. But he argued that the NSTC, which coordinates science and technology policy across the government, is well-placed to guide research agencies, universities, and other institutions in dealing with such issues.

“There’s a lot at stake here,” Droegemeier said. “This is an opportunity to reaffirm the fundamental principles of research, which requires ethical behavior, honesty and integrity. I don’t think any researcher would argue that we want to compromise on these things.”

Agencies have mostly been working on their own so far. The NIH has been aggressively investigating whether the scientists it funds are abiding by its security rules. Both Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, and the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston have fired ethnically Chinese researchers after the NIH alleged they had failed to disclose foreign funding, among other charges.

The Department of Energy announced in January that its employees and grant recipients cannot participate in talent-recruitment programmes run by the governments of “sensitive” countries — a move believed to be targeted at China. The National Science Foundation (NSF), which followed suit in July, has said that it is working to streamline the process by which its grantees must disclose all their financial support, both within the United States and from other countries.

Droegemeier’s push is meant to help coordinate and oversee these individual efforts. He says he will be visiting academic institutions across the United States in the coming months, to hear directly from scientists affected by, or interested in, the recent crackdown. “This reflects very well how he’s engaging the community,” says Peter McPherson, president of the Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities in Washington DC.

“It’s a very good thing that they are getting out in front and taking leadership on this issue,” adds Tobin Smith, vice-president for policy at the Association of American Universities in Washington, DC. He notes that Congress is considering similar legislation that, if approved, could fold into what the NSTC has already started and work to improve the government’s response to security breaches.

Separately, the elite group of scientists who advise the US government on national security issues, known as the JASONs, is studying research security at the request of the NSF. Their report is expected later this year, and will address how research institutions can best balance openness and security.