Foundations
Here's a look at documents from U.S. foundations
Featured Stories
TPPF Files Motion to Intervene in EPA Endangerment Finding Rule Dispute
AUSTIN, Texas, March 23 -- The Texas Public Policy Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
TPPF Files Motion to Intervene in EPA Endangerment Finding Rule Dispute
*
A coalition of groups represented by the Texas Public Policy Foundation are seeking to join a lawsuit to defend the Environmental Protection Agency's groundbreaking deregulatory effort. Last month, EPA announced what it has called "the single largest deregulatory action in American history." This final rule rescinds the 2009 Endangerment Finding and the car and truck greenhouse gas emissions standards that rely upon
... Show Full Article
AUSTIN, Texas, March 23 -- The Texas Public Policy Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
TPPF Files Motion to Intervene in EPA Endangerment Finding Rule Dispute
*
A coalition of groups represented by the Texas Public Policy Foundation are seeking to join a lawsuit to defend the Environmental Protection Agency's groundbreaking deregulatory effort. Last month, EPA announced what it has called "the single largest deregulatory action in American history." This final rule rescinds the 2009 Endangerment Finding and the car and truck greenhouse gas emissions standards that rely uponit. EPA estimates this deregulatory action will save Americans more than $1.3 trillion, lowering costs for consumers across the board and reducing new vehicle prices by an average of $2,400 per vehicle.
The Western States Trucking Association (WSTA), Construction Industry Air Quality Coalition (CIAQC), Liberty Packing Company, and Merit Oil Company submitted comments drafted by TPPF attorneys supporting the proposed rescission rule. As soon as EPA published the final rule, a large number of advocacy groups and left-wing states immediately challenged the final rule in the D.C. Circuit. WSTA, CIAQC, Liberty Packing, and Merit Oil are seeking to intervene in this case to help EPA defend the final rule. Beyond a general defense of the rescission, they are also advancing arguments EPA declined to bring. This includes voiding the 2009 Endangerment Finding because EPA did not share the proposal with its Science Advisory Board-a violation of federal law. They are also seeking to overturn Massachusetts v. EPA because it improperly expanded the Clean Air Act to cover greenhouse gas emissions and because the decision gives states "special solicitude" standing to challenge regulations that other parties cannot.
"By making the Endangerment Finding in 2009, EPA impermissibly arrogated to itself enormous powers over virtually every nook and cranny of the nation's economy in an effort to regulate carbon dioxide, a ubiquitous natural substance essential to life on Earth." said TPPF Senior Attorney Ted Hadzi-Antich. "Now that EPA has finally rescinded that ill-conceived program, TPPF is happy to lead the charge to help EPA defend the long-overdue rescission of the Endangerment Finding."
"Rescinding the Endangerment Finding provides the Supreme Court a perfect opportunity to revisit erroneous precedent," said TPPF attorney Eric Heigis. "In the years since Massachusetts v. EPA, landmark cases such as Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and West Virginia v. EPA limit EPA's ability to unilaterally enact politically important and economically costly regulations without Congress's approval. Until Congress amends the law, the courts must interpret the law based on the best reading of the statute. The best reading of the Clean Air Act precludes regulating carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas."
To read the motion to intervene, click here.
***
Original text here: https://www.texaspolicy.com/press/tppf-files-motion-to-intervene-in-epa-endangerment-finding-rule-dispute
TPPF Challenges City of Austin's Unconstitutional Transportation Tax
AUSTIN, Texas, March 23 -- The Texas Public Policy Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
TPPF Challenges City of Austin's Unconstitutional Transportation Tax
*
AUSTIN - Today, the Texas Public Policy Foundation filed a complaint, on behalf of local taxpayers, against the City of Austin for imposing an unconstitutional tax on utilities customers. The Transportation User Fee (TUF) has been tacked onto utilities bills since the 1990s and can cost households more than $260 per year.
Under the Texas Constitution, a tax must be equal and uniform, and the amount must be tied to property
... Show Full Article
AUSTIN, Texas, March 23 -- The Texas Public Policy Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
TPPF Challenges City of Austin's Unconstitutional Transportation Tax
*
AUSTIN - Today, the Texas Public Policy Foundation filed a complaint, on behalf of local taxpayers, against the City of Austin for imposing an unconstitutional tax on utilities customers. The Transportation User Fee (TUF) has been tacked onto utilities bills since the 1990s and can cost households more than $260 per year.
