Foundations
Foundations
Here's a look at documents from U.S. foundations
Featured Stories
Space Foundation Announces 2026 John L. "Jack" Swigert Jr. Award for Space Exploration and Douglas S. Morrow Public Outreach Recipients
COLORADO SPRINGS, Colorado, Jan. 30 -- Space Foundation issued the following news release on Jan. 29, 2026:* * *
Space Foundation Announces 2026 John L. "Jack" Swigert Jr. Award for Space Exploration and Douglas S. Morrow Public Outreach Recipients
Space Foundation, a nonprofit organization founded in 1983 to advance the global space community, today announced it has selected NASA's Voyager Team as the recipient of the 2026 John L. "Jack" Swigert Jr. Award for Space Exploration and the Estes Model Rocket Company as the 2026 Douglas S. Morrow Public Outreach Award recipient.
"We are proud to ... Show Full Article COLORADO SPRINGS, Colorado, Jan. 30 -- Space Foundation issued the following news release on Jan. 29, 2026: * * * Space Foundation Announces 2026 John L. "Jack" Swigert Jr. Award for Space Exploration and Douglas S. Morrow Public Outreach Recipients Space Foundation, a nonprofit organization founded in 1983 to advance the global space community, today announced it has selected NASA's Voyager Team as the recipient of the 2026 John L. "Jack" Swigert Jr. Award for Space Exploration and the Estes Model Rocket Company as the 2026 Douglas S. Morrow Public Outreach Award recipient. "We are proud tocelebrate the spirit of exploration, innovation and education demonstrated in both the Voyager missions and the Estes Model Rocket Company," said Space Foundation CEO Heather Pringle. "Voyager has expanded our understanding of the universe for decades, while Estes inspires curiosity and creativity in students worldwide. Together, they show how dedication can guide future generations to reach higher and dream bigger."
The John L. "Jack" Swigert Jr. Award for Space Exploration honors exceptional achievements in space exploration and discovery by a company, agency or consortium. Named for astronaut Jack Swigert, a Colorado native and Apollo 13 crew member, the award reflects the mission's historic perseverance and ingenuity, and it celebrates the spirit of overcoming challenges in the pursuit of discovery.
Nearly 50 years after their launch, Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 remain among humanity's greatest achievements in space exploration. Originally designed for a four-year mission, the twin probes became the only spacecraft to visit all four giant outer planets -- Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune -- reshaping our understanding of the solar system. Voyager discoveries include active volcanoes on Jupiter's moon Io, detailed structures within Saturn's rings, new moons, and magnetic fields around Uranus and Neptune, providing insights that continue to influence planetary science. In 2012, Voyager 1 became the first human-made object to enter interstellar space, followed by Voyager 2 in 2018, delivering the first direct measurements of the space between stars.
The Voyager team's recent successes in sustaining and restoring communication with the aging spacecraft further strengthen its historic legacy. Operating across vast distances, the team continues to provide critical scientific data from interstellar space, demonstrating ingenuity, perseverance, and technical expertise. Their ability to generate new discoveries from a mission now in its fifth decade underscores the enduring impact of Voyager and the remarkable talent behind one of the longest-running space missions in history.
Space Foundation also selected the Estes Model Rocket Company for the 2026 Douglas S. Morrow Public Outreach Award for its decades-long commitment to immersive STEM learning and education. Founded in 1958, the company has grown into the world's leading model rocketry manufacturer and a trusted partner for teachers and youth organizations nationwide, providing accessible tools and resources that help students explore science, technology, engineering and math in hands on ways.
Through model rockets, classroom kits, curriculum resources, and national education partnerships, Estes nurtures curiosity and builds scientific understanding from early learning through high school. Its lesson plans and hands-on activities turn abstract concepts into practical experiences that develop problem-solving and critical-thinking skills. From a student's first rocket launch to collaborative projects and national competitions, Estes invites learners of all ages to explore science and engineering and experience the excitement of discovery.
The awards will be presented at Space Foundation's 41st annual Space Symposium, April 13-16, 2026, at The Broadmoor in Colorado Springs.
* * *
About Space Symposium
Space Symposium, created in 1984 by Space Foundation, is the premier assembly of the global space community, bringing together more than 10,000 space professionals, business leaders, and decision-makers. Attendees from more than 40 countries gather annually in Colorado Springs to form partnerships and explore the latest in space technology. Representing all sectors of the space ecosystem, participants include space agencies, commercial businesses, military organizations, government agencies, R&D facilities, educational institutions, and entrepreneurs. The event also extends its global reach with virtual access through livestream and on-demand programming. Learn more at www.spacesymposium.org.
* * *
About Space Foundation
Space Foundation is a nonprofit organization founded in 1983 as a gateway to advance the global space community. Space Foundation uniquely educates, collaborates and informs the entire space workforce, from early education through post-secondary (college, non-college, vocational), to the start of their careers as new professionals, and ultimately as leaders at the highest levels of government and commercial industry. As a charitable organization, Space Foundation receives support from corporate members, sponsors, individual giving, and grants. Visit Space Foundation at www.SpaceFoundation.org, and follow us on Facebook, X, Instagram, LinkedIn and YouTube.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.spacefoundation.org/2026/01/29/space-foundation-announces-2026-john-l-jack-swigert-jr-award-for-space-exploration-and-douglas-s-morrow-public-outreach-recipients/
Reason Foundation Issues Commentary: Despite Increased Funding, Transit Ridership Hasn't Returned in Most Areas
LOS ANGELES, California, Jan. 30 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following commentary on Jan. 28, 2026, by transportation policy analyst Neliann Rivera:* * *
Despite increased funding, transit ridership hasn't returned in most areas
States where transit continued to support local, all-day travel generally saw steadier post-pandemic recoveries than those focused primarily on peak-hour commuting into downtown job centers.
