NewzIntel.com

Category: Education

  • MIL-OSI USA: Duckworth Joins Schatz, Murray, Colleagues in Condemning Labor Department’s Cancellation of Funding to Address Child Labor, Human Trafficking Worldwide

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Illinois Tammy Duckworth
    April 23, 2025
    [WASHINGTON, D.C.] – U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) joined U.S. Senators Brian Schatz (D-HI), Patty Murray (D-WA) and 10 Senate Democratic colleagues in condemning the Trump Administration’s cuts to federal funding that for decades helped address child labor, forced labor and human trafficking globally.
    “These cuts are inconsistent with bipartisan laws passed by Congress providing federal funds to combat child labor, forced labor, human trafficking, and enforce labor standards in over 40 countries,” the Senators wrote in a letter to Labor Secretary Lori M. Chavez-DeRemer. “Cancelling all existing cooperative agreements will only harm American workers, lower international labor standards, and hurt children.”
    The Senators continued, “ILAB grants level the playing field for American workers and ensure businesses cannot profit from labor abuses by stopping the problems at their source. Offshoring work will only drive down wages, incentivize abusive labor practices abroad, and take jobs away from hard working Americans. For example, the President and CEO of the American Apparel & Footwear Association (AAFA) has said that the cancellation of ILAB contracts will harm both their consumers and 3.5 million American workers. The only winners here will be the multinational corporations who want cheap labor, and our adversaries that benefit from these practices.”
    “We ask that you live up to your comments and urge you to take immediate steps to protect children, American workers, and other vulnerable populations by using funds Congress appropriated for ILAB for that purpose,” the Senators concluded.
    Along with Duckworth, Schatz and Murray, the letter was co-signed by U.S. Senators Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Jeff Merkley (D-OR) and Ruben Gallego (D-AZ).
    The full text of the letter is available on Senator Duckworth’s website and below.
    Dear Secretary Chavez-DeRemer:
    We write to express our serious concerns about the Department of Labor (DOL)’s decision to terminate all existing cooperative agreements at the Bureau of International Labor Affairs (ILAB). DOL and the United States Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) Service have announced the cancellation of $577 million in cooperative agreements. These cuts are inconsistent with bipartisan laws passed by Congress providing federal funds to combat child labor, forced labor, human trafficking, and enforce labor standards in over 40 countries. We note that the Trump Administration identifies labor practices, including failures by foreign governments to protect internationally recognized worker rights, as a foreign trade barrier in the recently issued National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers. Cancelling all existing cooperative agreements will only harm American workers, lower international labor standards, and hurt children.
    ILAB was created by President Truman after World War II. Since its creation, it has served at the forefront of global efforts to eliminate child labor. Under international standards, child labor applies to work below the minimum age established under national legislation—usually 14 or 15 years old— and includes slavery, commercial sexual exploitation, illicit activities, and hazardous work that is likely to harm health or safety. Global estimates from the International Labor Organization (ILO) indicate that there are 160 million children between 5-17 years old in child labor, roughly half of them in hazardous conditions.
    ILAB also works to combat forced labor and human trafficking – serious violations of human rights. According to the most recent figures available, there are 5.4 victims of modern slavery for every 1,000 people in the world, with women and girls disproportionately affected. Additionally, the ILO estimated that 24.9 million people around the globe were in forced labor as of 2016. Victims are rarely able to seek help for various reasons, due to language barriers, poverty, or unstable immigration status. Furthermore, ILAB plays a key role in addressing China’s use of slave labor as a member of the Forced Labor Enforcement Task Force to enforce the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act.
    Critically, the findings from ILAB and ILAB funds provided by Congress have led to improved adherence to international labor standards that support American workers. Since 2019, ILAB has invested in eliminating the roughly 1.56 million instances of child labor violations in the production of cocoa in Ghana and Cote d’Ivoire—countries that produce cocoa for chocolate bought by American consumers, as well as nearly 60 percent of the world’s cocoa each year. Recently, DOL’s November 2024 framework of action included improving access to quality education, as well as technical and vocational training, strengthening social services and social protection, and empowering women, youth and workers in cocoa-growing communities. Uzbekistan was pushed to address forced labor and child labor in the cotton sector, which unfairly competes with American cotton growers and exporters. Argentina’s government and private sector built technical assistance programs developed by DOL in the blueberry sector, ensuring that children and teenagers had access to child care and enrichment programs. In Honduras, one DOL cooperative agreement disbursed more than $13 million to fight child labor and other exploitation, resulting in more than 6,000 children enrolling in educational programs, aiding more than 1,800 families, and helping train around 500 inspectors on child labor exploitation and other labor laws.
    Unfortunately, your actions will prevent this work from continuing. A few of the contracts that have been eliminated by you and DOGE include the “Global Better Work Program (I)” and “Better Work Global (II)” in Haiti, Jordan, Cambodia, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Vietnam to establish strong labor enforcement and transparency; “Supporting Safe and Inclusive Work Environments in Lesotho” to stop violence against women; “Research, Innovation and Strategic Engagement Project (RISE-global)” in Brazil, Colombia, Cote D’Ivoire, Indonesia, and Guatemala to educate workers on their rights and how to protect them; and “Promoting Safe and Healthy Workplaces in Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador” to improve worker safety and discourage migration to the United States. The cancellation of these contracts is neither efficient nor puts America’s interests first. Instead, we believe it will cause devastating, widespread harm to our most vulnerable populations, and put American workers at a disadvantage.
    Additionally, we are concerned about the economic impacts of this decision. One of the major missions of ILAB is to enforce the labor provisions in U.S. trade agreements. ILAB grants level the playing field for American workers and ensure businesses cannot profit from labor abuses by stopping the problems at their source. Offshoring work will only drive down wages, incentivize abusive labor practices abroad, and take jobs away from hard working Americans. For example, the President and CEO of the American Apparel & Footwear Association (AAFA) has said that the cancellation of ILAB contracts will harm both their consumers and 3.5 million American workers. The only winners here will be the multinational corporations who want cheap labor, and our adversaries that benefit from these practices.
    In your confirmation hearing on February 19th, you testified to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions that we must protect children from labor exploitation. You said this in response to questions from members on both sides of the aisle. We ask that you live up to your comments and urge you to take immediate steps to protect children, American workers, and other vulnerable populations by using funds Congress appropriated for ILAB for that purpose.
    Sincerely,
    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: UConn Leading New England’s Point of Care Ultrasound Training