Under the Texas Constitution, a tax must be equal and uniform, and the amount must be tied to propertyvalues. Under the Texas Tax Code, a new tax cannot be imposed without voter approval. This so-called "fee" violates all of those requirements.
"When a city wants to impose new taxes, it needs to hold an election so taxpayers have a say before more of their money goes to the government," said TPPF Attorney Heidi Walusimbi. "Disguising new taxes as fees not only violates Texas law, it gives the City carte blanche to fill its coffers, while silencing the very people who fund it. This case reminds the City that if it wants more funds, it needs to ask first."
To read the original petition, click here.
***
Original text here: https://www.texaspolicy.com/press/tppf-challenges-city-of-austins-unconstitutional-transportation-tax
Colon cancer vs. rectal cancer: What's the difference?
ALEXANDRIA, Virginia, March 23 -- The Prevent Cancer Foundation issued the following news:
* * *
Colon cancer vs. rectal cancer: What's the difference?
*
Colorectal cancer, colon cancer and rectal cancer are often lumped together or even used interchangeably, leading to some confusion as to the relationship between these cancer types.
Colorectal cancer has been grabbing headlines in recent years after the deaths of several prominent celebrities from colon or rectal cancer, including Catherine O'Hara, James Van Der Beek, and Chadwick Boseman. Their stories are a powerful reminder of the importance
... Show Full Article
ALEXANDRIA, Virginia, March 23 -- The Prevent Cancer Foundation issued the following news:
* * *
Colon cancer vs. rectal cancer: What's the difference?
*
Colorectal cancer, colon cancer and rectal cancer are often lumped together or even used interchangeably, leading to some confusion as to the relationship between these cancer types.
Colorectal cancer has been grabbing headlines in recent years after the deaths of several prominent celebrities from colon or rectal cancer, including Catherine O'Hara, James Van Der Beek, and Chadwick Boseman. Their stories are a powerful reminder of the importanceof early detection of these diseases.
Below, we're spelling out the differences in colon cancer and rectal cancer and explaining how they fit together under the umbrella that is colorectal cancer.
What is colorectal cancer?
Colorectal cancer is the third-most common cancer in the United States. It is cancer that begins in the colon or rectum and can often be prevented with a screening colonoscopy by removing polyps (grape-like growths on the wall of the large intestine, which includes both the colon and rectum) before they become cancerous.
A colon cancer diagnosis or a rectal cancer diagnosis is each considered a colorectal cancer diagnosis.
What is colon cancer?
Colon cancer is a cancer that forms in the tissues of the colon (the longest part of the large intestine). According to the National Institute of Health (NIH), approximately 70% of colorectal cancer cases in the United States originate in the colon.
What is rectal cancer?
Rectal cancer is a cancer that forms in the tissues of the rectum (the last several inches of the large intestine closest to the anus). Approximately 30% of colorectal cases in the United States originate in the rectum, according to the NIH.
Similarities between colon cancer and rectal cancer
The colon and rectum are both parts of the large intestine, and the term "colorectal cancer" can refer to cancer in either or both areas.
Risk factors
Both colon cancer and rectal cancers share several risk factors, such as diet, age and genetics. You are at increased risk for colon cancer and rectal cancer if you:
* Drink alcohol in excess
* Eat a lot of red or processed meat
* Smoke
* Are overweight or obese
* Are not physically active
Symptoms
Colon cancer and rectal cancers also share several symptoms. Talk to a health care provider right away if you experience any of the following symptoms:
* Bleeding from the rectum or blood in or on the stool
* Unexplained iron-deficiency anemia
* Change in bowel movements that lasts more than a few days
* Stools that are more narrow than usual
* General abdominal problems such as bloating, fullness or a feeling that you need to have a bowel movement that's not relieved by having one
* Persistent abdominal cramps
* Unexplained vomiting, diarrhea or constipation
* Weight loss for no apparent reason
Your personal and family health histories also factor into your colon cancer and rectal cancer risk. If you have a family history of colon or rectal cancer, especially first-degree relatives such as your sibling, child or parent, you have an increased chance of developing the disease. Additionally, you are at increased risk if you have a personal history of inflammatory bowel disease or Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis.
People between the ages of 50 and 75 are at greater risk of getting colorectal cancer than younger people, but colorectal cancer has been on the rise in younger adults in recent years. Earlier this month, a study from the American Cancer Society showed nearly half of all new colorectal cancer diagnoses are in adults under the age of 65.