*
Before 2020, much of U.S. transit planning, especially in metropolitan areas with long-established rail networks, was built around the weekday commute. Heavy rail, light-rail ... Show Full Article LOS ANGELES, California, Jan. 30 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following commentary on Jan. 28, 2026, by transportation policy analyst Neliann Rivera: * * * Despite increased funding, transit ridership hasn't returned in most areas States where transit continued to support local, all-day travel generally saw steadier post-pandemic recoveries than those focused primarily on peak-hour commuting into downtown job centers. * Before 2020, much of U.S. transit planning, especially in metropolitan areas with long-established rail networks, was built around the weekday commute. Heavy rail, light-railand downtown-oriented commuter rail systems were designed to move large volumes of workers into central business districts during peak hours, and investment decisions often reflected that priority.
Most bus systems followed a different logic. In smaller or more dispersed metropolitan areas, buses were more likely to support local, all-day travel across the metro area, serving non-commute trips such as medical appointments, shopping, and service-sector work, because bus networks are less constrained by fixed infrastructure. They have historically played a broader role in meeting everyday mobility needs beyond the traditional rush-hour commute. This model worked well for decades until the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the assumptions that had long shaped how transit systems were planned and used.
During the pandemic and shutdowns, transit ridership declined rapidly across nearly every state in the United States, leading to significantly reduced fare revenue and placing tremendous financial pressure on transit agencies. In response, Congress approved the largest package of federal transit assistance programs in American history, providing approximately $25 billion through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, $14 billion via the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act (CRRSAA), and adding $30.5 billion in the American Rescue Plan for public transit.
At the time, policymakers anticipated that, once offices reopened and daily routines resumed, ridership and transit system performance would recover.
Examining metro transit recovery patterns in select areas since the pandemic
The table below groups major metropolitan transit markets by the percentage of their 2019 ridership that had returned by 2024, using unlinked passenger trips reported to the Federal Transit Administration's National Transit Database. Each metro is listed with the main transit agency or agencies that operate service in that area. Using metro areas rather than states avoids double-counting riders and helps explain why recovery can differ within a single state. Large urban systems that rely heavily on rail and downtown commuting have often recovered more slowly, while smaller, bus-based systems in other parts of the state have tended to rebound more quickly.
* * *
Recovery Category ... States
Exceeding 2019 Ridership ... Wilmington, DE (DART First State)
Strong Recovery of 2019 Ridership (~85-95%) ... Miami-Dade, FL (Miami-Dade Transit); New Orleans, LA (New Orleans RTA); Wichita, KS (Wichita Transit); Sioux Falls, SD (Sioux Area Metro)
Upper-Moderate Recovery of 2019 Ridership (~75-84%) ... Salt Lake City / Wasatch Front, UT (Utah Transit Authority); Detroit, MI (DDOT and SMART buses); Des Moines, IA (Des Moines Area Regional Transit Authority); Boise, ID (Valley Regional Transit); Cheyenne and Casper, WY (local bus systems)
Moderate Recovery of 2019 Ridership (~65-74%) ... Phoenix, AZ (Valley Metro); Denver, CO (Regional Transportation District); Los Angeles, CA (Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority); Chicago, IL (Chicago Transit Authority); Boston, MA (Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority); Seattle, WA (King County Metro; Sound Transit); Dallas-Fort Worth, TX (Dallas Area Rapid Transit); Portland, OR (TriMet)
Below ~65% Recovery of 2019 Ridership ... Atlanta, GA (Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority); Twin Cities, MN (Metro Transit); New York City, NY (MTA New York City Transit); Newark-Jersey City, NJ (NJ Transit; PATH); San Francisco Bay Area (Bay Area Rapid Transit)
* * *
What the 2019-2024 transit ridership data show
After five years, the data tell a more complicated story. Although ridership has increased since its low point in 2020-2021, most places have not returned to pre-pandemic ridership levels despite unprecedented federal aid and higher state and local spending.
Some transit systems are close to recovery; a handful have surpassed 2019 ridership, but many remain well below their earlier benchmarks. Across the markets reviewed, 2024 ridership typically falls between roughly two-thirds and three-quarters of 2019 levels, with fewer regions reaching 80-90% of pre-pandemic levels, and only one region, Wilmington, Delaware, exceeding pre-pandemic use in this sample.
The data from 2019 to 2024 point to a clear conclusion: increased short-term federal funding did not consistently lead to higher transit ridership in the areas examined. Even as transit funding rose nationwide, ridership recovery varied widely by state. Pandemic-era policies treated transit ridership losses as a revenue problem to be solved with emergency aid. That approach stabilized transit agency finances but often failed to address whether transit service still matched how people were traveling after the pandemic, even as work patterns, travel behavior, and daily trip-making continued to evolve.
As my Reason Foundation colleague Marc Scribner has noted in his analysis of post-pandemic transit finances, federal relief largely addressed budget shortfalls while ridership across most regions remained well below pre-pandemic levels. The result was financial stability without a corresponding return of ridership.
This distinction matters because it reflects a shift in transit's core challenge. The issue is no longer whether transit agencies can remain solvent. It is whether the service they provide still aligns with how and where people travel.
The transit ridership divide that governments must address
Between 2019 and 2024, states worked with local governments to keep transit service operating through a period of historic ridership loss. Funding levels remained elevated across many systems even as fare revenue collapsed and travel patterns shifted. Yet ridership recovery varied widely from state to state.