    Source: US State of Connecticut

    UConn School of Medicine experts continue to be on the forefront of teaching point-of-care ultrasonography (PoCUS) and have now expanded their training to New England’s health care professionals.

    Hands-on training session at the Symposium.

    On April 10-11 UConn’s medical school organized the first annual New England Regional PoCUS Symposium in Bristol, Conn. Physicians, fellows, residents, and advanced practice providers had the opportunity to gain hands-on PoCUS training and education. The symposium also focused on Advanced Critical Care Echocardiography (CCE), another effective tool for the management of critically ill patients.

    “Our first annual PoCUS symposium was a huge success,” says Symposium Course Director Dr. Jennifer Kanaan, associate professor of Medicine, Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine at UConn School of Medicine. She has been teaching a Connecticut statewide course on PoCUS for pulmonary critical care fellows since 2015 as well as a curriculum with colleagues for UConn School of Medicine’s Emergency Medicine residency and UConn John Dempsey hospitalists too.

    PoCUS is ultrasonography performed rapidly at the patient’s bedside and interpreted in real-time by the clinician to aid with decision-making and procedural guidance.  It is most widely used in emergency medicine and pulmonary critical care.

    “The response from the Symposium was very positive so we will be running it again next year,” says Kanaan of UConn. “It is important to have this regional meeting as it provides an opportunity for experts from around the region to educate fellows on critical care PoCUS as well as share ideas on the future of point of care ultrasound.”

    Hands-on ultrasound technology training session.

    Keynote speaker for the event was internationally recognized Paul Mayo, MD, FCCP, professor of Medicine at the Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra. He discussed cutting-edge PoCUS education and the future of ultrasound, led a panel discussion with regional experts, and for the audience even taught a UConn fellow how to perform a Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) imaging procedure with a hands-on simulation.

    Panel discussions also explored issues such as credentialing, billing, and quality assurance and ultrasound case studies were presented by various fellows.

    Symposium Course Directors and faculty of the first annual New England Regional PoCUS Symposium including Dr. Jennifer Kanaan of UConn.

    Other Connecticut health care institution faculty assisting UConn with the successful Symposium included Aydin Pinar, M.D., Assistant Course Director from Yale; Ian Weir, D.O., Assistant Course Director from Yale School of Medicine and Nuvance Health; Ameer Rasheed, M.D., CME Coordinator, Assistant Professor of Medicine at UConn Health; Zubin Bham, M.D., Associate Program Director, Internal Medicine Residency at Bridgeport Hospital and Yale New Haven Health; and Adriana Olariu, M.D., Clinical Instructor at Yale School of Medicine.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: April 28th, 2025 Heinrich, Luján Blast Trump Admin’s Attacks on Head Start, Demand RFK Jr. Immediately Unfreeze Head Start Funding & Reverse Firings of Early Childhood Education Workers

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Mexico Martin Heinrich

    WASHINGTON — U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) and U.S. Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), one of only two Head Start graduates to serve in the Senate, sent a letter to Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to demand the Trump Administration stop its attacks on Head Start programs. In their letter, Heinrich and Luján reminded Secretary Kennedy of his legal obligation to administer Head Start, and demanded that HHS immediately unfreeze Head Start funding, reverse the mass firing of Head Start workers, and stop  gutting offices that ensure high-quality early childhood education services are available for thousands of children and families in New Mexico and nationwide.