You should begin screening at age 45 if you are at average risk for colorectal cancer. If you are at increased risk, you may need to start screening earlier or be screened more often-talk to your health care provider about what's right for you.
RELATED | 5 myths about colorectal cancer
Differences between colon cancer and rectal cancer, and why it's important for you
Demographics
Statistically, women are more likely to be diagnosed with colon cancer than men, whereas rectal cancer is the opposite.
When men are diagnosed with colon cancer, they are more likely (53%) to develop it at a younger age than women (68 vs. 72 years).
Odds of cancer recurrence
According to the University of Michigan's Rogel Cancer Center, rectal cancer has about a 20% risk of local recurrence, opposed to about a 2% chance with colon cancer.
"The rectum doesn't have the same protective outer layer (called the serosa) as the colon, so it's easier for a tumor to break through and spread locally," says Dr. Karin Hardiman, surgical director at the Center. "That makes rectal cancer 10 times more likely than colon cancer to come back after treatment where it started."
Treatment
Treatment for colon cancer is typically more straightforward than treatment for rectal cancer, primarily due to the location of the colon versus the location of the rectum.
The colon is located in a more accessible area, so it is easier to reach in surgical procedures. The rectum, on the other hand, has other critical organs nearby, making treatment more challenging. Rectal cancer can impede essential bodily functions, such as bowel movements and urination, depending on the tumor's size and proximity to these organs.
Dr. Eric Dozois, a Mayo Clinic colon and rectal surgeon, says if colon cancer is caught early, surgery may be the only treatment that is necessary, but added that rectal cancer treatment may be a different story.
"Our approach to rectal cancer often involves more aggressive treatments that help prevent it from coming back," he said.
READ MORE | 'Twas the night before your colonoscopy: 5 tips to make it easier
Screening and early detection are key
Regardless of whether cancer is found in the colon or the rectum, the best chance at better health outcomes is detecting it early, before symptoms develop. A colonoscopy is recommended every 10 years beginning at age 45, however there are multiple options when it comes to screening-including some tests that can be done from the comfort of your home.
Your health care provider can discuss which options are available to you.
RELATED | New option for colorectal cancer screening: Which one is right for you
Learn more about screening recommendations, risk factors, plus signs and symptoms of colorectal cancer.
***
Original text here: https://preventcancer.org/article/colon-cancer-vs-rectal-cancer-whats-the-difference/
National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation: Canton SA Recycling Employees Scrap Steelworkers Union
SPRINGFIELD, Virginia, March 20 -- The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
Canton SA Recycling Employees Scrap Steelworkers Union
*
Recycling workers voted by over 2-1 margin to remove unpopular union, escape forced union payments
Canton, OH (March 20, 2026) - A group of over 40 employees of SA Recycling in Canton have successfully voted Steelworkers union officials out of power at their facility by a wide margin. SA Recycling worker Leslie Frase spearheaded the effort by filing a petition in February in which her coworkers demanded that
... Show Full Article
SPRINGFIELD, Virginia, March 20 -- The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
Canton SA Recycling Employees Scrap Steelworkers Union
*
Recycling workers voted by over 2-1 margin to remove unpopular union, escape forced union payments
Canton, OH (March 20, 2026) - A group of over 40 employees of SA Recycling in Canton have successfully voted Steelworkers union officials out of power at their facility by a wide margin. SA Recycling worker Leslie Frase spearheaded the effort by filing a petition in February in which her coworkers demanded thatthe National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) hold a union decertification election at their workplace. Frase filed the petition with free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
The NLRB is the federal agency responsible for enforcing private sector labor law, a task that includes administering votes to install (or "certify") and remove (or "decertify") unions. Frase's petition contained more than enough signatures from her coworkers to trigger a decertification vote under NLRB rules. In February, the NLRB approved an agreement that set the election date for March 5, and specified that the vote would take place among "[a]ll full-time and regular part-time production and maintenance employees, including truck drivers." On March 19, the NLRB certified the vote result, making official the Steelworkers union's ouster.
Ohio lacks Right to Work protections, meaning Steelworkers union officials had the power to force Frase and her coworkers to pay money to the union hierarchy as a condition of keeping their jobs. In contrast, in Right to Work states like Ohio's neighbors Indiana, Kentucky, and West Virginia, union membership and financial support are the voluntary choice of each worker. Now that Frase and her coworkers have voted to decertify the union, Steelworkers union officials have lost their power to impose forced-dues contracts on the workers.