Based on data reported to the Federal Transit Administration's National Transit Database, in Georgia, statewide ridership fell from roughly 142.3 million trips in 2019 to 55.3 million in 2021, a 61% decline. By 2024, ridership rebounded to about 80.1 million trips, still approximately 44% below pre-pandemic levels. Colorado experienced a similar trajectory, dropping from 134.2 million trips in 2019 to 66.9 million in 2021 before recovering to 92.0 million trips in 2024, or about 69% of its 2019 ridership.
Large, rail-focused states show an even clearer disconnect between funding and recovery. New York received more than $25.5 billion in federal transit funding between 2019 and 2024, in addition to substantial state and local support, yet recorded approximately 1.63 billion transit trips in 2024, only about two-thirds of its 2019 total.
New Jersey and Massachusetts followed similar patterns. Despite billions in combined federal and state funding, transit ridership in 2024 reached only about 64% of 2019 levels in New Jersey and roughly 72% in Massachusetts.
By contrast, several more rural, lower-spending, bus-focused states recovered more fully. By 2024, Delaware slightly exceeded its 2019 ridership. Kansas, after experiencing a roughly 50% decline during the pandemic, rebounded to about 87% of its pre-pandemic ridership despite comparatively modest funding levels. Other primarily bus-based states also returned closer to earlier ridership levels, including South Dakota at about 84%, Iowa at about 81%, Michigan at about 80%, and Wyoming at about 83%.
At the same time, several states with comparatively high total transit funding continued to lag in ridership recovery. Minnesota applied roughly $4.6 billion in combined federal, state, and local transit funding between 2019 and 2024, yet recovered only about 64% of its 2019 transit ridership by 2024.
Similar outcomes appear in Maryland, which applied about $7.6 billion and recovered roughly 67% of pre-pandemic ridership, Virginia, which used about $10.9 billion and recovered about 66%, and Pennsylvania, which applied approximately $30.1 billion and recovered about 65%.
Taken together, these transit ridership patterns suggest that post-pandemic recovery depended less on total spending levels and more on whether transit systems continued to serve practical, everyday travel needs rather than primarily commuter-oriented demand.
Transit ridership recovery followed usefulness, not spending
How well transit recovered after the pandemic depended largely on how systems were designed and who they served. States where transit continued to support local, all-day travel generally saw steadier recoveries than those focused primarily on peak-hour commuting into downtown job centers.
Where transit remained useful for health care workers, service-sector employees, students, and people making everyday trips, ridership returned more quickly.
In contrast, simply restoring pre-pandemic schedules in commuter-focused systems often failed to bring riders back because work and travel patterns had changed.
Decisions by state departments of transportation and transit agencies played a major role in shaping outcomes. Systems with stronger recoveries since the pandemic tended to focus on three actions:
1. Restoring frequent transit service on high-demand corridors.
2. Simplifying transit networks to make routes easier to understand and use.
3. Prioritizing safety and cleanliness to rebuild rider confidence.
Agencies that instead preserved underused routes or maintained legacy service patterns often experienced weaker ridership recoveries, even with substantial funding increases. The key question, then, is not how much funding was provided but how effectively it was used. Ridership remains the clearest measure of value, reflecting whether transit service is frequent, reliable, safe, and aligned with how people travel today.
Going forward, states and transit agencies should prioritize funding based on outcomes
To achieve better returns on future transit spending, states and transit agencies should prioritize funding based on measurable outcomes rather than established practices. What concerns transit riders the most is simple: increased service frequency that gives them options, whether the bus or train shows up when it is supposed to, and if they feel safe riding the system. Operating support for transit systems should be allocated to address these key customer priorities.
On high-ridership routes, transit should run frequently throughout the day to meet demand, not just during morning and evening rush hours. For many urban corridors, that means buses or trains should run every 10 to 15 minutes as a baseline, with more frequent service where ridership supports it. This frequency is the difference between transit being a backup option and being a reliable part of daily life. When service runs this often, people can use it for work, school, medical appointments, and errands without checking a schedule or worrying about missing a trip.
When transit service is infrequent, even motivated riders are forced to plan their day around the timetable, and many simply choose to drive instead. Frequency is not about convenience. It is about whether transit is practical to use at all.
Reliability should be evaluated from the rider's perspective rather than through internal documentation. On scheduled routes, vehicles should depart no more than one minute early and no more than five minutes late. On high-frequency routes, maintaining consistent vehicle spacing is essential to prevent excessive waits caused by vehicle bunching.
Safety should be evaluated based on real-world results rather than internal compliance. Transit riders are concerned with incidents such as assaults, operator injuries, serious collisions, and disorder that can undermine predictability and security or simply make riders feel unsafe. States should link a portion of operating support for transit to measurable improvements in these areas rather than solely to administrative compliance. Transit agencies should be required to demonstrate reductions in serious incidents and injuries.
States should also encourage transit agencies to redesign their networks according to current travel patterns rather than pre-pandemic commuter trends. This redesign should include implementing simpler routes, enhancing all-day service, and reducing low-ridership coverage routes maintained primarily due to historical precedent.
Bus speed and reliability improvements, such as dedicated lanes, signal priority, and optimized stop spacing, should be reserved for corridors with demonstrated or latent demand sufficient to justify reallocating roadway capacity. Exclusive lanes are most cost-effective where buses already carry high passenger volumes or where time savings and frequency improvements are likely to attract significant new ridership.
In areas with low or dispersed demand, dedicating lanes may result in underutilization and inefficient use of limited road space. Therefore, states and transit agencies should prioritize lower-cost reliability measures, including schedule adherence improvements, stop consolidation, running-time adjustments, and targeted signal priority, until demand justifies more intensive interventions.
Currently, many states allocate operating support using legacy formulas based on historical or geographic factors rather than current transit ridership and performance. This approach prioritizes preservation over effectiveness. Public funding should be directed toward transit routes and services that demonstrably enhance riders' mobility.