    In New Mexico, Head Start and early Head Start programs serve 8,800 children living below the poverty line, including 271 children experiencing homelessness, and 139 children in foster care in 2022. 

    “We write to express our strong opposition to the actions you have taken to directly attack and undermine the federal Head Start program. Since day one, this Administration has taken unacceptable actions to withhold and delay funding, fire Head Start staff, and gut high-quality services for children. Already this year, this Administration has withheld almost $1 billion in federal grant funding from Head Start programs, a 37 percent decrease compared to the amount of funding awarded during the same period last year,” the senators wrote in a letter to Secretary Kennedy. “It is abundantly clear that these actions are part of a broader effort to ultimately eliminate the program altogether, as the Administration reportedly plans to do in its fiscal year 2026 budget proposal.”

    The senators detailed how the program plays an instrumental role in supporting kids and families across the country, writing: “Head Start provides early childhood education and comprehensive health and social services to nearly 800,000 young children every year in communities across this country, and employs about 250,000 dedicated staff. Head Start is a critical source of child care for working families, particularly in rural and Tribal communities, where Head Start programs are often the only option for high-quality child care services. Head Start programs ensure children receive appropriate health and dental care, nutrition support, and referrals to other critical services for parents, such as job training, adult education, nutrition services, and housing support.”

    “You even acknowledged the value of Head Start following a recent visit to a Virginia Head Start center,” the senators wrote, contrasting that statement of support with the Trump administration’s actions. “However, as a result of your actions to withhold and delay funding and undermine the administration of this vital program, Head Start centers are in serious jeopardy and have already had their day to day operations impacted. Programs are increasingly worried that they will not be able to make payroll, pay rent, and remain open to serve the hundreds of thousands of children and families who depend on their services in communities across the nation.”

    “Since the very start of this Administration, Head Start programs have been under attack,” the senators wrote, detailing office closures and funds that were frozen for Head Start grants across the country. “At one point, the National Head Start Association reported 37 programs serving nearly 15,000 children across the country could not access their federal funding. Head Start programs operate with thin margins and on short-term budgets from HHS, and without any communication from the Administration about the status of funding, programs were forced to temporarily close or to lay off staff.”

    The senators underscored how the gutting of Head Start offices and the firing of staff who keep the federal program running puts the entire program in jeopardy, “On April 1st, you abruptly closed five of the ten regional offices that help local grantees administer Head Start programs in 22 states. This left hundreds of programs without dedicated points of contact to address mission critical issues like approving grant renewals and modifications, investigating child health and safety incidents, and providing training and technical assistance to ensure high-quality services for children. While some grantees were assigned a new program specialist, we understand many have not been receiving responses to their inquiries. This is on top of the estimated 97 Office of Head Start central office staff that were terminated due to their probationary status and the recent reduction in force. You promised ‘radical transparency’ as Secretary, yet it is unclear how these actions will improve Head Start programs, and you and your staff refuse to respond to basic inquiries and requests for information.”

    Importantly, the senators noted that if Head Start funding is kept frozen by the Trump Administration, many more programs could be forced to close. 

    “Head Start grantees are still waiting on payments and grant renewals from the Office of Head Start, including programs whose grants end on April 30th, 2025. These notices should have gone out by now, yet we are concerned to hear programs report they have received little to no correspondence regarding their grant renewals,” the senators continued, detailing how local HeadStart programs are receiving no notice for the path forward for grant funding. “Additionally, because we started fiscal year 2025 under a short-term continuing resolution, as is usual, some grantees have only received partial funding for the first few months of the year. But with a full year funding bill in place, these grantees should have received full funding by now, yet some are reporting that they have not received the full amount of their grants and will run out of funds this month or next. On Wednesday, April 16th, the delays in Head Start funding led to the closure of Head Start centers serving more than 400 children in Sunnyside, Washington.”

    “The Administration has a legal and moral obligation to disburse Head Start funds to programs and to uphold the program’s promise to provide high-quality early education services to low income children and families across this country,” the senators stated. “There is no justifiable reason for the delay in funding we have seen over the last two months, and you have refused to offer any kind of explanation.”