"Steelworkers union officials had been in our workplace for quite a while, and did little to improve our working lives. Yet dues money was still coming out of our paychecks to support union activities," commented Frase. "The fact that we voted the Steelworkers union out by such a wide margin speaks to the fact that employees didn't think we were getting a good deal. We are very grateful to Foundation attorneys for their assistance."
The tally of the March 5 vote showed Frase and her fellow SA Recycling workers voting the Steelworkers out 28-12.
Foundation attorneys have noticed a marked increase in worker requests for help in decertifying unpopular unions. NLRB statistics indicate that in 2025 (the last year for which data is available), decertification petition filings are up almost 40 percent from 2020.
"Foundation attorneys were proud to help Ms. Frase and her fellow recycling employees scrap a Steelworkers union they pretty clearly did not want," commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. "However, it's important to recognize that many employees across the United States have a path to voting out a union that is much more difficult: Many arbitrary Biden-era NLRB rules are still in effect, which give union officials a multitude of ways to stop workers from exercising their right to vote.
"Independent-minded workers across the country are teaming up with Foundation staff attorneys to challenge many of these rules, and the Trump Administration should ensure that the NLRB is well-equipped to reshape labor regulations around employee free choice and not union boss power," Mix added.
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Print Share
The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation is a nonprofit, charitable organization providing free legal aid to employees whose human or civil rights have been violated by compulsory unionism abuses. The Foundation, which can be contacted toll-free at 1-800-336-3600, assists thousands of employees in about 200 cases nationwide per year.
***
Original text here: https://www.nrtw.org/news/sa-recycling-decert-03202026/
Georgia Public Policy Foundation Issues Commentary: Fight Against Red Tape Continues in Georgia
ATLANTA, Georgia, March 20 -- The Georgia Public Policy Foundation posted the following commentary on March 19, 2026, by policy analyst J. Thomas Perdue:
* * *
The Fight Against Red Tape Continues in Georgia
Georgia is one of many states that has recently begun to look critically at its growing regulatory code.
Lawmakers, business leaders and policy advocates have pointed out how regulations enacted by unelected bureaucrats in the executive branch have placed an unnecessary burden on the state's workers and industries. The lack of legislative oversight in what functions as de facto lawmaking
... Show Full Article
ATLANTA, Georgia, March 20 -- The Georgia Public Policy Foundation posted the following commentary on March 19, 2026, by policy analyst J. Thomas Perdue:
* * *
The Fight Against Red Tape Continues in Georgia
Georgia is one of many states that has recently begun to look critically at its growing regulatory code.
Lawmakers, business leaders and policy advocates have pointed out how regulations enacted by unelected bureaucrats in the executive branch have placed an unnecessary burden on the state's workers and industries. The lack of legislative oversight in what functions as de facto lawmaking(this is especially true at the federal level) is another concern. This problem is compounded by the fact that Georgia's code has grown unchecked for decades, resulting in a lack of transparency as well as redundant, outdated and even contradictory rules.
But as the state's code grows, so too does the list of other states that have taken steps to reduce their own. Those efforts demonstrate a widespread shift away from passive acceptance of regulatory growth. Despite lawmakers' desire to maintain Georgia's status as "the best state for business," the push for meaningful regulatory reform has not been free of obstacles.
At the beginning of 2025, the first year of Georgia's current two-year legislative session, the lieutenant governor's office sent a clear signal that the state was getting serious about regulatory reform with the announcement of the Red Tape Rollback Act. This resulted in Senate Bill 28, introduced by Sen. Greg Dolezal. It was an omnibus package that bundled together several ideas seen in other states that have proved more effective and enduring.
It would have required small-business impact analyses for bills, added stronger economic impact analysis requirements for agency rules, expanded the General Assembly's ability to object to or override proposed rules and required periodic review and sunset of administrative rules so agencies would have to justify keeping them on the books. Despite passing the Senate last year, SB 28 was not brought up for a vote in the House and has not advanced this year.
Despite this, regulatory reform is still very much alive at the Capitol. Instead of one sweeping package, lawmakers have moved a series of smaller, targeted fixes.
One of these is House Bill 903, which was introduced by Rep. Alan Powell (R-Hartwell) and passed the House in February. This bill would apply the state's Administrative Procedures Act (APA) to all agencies across the executive branch. This means that more state agencies would have to work through a legislative framework of notice, review and possible override by following the APA's requirements before adopting rules or deciding contested cases.