The objective should be to develop transit systems that attract and serve riders in 2026 and beyond, rather than restoring transit systems to their 2019 state.
* * *
Neliann Rivera is a transportation policy analyst at Reason Foundation.
* * *
Original text here: https://reason.org/commentary/despite-increased-funding-transit-ridership-hasnt-returned-in-most-areas/
Connecticut Residents, Environmental, and Social Justice Groups Demand Fairness and Accountability, Rally To Make Polluters Pay
BOSTON, Massachusetts, Jan. 30 -- Conservation Law Foundation issued the following news release on Jan. 29, 2026:* * *
Connecticut Residents, Environmental, and Social Justice Groups Demand Fairness and Accountability, Rally To Make Polluters Pay
Connecticut residents gathered near the State Capitol on January 28 to demand accountability for polluting corporations that pass on costs to local communities. Connecticut families are paying millions for climate disasters while a handful of fossil fuel executives and corporate elites rake in record profits. This is climate injustice and it's being ... Show Full Article BOSTON, Massachusetts, Jan. 30 -- Conservation Law Foundation issued the following news release on Jan. 29, 2026: * * * Connecticut Residents, Environmental, and Social Justice Groups Demand Fairness and Accountability, Rally To Make Polluters Pay Connecticut residents gathered near the State Capitol on January 28 to demand accountability for polluting corporations that pass on costs to local communities. Connecticut families are paying millions for climate disasters while a handful of fossil fuel executives and corporate elites rake in record profits. This is climate injustice and it's beingdriven by an oligarchy that pollutes our communities and sticks taxpayers with the bill.
"If you make a mess, you should clean it up. We learned this lesson as children, and now it's time Big Oil and Gas do, too," says Kendall Keelen, Conservation Law Foundation Staff Attorney. "It's not fair that Connecticut families and small businesses foot the entire bill for the damages caused by extreme weather. Especially, when those companies knew what science shows-that fossil fuels worsen it. We can't let the companies responsible continue to make millions off of the dirty fuels that destroy our homes, threaten our livelihoods, and harm our loved ones while we drain our wallets. It's common sense that the companies that make so much money from fossil fuels share in the financial burden of the cleanup."
At the rally, community members, climate advocates, and local leaders shared firsthand stories of flooding, extreme heat, rising insurance costs, and damage to homes and businesses caused by climate change. Speakers warned that fossil fuel corporations have knowingly driven the climate crisis for decades while evading accountability, and are now pushing for immunity from responsibility with support from the Trump administration and its allies. Rallygoers made clear that Connecticut families should not be forced to subsidize Big Oil's profits or bail out polluters who want a free pass for the damage they've caused.
Moving forward, advocates are calling on Connecticut lawmakers to pass Climate Superfund legislation that would require the largest fossil fuel corporations to help pay for climate-related damages and resilience efforts. The coalition urged legislators and the Governor to stand with Connecticut residents, not corporate polluters, by advancing policies that protect communities, lower taxpayer burdens, and ensure that those most responsible for the climate crisis are held financially accountable.
"The Connecticut legislature has a second chance to stop sticking taxpayers with Big Oil's bills and put the cost of extreme weather where it belongs on the corporations that contributed to the crisis," said Julianna Larue, Organizer with Sierra Club Connecticut. "A Climate Superfund would take financial burden off of families and municipalities, hold polluters accountable for the damage they knowingly caused, and deliver real relief to communities hit hardest by climate disasters."
"Young people are inheriting a climate crisis that we did not create, and we are the ones forced to live with the consequences. A Climate Superfund is about making the biggest polluters pay for the damage they've caused instead of passing the costs onto our generation. This is a necessary step to create a more livable and affordable future for us young people where we can pay for and repair the damages undone onto our communities" - Sydney Collins, Sunrise New Haven
"Environmental racism has been detrimental to the health of my family. Maintaining a decent quality of life seems nearly impossible as our water and air continues to be polluted by corporations causing us to struggle with health barriers, education, and early mortality. Along with medical bills, high energy costs, and rising rents it is necessary to hold these billion dollar corporations accountable for the damage they have done to our communities for decades and decades. We suffer while they profit and enough is enough." - Tenaya Taylor, Non-Profit Accountability Group
"We must make fossil fuel companies pay for the climate damage they have created, rather than leaving those costs to our neighbors and families. New York and Vermont have both passed similar laws to address climate pollution. We in Connecticut desperately need our own. Connecticut can build more climate-resilient towns and cities. The Climate Superfund provides an alternative to make polluters pay, not residents." - Dr. Meagan Moore, Organizer with Mothers Out Front Connecticut
"The Climate Superfund makes it clear to fossil fuel companies - you break it, you buy it." said Helen Humphreys of Connecticut Citizen Action Group. "These companies have known for decades what their product does to our planet, but refuse to take any accountability for these devastating effects. This fund would stop socializing the cost of their climate damage and take the burden off of taxpayers."