    The senators concluded by warning that eliminating Head Start would be devastating, demanding answers on the Trump Administration’s actions, and demanding the reversal of these actions: “[W]e urge you to immediately reinstate fired staff across all Offices of HeadStart, and cease all actions to delay the awarding and disbursement of funding to Head Start programs across this country.”

    Community leaders in New Mexico are weighing in on the grave consequences of the Trump Administration’s continuous assault on Head Start for children’s futures:

    “As a Head Start Leader for over 40 years, I have witnessed firsthand the transformative impact Head Start has on children, families, and communities. Eliminating Head Start would be nothing less than a national tragedy. It would be a direct attack on the country’s most vulnerable children and families – those who have the least and need the most.” said Patricia Grovey Evans, President of New Mexico Head Start Association.

    “Defunding the Head Start program would be a grave injustice to young Zuni children, who depend on this vital resource to embark on their educational journey steeped in cultural identity and moral values. Early childhood education is not merely about teaching; it lays the foundation for self-awareness and community connection that will guide them throughout their lives. Cutting this crucial funding threatens to strip away their opportunity to nurture the skills and cultural heritage essential for their growth and future success,” said Anthony Sanchez, Head Councilman for Zuni Tribe.

    “Jemez Pueblo’s Walatowa Head Start Language Immersion Program offers a unique and valuable community-based education delivered solely in our Towa language. Education of our youngest community members is important and to have that education provided in our native language is of the utmost importance. As Native people, it was vital that our Head Start program incorporated the Pueblo’s vibrant traditional calendar through art, music and dance while also incorporating other subjects like math and science. Walatowa Head Start Language Immersion Program serves as a model for other tribal Head Start programs who wish to teach the children in their native language. Our community worked for over a decade to make this education culturally responsive and if funding for Head Start were to disappear, so would our community’s work. We cannot allow this to happen,” said Carnell Chosa, First Lieutenant Governor of Jemez Pueblo.

    “As someone working on the front lines of early childhood education in New Mexico, I am deeply alarmed by the proposed cuts to Head Start in President Trump’s leaked budget. At the Now Mexico Association for the Education of Young Children (NMAEYC), we see firsthand how essential this program is especially for families in our rural and underserved communities. Head Start has been a cornerstone for opportunity and stability for low-income families for 60 years. Eliminating this program would jeopardize early learning, health, and nutrition services for more than 150,000 children across the country, including thousands here in New Mexico. Head Start is not just a program- it’s a lifeline. Gutting this critical funding, would harm our most vulnerable children, undermine family stability, and set our state back for generations. Continued investment in Head Start is not optional – it’s essential to ensuring that every New Mexico child, regardless of zip code, has a fair shot at success,” said Alicia B. Borrego, MBA, Executive Director of New Mexico Association for the Education of Young Children.

    “Head Start has been a massively important force in changing the game for young children. The science tells us that 85% of brain development happens before age 5, so this is a common sense investment, and one that has contributed to decades of American prosperity,” said Kate Noble, President and CEO of Growing Up New Mexico. 

    “Thanks to my experience working as a Head Start teacher in Santa Fe, I’ve seen firsthand how the Head Start Program change lives – giving our youngest leaners the solid foundation they need to succeed in school and beyond. Cutting this program would mean turning our backs on the children who need us most. This program isn’t just early education; it’s lifeblood for families who are doing their best with so little. Taking it away would break something sacred in our community.” said Deyanira Contreras, Director of Kids Campus at SFCC. 

    Alongside Heinrich and Luján, the letter is signed by U.S. Senators Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tim Kaine (D-Minn.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Minn.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Angus King (I-Maine), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), and Mark Warner (D-Va.). 

    The full text of the letter is here and below:

    Dear Secretary Kennedy:

    We write to express our strong opposition to the actions you have taken to directly attack and undermine the federal Head Start program. Since day one, this Administration has taken unacceptable actions to withhold and delay funding, fire Head Start staff, and gut high-quality services for children. Already this year, this Administration has withheld almost $1 billion in federal grant funding from Head Start programs, a 37 percent decrease compared to the amount of funding awarded during the same period last year. It is abundantly clear that these actions are part of a broader effort to ultimately eliminate the program altogether, as the Administration reportedly plans to do in its fiscal year 2026 budget proposal. 

    Head Start provides early childhood education and comprehensive health and social services to nearly 800,000 young children every year in communities across this country, and employs about 250,000 dedicated staff. Head Start is a critical source of child care for working families, particularly in rural and Tribal communities, where Head Start programs are often the only option for high-quality child care services. HeadStart programs ensure children receive appropriate health and dental care, nutrition support, and referrals to other critical services for parents, such as job training, adult education, nutrition services, and housing support.