For rulemaking, Georgia's APA generally requires agencies to give at least 30 days' notice of a proposed rule, publish the proposed text and synopsis and provide a chance for public participation before adoption. The APA also governs contested cases and judicial review, including notice and hearing requirements in agency adjudications.
This idea is one of several regulatory reform efforts that simply returns powers and responsibilities to their intended branches of government. Rep. Powell pointed this out in his floor speech, saying that, "for too long, this House has been derelict in its duties due to the bureaucracy of the state that passes rules and regulations that we don't have oversight to."
Rep. Powell noted that his own constituents had asked him many times over his long tenure in the House about a given law, only to find that "law" was a regulation put forth by the bureaucracy that had the effect of law.
House Bill 1178 also strengthens legislative oversight by giving the House Budget and Fiscal Affairs Oversight Committee the authority to review budget matters, require reporting and provide for audits of state spending and performance. Its sponsor is Rep. Mitchell Horner (R-Ringgold).
To complete the trifecta, lawmakers have also sought curbing administrative overreach by reforming how the judiciary handles the regulatory process through House Bill 1247, sponsored by Rep. Matt Reeves (R-Duluth). This bill creates the "Georgia Bureaucratic Deference Act."
Currently, when an agency and a regulated party disagree over what a law requires, courts primarily give benefit of the doubt to the agency's interpretation. This process is commonly referred to as "judicial deference." It can function as a shortcut through our system of separated powers because it involves the executive branch performing duties meant for other branches. HB 1247 would require Georgia courts to decide questions of law without defaulting to an agency's preferred interpretation.
Other proposals reflected the same broader skepticism of unchecked administrative policymaking, but didn't make it through Crossover Day. House Bill 1078, for example, would have required agencies to periodically review and sunset existing rules, one of the more common regulatory reform tools found in other states.
While this session has not seen the sweeping overhaul of the administrative state that many advocates might have wanted, there's still a chance to make progress on regulatory reform, as consequential proposals are still alive.
***
Original text here: https://www.georgiapolicy.org/news/the-fight-against-red-tape-continues-in-georgia/
Bush Institute Launches the United States Afghan Women's Coalition
DALLAS, Texas, March 20 -- The George W. Bush Institute issued the following news release on March 19, 2026:
* * *
The Bush Institute launches the United States Afghan Women's Coalition
Today, the George W. Bush Institute announced the formation of the United States Afghan Women's Coalition (USAWC).
"I am grateful that the Bush Institute continues to support the women and girls of Afghanistan," said Mrs. Laura Bush. "Despite the brutality of Taliban rule and its attempts to erase Afghan women from society, we will never lose hope that our Afghan sisters will one day regain their freedoms."
... Show Full Article
DALLAS, Texas, March 20 -- The George W. Bush Institute issued the following news release on March 19, 2026:
* * *
The Bush Institute launches the United States Afghan Women's Coalition
Today, the George W. Bush Institute announced the formation of the United States Afghan Women's Coalition (USAWC).
"I am grateful that the Bush Institute continues to support the women and girls of Afghanistan," said Mrs. Laura Bush. "Despite the brutality of Taliban rule and its attempts to erase Afghan women from society, we will never lose hope that our Afghan sisters will one day regain their freedoms."
Led by the George W. Bush Institute, the USAWC will work to advance policies, encourage solidarity and action, and lift the perspectives and experiences of Afghan women, children, and other vulnerable populations. Through network coordination, targeted thought leadership, and influencer engagement, this working group aims to serve as a beacon of hope and resilience for those committed to a brighter future for all in Afghanistan.
Recognizing over two decades of impact, this effort pays tribute to the tremendous legacy of the U.S.-Afghan Women's Council, a public-private partnership that for nearly a quarter century convened government officials, civil society advocates, and private sector leaders in Afghanistan and the United States to improve lives across Afghan communities.