"It's reprehensible that older policymakers remain willfully ignorant of what young people are experiencing," said Christine Palm, a former state representative who decided not to run for office for a fourth term so she could launch The Active Voice, a civics and journalism internship for young environmentalists. "The 10th amendment gives states enormous power, and our state elected leaders must invoke that power in order to protect the air our youngest generations will breathe long after we are gone." - Christine Palm, The Active Voice
"Climate change continues to threaten farmers in Connecticut, creating more extreme weather patterns that lead to crop loss and top soil erosion. Farmers continue to innovate with climate smart strategies, however the increasingly hot summers, significant rain and flooding events, as well other natural disasters are all overwhelming barriers to sustaining a healthy environment and local food system." - Kaitlyn Kimball, Owner; Sunset Farm, Director of Ag; CitySeed
"Climate change disproportionately hurts people, the most vulnerable people in our society, which we, as people of faith, are asked to care for. Children, the elderly, and medically-fragile people struggle in extreme heat and extreme cold, while people who are poor don't have the resources to address the damage caused by storms and floods. Extreme weather is costing CT millions each year, meanwhile, the fossil fuel companies are making trillions. It is time that they paid to address the harms caused by climate change." - Terri Eickel, Interreligious Eco-Justice Network
"A Climate Superfund is a policy that makes sense for Connecticut and puts the responsibility for the costs on those causing it. Funding to support state and local governments with the effects of climate change will protect public services and make sure that public employees work in a safe environment." - Zak Leavy, AFSCME Council 4
Farmers and farmworkers are on the front lines of climate change. Farms in CT lost over $80 million from climate disasters in 2023 and 2024, and, despite efforts to partially reimburse those losses, they still haven't been paid. Farms suffer the effects of erratic weather, but there's also a lot they can also due to adapt and make their operations more resilient, and a lot they can due to mitigate climate change with nature-based solutions. Farmers want to make these changes, but they cost money, and Federal and state programs run out of money for climate-smart agriculture every year. The Climate Superfund would provide another source of money to help CT farms survive and help to mitigate climate change." - Kimberly Stoner, PhD. Director of Advocacy, CT NOFA
"Connecticut residents should not bear the financial burden for the damages directly caused by fossil fuel corporations. These companies knowingly pollute the environment and earn significant profits while the costs of a deteriorating ecosystem fall on our communities. We must take action by following the lead of New York and Vermont to enact Climate Superfund legislation, ensuring that those responsible for environmental harm are held accountable." - Madison Spremulli, CT Zero Waste Coalition
"It's time that those companies who are responsible for and have profited from climate pollution pay for its consequences. The status quo is that Connecticut taxpayers alone bear the costs of responding to increasingly frequent and severe disasters. That's not fair and it must change. We need to join other states in holding fossil fuel companies accountable and make polluters pay." - State Representative Steven Winter
"Connecticut communities are already paying for climate damage through flooded roads, strained budgets, and higher insurance costs. Internal documents show that many oil companies understood these risks decades ago, yet continued to mislead the public while expanding production. Now, some of those same companies are lobbying for immunity so they never have to answer for harms they long knew their products would cause. The Make Polluters Pay campaign draws a clear line: no corporation is above the law, and this cycle of damage and denial cannot continue." - Mike Urgo, Former First Selectman, North Stonington CT
"For too long polluting industries have profited off the climate crisis that they have created. Under a federal administration rampant with corporate greed we are seeing more and more people standing up and speaking out every single day. We are standing up in CT to push for progress on climate and we need our state's elected leaders to make it happen. Now is the time for real action!" - Connor Yakaitis, Deputy Director, CT League of Conservation Voters
"I think we must fight for the human right for clean air, clean water, and clean food. We must understand our history as a nation and learn from it. Connecticut, as a state, must be at the forefront for clean energy solutions such as thermal energy networks (TENs), heat pumps, and solar. We do not have time to waste. This is urgent! This is now!" - Alycia D. Jenkins, Organizer, Sierra Club CT, Hartford Resident
Experts are available for further comment.
***
Original text here: https://www.clf.org/newsroom/connecticut-residents-environmental-and-social-justice-groups-demand-fairness-and-accountability-rally-to-make-polluters-pay/
Prosperity Now, Nestment, and Next Belt Strategies Release New Report Homeownership in America: The Starter Home Is Dead. Now What?
WASHINGTON, Jan. 29 [Category: Economics] (TNSrpt) -- Prosperity Now (formerly the Corporation for Enterprise Development) posted the following news release:* * *
Prosperity Now, Nestment, and Next Belt Strategies Release New Report Homeownership in America: The Starter Home Is Dead. Now What?
New analysis examines why the traditional starter home no longer functions as a reliable entry point for first-time homebuyers.
*
New analysis from Prosperity Now, Nestment, and Next Belt Strategies examines why the traditional starter home has become increasingly misaligned with today's housing market ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Jan. 29 [Category: Economics] (TNSrpt) -- Prosperity Now (formerly the Corporation for Enterprise Development) posted the following news release: * * * Prosperity Now, Nestment, and Next Belt Strategies Release New Report Homeownership in America: The Starter Home Is Dead. Now What? New analysis examines why the traditional starter home no longer functions as a reliable entry point for first-time homebuyers. * New analysis from Prosperity Now, Nestment, and Next Belt Strategies examines why the traditional starter home has become increasingly misaligned with today's housing marketrealities, even for households with stable incomes and strong credit.
The report, Homeownership in America: The Starter Home Is Dead. Now What?, finds that rising prices, constrained supply, and evolving household financial structures have fundamentally altered how first-time buyers enter homeownership. Rather than reflecting a decline in aspiration, the research suggests that long-standing entry points no longer function as intended under current conditions.
Drawing on market data, practitioner insights, and real-world case studies, the report documents how buyers are adapting by navigating alternative pathways into ownership. These include co-buying, shared equity and shared appreciation models, house hacking, cooperative housing, and rent-vesting strategies. While historically considered niche, the research finds that these approaches are increasingly serving as primary entry points for first-time buyers in practice.
"The buyers we're seeing today are not disengaging because they lack motivation or financial discipline," said Marisa Calderon, President and Chief Executive Officer of Prosperity Now. "They're responding rationally to a system that was designed for a different market. This research helps put shared language around what practitioners and households are already experiencing."
The analysis also highlights a growing mismatch between buyer timelines and industry structures. Many households require extended periods of preparation and guidance before purchasing, while housing finance and real estate systems are largely designed around short transaction cycles. This misalignment can leave otherwise prepared buyers without sustained support during readiness-building phases, contributing to disengagement even among credit-qualified households.