    You even acknowledged the value of Head Start following a recent visit to a Virginia Head Start center, where you said, “I had a very inspiring tour. I saw a devoted staff and a lot of happy children. They are getting the kind of education and socialization they need, and they are also getting a couple of meals a day.”

    However, as a result of your actions to withhold and delay funding and undermine the administration of this vital program, Head Start centers are in serious jeopardy and have already had their day to day operations impacted. Programs are increasingly worried that they will not be able to make payroll, pay rent, and remain open to serve the hundreds of thousands of children and families who depend on their services in communities across the nation.

    Since the very start of this Administration, Head Start programs have been under attack. On January 27th, 2025, the Office of Management and Budget issued a memo (M-25-13) that suddenly froze the disbursement of grant funding for federal programs and services government-wide, including Head Start. Despite the Administration’s clarification that Head Start programs would not be the target of the funding freeze, many Head Startprograms across the country were unable to draw down their grant funds through the Payment Management System (PMS) for weeks. At one point, the National Head StartAssociation reported 37 programs serving nearly 15,000 children across the country could not access their federal funding. Head Start programs operate with thin margins and on short-term budgets from HHS, and without any communication from the Administration about the status of funding, programs were forced to temporarily close or to lay off staff. In Wisconsin, the National Centers for Learning Excellence, which serves more than 200 children and their families, shut down for a week and laid off staff due to the funding freeze.

    On April 1st, you abruptly closed five of the ten regional offices that help local grantees administer Head Start programs in 22 states. This left hundreds of programs without dedicated points of contact to address mission critical issues like approving grant renewals and modifications, investigating child health and safety incidents, and providing training and technical assistance to ensure high-quality services for children. While some grantees were assigned a new program specialist, we understand many have not been receiving responses to their inquiries. This is on top of the estimated 97 Office of Head Start central office staff that were terminated due to their probationary status and the recent reduction in force. You promised “radical transparency” as Secretary, yet it is unclear how these actions will improve Head Start programs, and you and your staff refuse to respond to basic inquiries and requests for information.

    On March 14th, 2025, the Office of Head Start (OHS) notified all Head Start programs that “the use of federal funding for any training and technical assistance or other program expenditures that promote or take part in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives” will not be approved and that any questions should be directed to regional offices. Programs have not received any guidance for what would be considered “DEI” but this policy is potentially in direct conflict with statutory and regulatory program requirements, such as providing culturally and linguistically appropriate instructional services for English learners. Many programs cannot direct questions to regional staff, as half of regional offices were abruptly closed, and as unprecedented actions are being taken to delay and withhold funding, Head Start programs have been intentionally left with little to no guidance.

    Head Start programs are now arbitrarily required to provide justifications for each draw down of funds that is necessary to operate their programs, despite already receiving a federal grant award for these purposes. As of April 14th, Head Startprograms have reportedly received correspondence from an email address “defendthespend@hhs.gov” requiring programs to submit a “specific description of why the funds are necessary and why they are aligned to the award” before programs can have funding disbursed. It has been reported that political appointees must sign off on every draw down of funds. This creates an illusion of improving oversight but only serves to add unnecessary red tape by requiring the manual sign off on hundreds of thousands of individual actions annually across the Department based on two to three sentence justifications. Already some grantees have reported delays in receiving funds, and have reported that furloughs or closures are imminent if funds are not released. For an administration that purports to value local autonomy and efficiency in federally funded programs, your actions have achieved the exact opposite.

    Finally, Head Start grantees are still waiting on payments and grant renewals from the Office of Head Start, including programs whose grants end on April 30th, 2025. These notices should have gone out by now, yet we are concerned to hear programs report they have received little to no correspondence regarding their grant renewals. Additionally, because we started fiscal year 2025 under a short-term continuing resolution, as is usual, some grantees have only received partial funding for the first few months of the year. But with a full year funding bill in place, these grantees should have received full funding by now, yet some are reporting that they have not received the full amount of their grants and will run out of funds this month or next. On Wednesday, April 16th, the delays in Head Start funding led to the closure of Head Start centers serving more than 400 children in Sunnyside, Washington.

    The Administration has a legal and moral obligation to disburse Head Start funds to programs and to uphold the program’s promise to provide high-quality early education services to low income children and families across this country. The fiscal year 2025 appropriations act provided $12.3 billion for Head Start, the same as the fiscal year 2024 level. The Head Start Act includes an explicit formula for how appropriated funds should be allocated. There is no justifiable reason for the delay in funding we have seen over the last two months, and you have refused to offer any kind of explanation. However, this week leaked fiscal year 2026 budget documents indicated the Office of Management and Budget was directing the Department, consistent with the Administration’s proposal to eliminate Head Start in fiscal year 2026, to “ensure to the extent allowable FY2025 funds are available to close out the program.” If this explains any of the delay in awarding fiscal year 2025 funding, we want to be clear, no funds were provided in fiscal year 2025 to “close out the program,” and it would be wholly unacceptable and likely illegal if the Department tries to carry out this directive.