To learn about the coalition, visit bushcenter.org/topics/freedom-and-democracy/advocating-for-women/usawc
* * *
About the George W. Bush Institute
The George W. Bush Institute is a solution-oriented nonpartisan policy organization focused on ensuring opportunity for all, strengthening democracy, and advancing free societies. Housed within the George W. Bush Presidential Center, the Bush Institute is rooted in compassionate conservative values and committed to creating positive, meaningful, and lasting change at home and abroad. We utilize our unique platform and convening power to advance solutions to national and global issues of the day. Learn more at bushcenter.org.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.bushcenter.org/newsroom/the-bush-institute-launches-the-united-states-afghan-womens-coalition
AmfAR Announces Formation of Research Council to Guide Future Research Investments
NEW YORK, March 20 -- AmfAR-the Foundation for AIDS Research issued the following news release:
* * *
amfAR Announces Formation of Research Council to Guide Future Research Investments
Leaders at the forefront of science, including two Nobel Prize laureates, will offer expertise and recommendations on priority, scope, and innovative approaches to amfAR's research pipeline
*
Building on its rich history of scientific discovery that has revolutionized the treatment and prevention of HIV and benefited diseases beyond the virus, amfAR announced today the launch of a new advisory group to ensure
... Show Full Article
NEW YORK, March 20 -- AmfAR-the Foundation for AIDS Research issued the following news release:
* * *
amfAR Announces Formation of Research Council to Guide Future Research Investments
Leaders at the forefront of science, including two Nobel Prize laureates, will offer expertise and recommendations on priority, scope, and innovative approaches to amfAR's research pipeline
*
Building on its rich history of scientific discovery that has revolutionized the treatment and prevention of HIV and benefited diseases beyond the virus, amfAR announced today the launch of a new advisory group to ensureits research portfolio remains cutting-edge, impactful and relevant to amfAR's mission to save lives and improve global health.
The amfAR Research Council (aRC) will help guide the strategic direction of future research funding investments across HIV, virology, immunology, and AI-enabled science. All funded work, whether directly focused on HIV or in adjacent fields, must demonstrate how it can inform, strengthen, or accelerate HIV cure strategies and improve outcomes for people living with HIV.
The aRC is led under the direction of Dr. Andrea Gramatica, amfAR's Vice President of Research. With expertise in HIV, aging, neuroscience, cancer biology, and autoimmunity, members of the aRC include:
* Lishomwa Ndhlovu, MD, PhD; Weill Cornell Medicine; Chair
* Amanda Brown, PhD; Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
* Ulf Dittmer, PhD; Universitat Duisburg-Essen
* Kenneth Micklethwaite, MD, PhD; The Westmead Institute
* Sofiya Milman, MD; Albert Einstein College of Medicine
* Susan Moir, PhD; National Institutes of Health
* Ujjwal Rathore, PhD; Gladstone Institutes; Junior Member
* Charles M. Rice, PhD; The Rockefeller University; Nobel laureate; Honorary Member
* Drew Weissman, MD, PhD; University of Pennsylvania; Nobel laureate; Honorary Member
"amfAR's sustained support for innovative research has never been more important than it is today," amfAR Chief Executive Officer Kyle Clifford said. "For four decades, amfAR has helped drive advances that transformed medical treatments and improved millions of lives.
"Today we are building on that legacy by investing across the sciences shaping human health - from virology and immunology to AI enabled discovery. By bringing together leaders from an array of fields, the amfAR Research Council will help guide bold ideas and accelerate discoveries that move us closer to a cure, while also advancing breakthroughs that benefit global health."
Support from the aRC will include:
* Offering expertise and guidance on scientific, technological, and other matters relevant to amfAR's mission.
* Identifying potential gaps, redundancies, or partnership prospects within proposed funding initiatives.
* Recommending new research areas, as well as facilitating collaborations between amfAR and the global scientific community.
"The pathway to a cure for HIV becomes shorter when we invest with intention across disciplines," Dr. Gramatica said. "This type of integrated approach will improve the health of people living with HIV and deepen our understanding of the broader forces that drive disease. I welcome the counsel of the aRC members and their perspective on potential new funding opportunities."
Headshots and bios for amfAR Research Council members are available here (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/kmxiys1sb8ozkhzzwxw0z/APntfSYrR79iAFsxRCx74-E?rlkey=m4nhpo6sbfiwrogt7kznubl2f&st=n0e6wyjt&dl=0).
* * *
About amfAR
amfAR is a leading nonprofit dedicated to advancing scientific discovery and transforming global health with a primary and enduring commitment to ending the HIV/ AIDS epidemic. Serving as a catalyst for breakthrough science, amfAR supports innovative research in areas where viruses and the immune system play a defining role, including cancer, neurological conditions, autoimmune disorders, and other viral diseases. Through strategic investments, global research partnerships, and evidence-based policy leadership, amfAR helps accelerate discoveries that improve health and save lives. Since 1985, amfAR has raised more than $950 million and awarded in excess of 3,900 grants to scientists worldwide. Learn more at www.amfar.org.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.amfar.org/press-releases/amfar-announces-formation-of-research-council-to-guide-future-research-investments/