"The dream of homeownership revolves around stability and belonging as much as wealth building. We've seen over the years how each generation redefines the meaning of family, relationships, even success, " said Niles Lichtenstein, Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Nestment. "From our work with first-time buyers, it's clear that the challenge is not access to products alone, but access to navigation. When buyers understand their options and how different pathways work over time, outcomes improve, even within existing market constraints."
Importantly, the report does not argue for replacing existing systems or practitioners. Instead, it surfaces shared patterns already visible to housing counselors, lenders, and community-based organizations, and offers a common framework for understanding how buyers are experiencing the market today.
"Many of the tools in use today were built for a housing market that no longer exists," said Jeremy Potter, Principal at Next Belt Strategies and Co-Host of the Housing Insiders podcast. "This analysis is about recognizing where systems have become misaligned with household realities and identifying where potential buyers have adapted so the system can respond."
The report also considers implications for capital markets and policy. In markets where affordability challenges have become structural rather than cyclical, incremental demand-side tools alone have not restored broad access to entry-level ownership. The analysis suggests that recognizing and responsibly supporting new entry pathways, including those that incorporate risk-sharing and phased equity accumulation, may be essential to expanding durable access to homeownership over time.
"Homeownership in America: The Starter Home Is Dead. Now What?" is available to download here.
* * *
About Prosperity Now: Since 1979, Prosperity Now has been a trusted leader in strengthening financial security, expanding access to capital, and ensuring economic stability for businesses, families, and communities. Learn more at www.prosperitynow.org.
* * *
About Nestment: Nestment was founded in 2021 to guide the next generation of first-time homebuyers through the homebuying process with clarity and confidence. The company combines a dedicated homebuying coach, a trusted network of real estate agents and lenders, educational resources, and AI-powered tools to support buyers from their earliest questions through closing. Their homebuying platform helps first-time buyers to achieve homeownership through accessible, creative pathways and wealth-building strategies. Nestment is backed by leading venture investors including Protofund, IDEA Fund Partners, and mission-aligned funds, namely, Vamos Ventures, Concrete Rose, and The MBA Fund. Read more about how Nestment is revolutionizing the future of homeownership at https://www.nestment.com/.
* * *
About Next Belt Strategies: Next Belt Strategies is a consulting and advisory firm focused on innovation in the real estate, mortgage and title industries.
* * *
REPORT: https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/64f22f0478cf70a81b4dc7a9/697bdc315f5c710891c4532d_PN-Homeownership-in-America-2026-report-5.pdf
***
Original text here: https://www.prosperitynow.org/news-and-insights/prosperity-now-nestment-and-next-belt-strategies-release-new-report-homeownership-in-america-the-starter-home-is-dead-now-what
Foundation for Economic Education Posts Commentary: Reform on the Move
DETROIT, Michigan, Jan. 29 -- The Foundation for Economic Education posted the following commentary on Jan. 28, 2026:* * *
Reform on the Move
By Harry Phibbs
Britain's new political party is surging in the polls.
Like the United States, the United Kingdom has a first-past-the-post voting system. This tends to entrench a two-party system. It takes a lot for other rivals to break through. The resulting culture of complacency and entitlement by the main parties is certainly less than ideal.
In the UK, politics has been dominated by the Conservative and Labour Parties for the last century. In ... Show Full Article DETROIT, Michigan, Jan. 29 -- The Foundation for Economic Education posted the following commentary on Jan. 28, 2026: * * * Reform on the Move By Harry Phibbs Britain's new political party is surging in the polls. Like the United States, the United Kingdom has a first-past-the-post voting system. This tends to entrench a two-party system. It takes a lot for other rivals to break through. The resulting culture of complacency and entitlement by the main parties is certainly less than ideal. In the UK, politics has been dominated by the Conservative and Labour Parties for the last century. In1922, Labour overtook the Liberal Party. By 1924, the Liberal Party's support had collapsed. Our opinion polling suggests that just over a hundred years later, British politics is having another shake-up. An insurgent party called Reform UK, led by Nigel Farage, a friend of Donald Trump's, has a commanding lead in the polls, and has done so since the end of April last year. That is remarkable. At the last General Election in 2024, they won just five seats in the House of Commons out of 650--and have since increased their presence to eight, following high-profile defections from the Conservative Party, including their former home secretary Suella Braverman and immigration minister Robert Jenrick.
Local elections on May 7th this year will be a big test for them. (Although some elections have been canceled, most are proceeding.) It's not quite like the US midterms. No seats in the UK Parliament are up for election. But there are elections for the devolved parliaments in Scotland and Wales and for local authorities in most of England. Pundits expect that Reform UK will do better than either the Conservatives or Labour.
The situation reflects the exasperation of the electorate. Conservatives were dismayed that a supposedly Conservative Government had pursued socialist policies, with even the new Conservative Party leader admitting that the party "talked right but governed left." In their nearly 15 years of government, the party increased public spending, resulting in punitive levels of taxation and a growing mountain of Government debt, high energy bills caused by a commitment to "net zero" energy policies, and wealth creators being penalized by ever tighter regulations that make it harder to raise finance and riskier to hire staff. Voters who believe in free markets were left with few options.
The Labour Party has also alienated many of its traditional supporters. Working-class and older voters who had previously supported Labour found a party more interested in "woke" issues than the cost of living. At a time when many voters are feeling the squeeze financially, economic policies are often the main motivator when they make their choice at the ballot box.