    Finally, the leaked budget documents provided a justification, albeit brief, for eliminating Head Start in fiscal year 2026 that makes this Administration’s priorities clear and puts the Department’s actions over the last several months in context. The Administration argues that eliminating Head Start, “is consistent with the Administration’s goals of returning education to the States and increasing parental choice.” It is shocking to see an argument that eliminating a program that provides comprehensive early childhood care and education to 800,000 children and their families would increase parental choice. It is particularly concerning to see that argument in the context of the significant delay in awarding fiscal year 2025 appropriated funds and what that indicates about the intent behind the Department’s actions. We believe it is obvious that eliminating Head Start would be detrimental to hundreds of thousands of children and families. Similarly, we believe it is obvious that delaying funding like we have seen over the last two months, forcing Head Startprograms to close, and leaving families to scramble to find quality, affordable alternatives puts the education and well-being of some of the most vulnerable young children in America at risk. In our view, that is unacceptable.

    Therefore, we urge you to immediately reinstate fired staff across all Offices of HeadStart, and cease all actions to delay the awarding and disbursement of funding to HeadStart programs across this country. 

    Please provide us with a written response to the questions below no later than 10 days from receipt:

    1. Will you reinstate the staff who administer Head Start programs and reopen the closed regional offices responsible for overseeing Head Start programs in 22 states?

    a) When is HHS going to share information on the reorganization plan for the consolidation of the regional offices?

    b) Please provide the contact information for each program specialist designated to the 22 states who lost their regional office.

    c) Who is responsible for ensuring there are no delays or lapses in funding, nor any disruptions to Head Start program operations now that these states do not have a regional office?

    2. How many employees at the Offices of Head Start have been terminated, including the five regional offices and the central office?

    a) Which officials at HHS were involved in the staffing reduction decisions for OHS and what planning, if any, was undertaken prior to these reductions? Please describe the events that unfolded and name each office that was involved in the decision. Further, please name the official(s) who approved the staffing reductions.

    3. Can you confirm that the Administration will distribute all Head Start funds appropriated by Congress to Head Start programs in FY 25, as required by the HeadStart Act?

    4. Please provide a list of all grantees with 5-year Head Start grant renewals that startbetween now and the end of the fiscal year: May 1st, June 1st, July 1st, August 1st, and September 1st.

    a) Will any funding be delayed for grantees that are due to receive their annual funding on May 1st or beyond?

    5. Why are funding awards delayed for grantees that received partial awards during the first continuing resolution for FY25?

    a) When can HHS guarantee that all funds will be awarded for partially funded Head Start programs?

    6. What is the “Tier 2” department for review that is delaying drawn down for HeadStart programs in the Payment Management System?

    a) When should programs expect to receive their funds?

    b) Please provide all communication that went to Head Start grantees on the new review process.

    7. What guidance and clarifications have been provided to Head Start grantees on DEI expenditures?

    a) How is HHS evaluating Head Start programs’ expenditures and grant awards for DEI?

    b) What justifications are being used to prohibit DEI?

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Assistant Attorney General Gail Slater Delivers First Antitrust Address at University of Notre Dame Law School

    Source: United States Attorneys General

    Remarks as prepared for delivery, “The Conservative Roots of America First Antitrust Enforcement”

    Good afternoon. Thank you so much for having me. It is an honor to be here at Notre Dame to give my first formal address as Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division. I’ve had many offers to speak since I began my tenure at the Department of Justice, but it seemed appropriate that I present the conservative case for vigorous antitrust enforcement here at Notre Dame Law School. Notre Dame has a storied role in the development of American conservatism’s first principles. I hold those principles dear and, as I will discuss today, our enforcement of the antitrust laws will reflect those principles. Indeed, we seek to bring these shared principles to our work every day: they include American patriotism; textualism and adherence to precedent; and a firm commitment to law enforcement.

    I also wanted to deliver an address here in Indiana because the state’s economic history underscores the importance of those conservative first principles to the work I’m now honored to lead at the Antitrust Division. Indiana also played a role in molding the young President Benjamin Harrison into the man he would become. Although many know President Harrison as the U.S. President with the most impressive beard in American history, he was also the President who signed the Sherman Act of 1890 into law.

    But more on that in a minute. Let’s begin with some words of thanks.