These voters believe in the value of work, that honest employment should pay a living wage, and that only those who really need it should be living off welfare benefits. They thought that the Labour Party championed the workers, and were dismayed instead to find it lecturing people over their use of pronouns and shaming those who flew the national flag. Incredulity turned to anger as Labour, once the party of the blue collar, became the party of those with well-paid employment in the public sector.
Some of these erstwhile Labour voters would never contemplate voting for the Conservative Party due to family loyalty or because they disliked the Conservative "brand" as too snobbish or stuffy. But they were open to an alternative.
Along comes Reform UK. Seen by some as an energetic new party with a Conservative outlook, but without the baggage of the Conservative Party, it is a more attractive proposition. But what would a Reform government actually look like?
We are not required to have a General Election in the UK for another three years (though the Prime Minister does retain the prerogative to call for an early election). Much could happen in that time. It is hard to imagine the current Labour Government recovering in popularity. But there is increased support for the extreme left-wing Green Party, which could pull away votes from Labour's left. The Conservative Party might yet recover.
But what if Reform UK perform as well as opinion polls suggest, and form a government? What direction would the country take with Nigel Farage as Prime Minister?
Farage is, by instinct, a free-marketeer, as shown by his statements over many years, and temperamentally someone willing to confront the establishment to pursue his beliefs. On the other hand, he is a politician sensitive to what public opinion will accept. A wealthy man, who makes significant earnings from his media work, he has called for a cultural change where success is celebrated rather than denigrated. He has consistently highlighted entrepreneurs emigrating from the UK as one of his great concerns.
Yet he is more popular with low-income voters than the rich, which could lead to some inconsistencies. In a sop to "Old Labour"style voters, Reform UK has indicated its willingness on propping up loss-making traditional industries such as coal and steel with subsidies.
Another concern is that Reform UK has failed in its initial test with the local authorities, where it has already won power. In last year's elections, it took charge in several English county councils, promising bold action to cut wasteful spending. No specific promises were made on the tax cuts that would result, but it was implicit that they would be significant. Instead, the Reform UK councils have put tax up even higher.
Farage puts this local setback down to inexperience and has used that to justify welcoming in some defectors from the Conservative Party with experience of Government office. But how new can a party be when most of its recognizable faces are Tories who just switched their team jersey?
Yet there is one principal reason why a Reform government could take a free-market course: economic reality. In three years' time, there will be no alternative. Public spending will have to be cut. Economic growth has already ground to a halt, and further tax increases are planned. The tax-and-spend journey has reached a dead end. Welfare spending has been rising out of control in a way that is unsustainable.
If these underlying problems are not tackled, then the alternative will be crude emergency spending cuts as the money runs out. A bold program of enlightened reform, brought in by someone who believes in what he is doing, would be less painful.
* * *
Harry Phibbs is the Local Government editor of Conservative Home. He is a contributor to CapX and a former councilor on Hammersmith and Fulham Council in London.
* * *
Original text here: https://fee.org/articles/reform-on-the-move/
Boston Foundation: Review of Early Results of MBTA Communities Act Finds Law Has Produced "real But Modest" Gains, But Not Necessarily Near Transit
BOSTON, Massachusetts, Jan. 29 (TNSrpt) -- The Boston Foundation issued the following news release on Jan. 28, 2026:* * *
Review of early results of MBTA Communities Act finds law has produced "real but modest" gains, but not necessarily near transit
Report tracks nearly 7,000 housing units in the permitting and development pipeline to date, but under a third of those within a half-mile of transit
*
Five years after its initial passage, and after years of discussion in 177 cities and towns across Massachusetts, a new report finds that Greater Boston is seeing real but modest benefits from ... Show Full Article BOSTON, Massachusetts, Jan. 29 (TNSrpt) -- The Boston Foundation issued the following news release on Jan. 28, 2026: * * * Review of early results of MBTA Communities Act finds law has produced "real but modest" gains, but not necessarily near transit Report tracks nearly 7,000 housing units in the permitting and development pipeline to date, but under a third of those within a half-mile of transit * Five years after its initial passage, and after years of discussion in 177 cities and towns across Massachusetts, a new report finds that Greater Boston is seeing real but modest benefits fromthe MBTA Communities Act, with nearly 7,000 units of new housing in the development pipeline across more than 100 projects in Eastern Massachusetts.
The report, An Early Look at the MBTA Communities Permitting Pipeline, was compiled by Boston Indicators Senior Fellow Amy Dain to look at how the law has been implemented through a review of the projects in the construction pipeline that can be linked to the law's passage and resulting zoning changes. To date, 34 communities have projects in the permitting pipeline, ranging in size from two to more than 500 units.
"Construction is happening as a direct result of the MBTA Communities law, but the law's hallmark flexibility leaves a lot of leeway for communities to embrace or sidestep the law's housing goals," said Dain, who will host an author briefing on the new report on Friday, January 30 at 9:30 a.m. "As a result, while MBTA Communities has been the most effective state policy in recent years to encourage multi-family housing by right, its impacts in some areas, especially near transit stations, have been relatively modest compared to the overwhelming need."
The data also reflect two interesting dimensions of the law's implementation to date. The report notes that despite the "MBTA Communities" moniker, only about 30 percent of the units under development as a result of the law are within a half-mile radius of train stations. While that may come as a surprise to some observers, the report notes that the law's implementation guidelines providing leeway for communities without developable land near transit to site their MBTA Communities zones elsewhere in their communities as needed. Dain notes that most of the projects in the pipeline have easy access to city and town centers, available bus service, and/or bike infrastructure that supports multimodal mobility.
In addition, the data highlight the challenges of creating the scale needed to significantly impact regional needs. Just nineteen projects, of more than 100 units each, make up three-quarters of MBTA Communities projects. The majority are small-scale projects of under 10 units, which are sometimes referred to as the "missing middle" scale between single-family homes and mid-rise apartment buildings. For these smaller projects to aggregate to the tens of thousands of homes required for the region would require both more building in MBTA Communities zones and an expansion of zoning districts far beyond what the law currently requires.