    First, I am deeply grateful to President Trump for entrusting me with the responsibility to lead the Antitrust Division. When he nominated me, President Trump assailed the use of “market power to crack down on the rights of so many Americans.” I am so honored to have the chance to defend the American people’s rights at this critical juncture in our history.

    I am similarly grateful to the 78 Senators, from both sides of the aisle, who voted to confirm me in an incredible show of broad bipartisan support for vigorous antitrust enforcement.

    And I am grateful to Attorney General Pam Bondi, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, and all the leadership of the Department for their support and for being so welcoming and for being such strong supporters of the Antitrust Division. And, of course, I’m grateful for the team of Deputies, including my Principal Deputy Roger Alford who is here today, for joining me in this endeavor.

    My earnest thanks also go to the men and women of the Antitrust Division. My first two months in the building have confirmed that the Antitrust Division employs some of the very best of the very best. Our cases consistently pit a small army of Davids against the Goliaths of Big Law defending Big Business. Yet, as we showed in the Google Ad Tech case, our teams more often than not win the battle on behalf of the American people.

    The stakes of that fight are so high. The American people are once again facing a generation of economic and industrial change. We are adapting trade policies to put America First and undertaking deregulation that will unleash innovation in AI and other technologies3 and reshape our economy.

    But we face a choice in who will order this realignment and how. Will the American people shape tomorrow’s economy, or will others decide what gets made, where it is made, and who makes it? Will our laws be written by Congress and enforced by politically accountable appointees in the Trump Administration, or by technocrats and lobbyists elsewhere?

    Indiana has seen firsthand the consequences of getting these choices wrong for millions of Americans. If recent decades have shown us anything, it is that we need an economy that works for the American people, not the other way around. We also need public policies that afford our fellow countrymen and women the dignity they deserve as American citizens. Of course, antitrust is not a cure-all, but it can surely play an important role in building a more resilient economy going forward.

    To better understand what this future might look like we first need to look to the past. As I like to say, the past is prologue. We all know the story of the decline in manufacturing in this state. Indiana was at the heart of the United States’ thriving manufacturing industry for much of the 20th century.

    But then in the 1960s and ’70s the factories started shutting down. The Studebaker factory closed here in South Bend in 1963, and other Indiana cities experienced similar population declines as manufacturing moved overseas. It took decades for cities such as South Bend to recover, and some have still not recovered.

    Of course, change is inevitable in a dynamic and innovative economy. Economists call this creative destruction and shrug it off as merely market forces at play. But neoliberal public policy also played a role in enabling this creative destruction, and not always for the better. Policymakers in Washington, D.C. voted for free trade agreements that shipped jobs overseas; they opened up our southern border to mass migration; and they underenforced our century-old antitrust laws for several decades. In D.C., these neoliberal policies are collectively referred to as the “Washington Consensus,” and they were the foundation of our economic policy for several decades. They were born out of the optimism that followed the end of the Cold War, sometimes referred to as “the end of history.” They promoted globalization and the financialization of the U.S. economy, and they initially spurred economic growth and prosperity. But that growth left many Americans behind, which brings us to today.

    Some say that free trade and open borders result in a larger pie. But it begs the question as to the size of the slice that each community in our society received. At the same time that global labor arbitrage traded American jobs for cheap manufacturing abroad, growing profit margins diverted the economic gains for many goods from American consumers and workers to our coastal elites. Too many communities hollowed out here in Indiana and across the nation. This hollowing out in turn created the conditions for a weakened middle class, fractured families, and in some cases deaths of despair. What was good for a few powerful global corporations, it turned out, was often bad for the dynamic businesses and innovators that made us the greatest nation on earth. It was also bad for the communities in which those businesses once thrived.

    Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent recently said something incredibly important about all this. “Access to cheap goods,” he said, “is not the essence of the American dream.” The American Dream “is not ‘let them eat flat screens.’” Instead, he said, and I agree with this, that “The American dream is rooted in the concept that any citizen can achieve prosperity, upward mobility, and economic security.”

    Antitrust law enforcement plays an indispensable role in achieving the American Dream because competitive markets enable individuals to achieve prosperity, upward mobility, and economic security. That’s the premise of free market capitalism. In free markets, the American people shape the economy toward their own flourishing by starting and growing their own business, and through their choices in markets as buyers and sellers. Competitive markets enable the American people to build the lives they want, not just as consumers and producers, but as citizens.

    That’s the main thing I want you to take away from my remarks today. People ask me what my agenda will be. I get asked this question every week—how does antitrust fit in with the realignment underway in the Republican Party?

    I tell them it’s America First Antitrust.