The mix also results from a choice in many communities to rezone industrial, office or retail areas, rather than single-family and two-family neighborhoods, to meet the law's requirements. The law's flexibility has meant some communities are carefully crafting zones that allow for current development while putting up guardrails again future projects, while other communities (Dain cites Newton specifically) are using the law to develop broader opportunities for so-called 'missing middle' housing, small projects that can be built on available lots with 10 or fewer units.
The report looks at implementation with examples from dozens of communities' MBTA-C zoning plans, from communities whose zoning represents 'incremental change' to early adopters that 'go above and beyond,' such as Lexington, Westford, Lowell and Somerville, to a third category whose zoning is unlikely to lead to any increased production.
"As Amy notes, the flexibility that made the law more viable from a policy standpoint has made it more about fair zoning and less about transit-oriented development than the name would suggest," said Luc Schuster, Executive Director of Boston Indicators. "MBTA Communities was never going to be the single solution to our region's housing needs, but its progress could set the stage for continued development and the crafting of new, more ambitious efforts to provide housing for families in and around transit moving forward."
* * *
REPORT: https://www.bostonindicators.org/-/media/indicators/boston-indicators-reports/report-files/2026/mbtac_012726_v2.pdf
* * *
Original text here: https://www.tbf.org/news-and-insights/press-releases/2026/january/mbta-communities-report-pr-202601
Ahead Therapeutics Awarded Breakthrough T1D IDDP Grant to Accelerate ASIT Platform Technology Development for Type 1 Diabetes
NEW YORK, Jan. 29 -- Breakthrough T1D (formerly JDRF) a non-profit dedicated to funding type 1 diabetes research, posted the following news release:* * *
Ahead Therapeutics Awarded Breakthrough T1D IDDP Grant to Accelerate ASIT Platform Technology Development for Type 1 Diabetes
*
BARCELONA, Jan. 29, 2026 -Ahead Therapeutics, a Spanish biotechnology company focused on transformative solutions for autoimmune diseases, today announced it has been awarded a prestigious Industry Discovery and Development Partnership (IDDP) grant from Breakthrough T1D, the leading global type 1 diabetes research ... Show Full Article NEW YORK, Jan. 29 -- Breakthrough T1D (formerly JDRF) a non-profit dedicated to funding type 1 diabetes research, posted the following news release: * * * Ahead Therapeutics Awarded Breakthrough T1D IDDP Grant to Accelerate ASIT Platform Technology Development for Type 1 Diabetes * BARCELONA, Jan. 29, 2026 -Ahead Therapeutics, a Spanish biotechnology company focused on transformative solutions for autoimmune diseases, today announced it has been awarded a prestigious Industry Discovery and Development Partnership (IDDP) grant from Breakthrough T1D, the leading global type 1 diabetes researchand advocacy organization.
This strategic award will support Ahead Therapeutics in advancing its proprietary MiMi-ToP (Mimicking Tolerogenic Particles) platform, which is designed to promote the restoration of antigen-specific immune tolerance (ASIT) through an in vivo immune-reprogramming approach. MiMi-ToP is based on a well-established physiological mechanism involved in peripheral immune tolerance-the clearance of apoptotic cells-and biomimics this process using phosphatidylserine-based liposomes encapsulating disease-relevant autoantigen/s. In preclinical studies, this approach has shown the potential to restore long-term immune balance and reduce autoimmune activity across multiple disease models, including type 1 diabetes, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, myasthenia gravis, and others.
The IDDP grant will enable accelerated research and development activities in type 1 diabetes therapy, including the optimization and characterization of a multi-autoantigen formulation including multiple autoantigens relevant to type 1 diabetes, as well as the development of an industrially scalable lyophilization process. Together, these efforts will advance Ahead Therapeutics' program in type 1 diabetes toward IND readiness.
"Restoring immune tolerance to insulin-producing beta cells offers the potential for providing sustained rebalancing of the immune system and effectively halting the progression of T1D," said Dr. Joshua Vieth, Senior Director of Research at Breakthrough T1D. "We're excited about the opportunity this approach represents for those impacted by type 1 diabetes, and we look forward to working with the team at Ahead Therapeutics and supporting the advancement of their novel MiMi-ToP platform."
"Our team is deeply honored to receive this IDDP award from Breakthrough T1D," said Marti Dalmases, CEO of Ahead Therapeutics. "This support validates the potential of our platform to make meaningful progress toward transformative therapies for people living with type 1 diabetes. With Breakthrough T1D's partnership, we are positioned to advance our technology more rapidly and strategically than ever before."
About the Ahead Therapeutics-Breakthrough T1D Collaboration
This partnership combines Ahead Therapeutics' scientific and technological expertise with Breakthrough T1D's mission-driven funding model and deep experience in accelerating translational research. Together, the organizations aim to de-risk critical development steps, accelerate progress toward IND readiness, and advance new therapeutic options for people living with type 1 diabetes.
About Ahead Therapeutics
Ahead Therapeutics is a biotech company dedicated to pioneering a breakthrough in vivo immune reprogramming platform that enable next-generation solutions autoimmune diseases. With a multidisciplinary team of scientists and engineers, Ahead Therapeutics is committed to advancing scientific breakthroughs and accelerating the translation of research into real-world impact for people living with T1D.
***
Original text here: https://www.breakthrought1d.org/for-the-media/press-releases/ahead-therapeutics-awarded-breakthrough-t1d-iddp-grant-to-accelerate-asit-platform-technology-development-for-type-1-diabetes/