    America First Antitrust empowers America’s forgotten men and women to shape their own economic destinies in the free market. We will stand for America’s forgotten consumers. We will stand for America’s forgotten workers. And we will stand for the small businesses and innovators, from Little Tech, to manufacturing, to family farms, that were forgotten by our economic policies for too long.

    How will we accomplish this and what are our guiding principles? I submit we need only look to the past and to our conservative roots to find these principles. America First Antitrust roots are grounded in the Sherman Antitrust Act, but they in fact date back to our nation’s founding. Let us not forget that the Boston Tea Party was a protest not only against the British government’s taxation without representation, but also against the monopoly granted to the British East India Company.

    The Granger Movement at the end of the 19th century planted the early seeds for antitrust enforcement. It was born and raised by conservative hillbillies in the heartland in defense of their fundamental values. Finally, America First Antitrust continues the legacy of the Ohio Republican Senator John Sherman, the namesake of the Sherman Act, a true economic populist who never went to college, was a self-taught engineer, and became a lawyer under the apprenticeship of his brother.

    With the remainder of my time today, I’d like to talk about the conservative values that underpin America First Antitrust. This speech is not intended to be an LLM thesis, so I’ll address three that matter most immediately to the work of the Antitrust Division:

    • First, the protection of individual liberty from both government and corporate tyranny;
    • Second, a healthy respect for textualism, originalism, and precedent grounded in a commitment to robust and fair law enforcement; and
    • Third, a healthy fear of regulation that saps economic opportunity by stifling rather than promoting competition.

    Let me address each principle in turn.

    I have to begin with the value that defines both conservatism and America—freedom. We are a nation born from opposition to tyranny in defense of individual liberty. As a new American, I cherish the freedom that comes from being an American citizen. As I testified at my Senate confirmation hearing earlier this year, “In our Constitutional Republic, American citizens can speak their minds, earn a living, and invent new technologies free from unwarranted interference. These freedoms are not guaranteed in so many countries around the world, so they must be cherished and defended by us all.”

    How does this bedrock American value translate into antitrust?

    Antitrust respects the moral agency of individuals by protecting their individual liberty from the tyranny of monopoly.

    Here at Notre Dame, the principle of individual moral agency is second nature. And though few were Catholic themselves, the Founders believed philosopher Thomas Aquinas when he argued that humans are imago dei—beings made in the image of God whose exercise of individual moral agency defines us. We realize our goodness and define our own flourishing through our freedom of choice. And so the Founders penned the Declaration of Independence, reaffirming that it is “self-evident” that humans are “endowed by their Creator” with the “Rights” to “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”

    With that, they threw off the tyranny of King George. In so doing, they rejected his grants of monopolies in the colonies as inconsistent with their natural rights. That same year – 1776 – the Scottish philosopher Adam Smith published his seminal book on economics The Wealth of Nations in which he wrote “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.”

    Ill-gotten monopolies inherently restrain human liberty by depriving individuals of choices as both consumers and producers. That is why popular opposition to the East India Company monopoly led directly to the Boston Tea Party and played an important motivating role in the Founding.

    Of course, monopolies at that point in history required the grant of a king, protected by his law. With the success of the Revolution, they largely disappeared from American life for a time. As a result, innovation flourished over the ensuing century, and many new inventions—from the cotton gin to the lightbulb and telephone—launched technological revolutions that improved the lives of all Americans.

    But the 19th century also saw the emergence of a new kind of monopoly—a private empire of oil, railroad, and agricultural robber barons.

    These private monopolies threatened liberty just as King George once had. Although the identity of the tyrant changed, the threat posed by monopoly to the American people’s endowed natural rights to liberty had not.

    The Grangers were among the first to point this out. In the 1860s, midwestern farmers—known then as grangers—began to unite against railroad and grain elevator monopolies that deprived farmers of fair, competitive returns for their crops.

    In 1873, the Grangers echoed our founding principles in their “Farmer’s Declaration of Independence.” “The history of the present railway monopoly,” the Grangers declared, “is a history of repeated injuries and oppressions, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over the people of these states unequalled in any monarchy of the old world….” And so they called for government action to constrain private tyranny. This was the perspective that, in 1890, drove an Ohio Republican from the foothills of the Appalachians to draft the nation’s first federal antitrust law constraining private monopolization. Senator Sherman saw his bill as an extension of the Founders’ rejection of the tyranny of monopoly in defense of liberty. “If we will not endure a King as a political power,” Sherman said, “we should not endure a King over the production, transportation, and sale of the necessaries of life.”

    To ensure care and precision in using government power against private monopolies, the Sherman Act preserves liberty by promoting economic competition that benefits consumers, workers, inventors, and other trading partners in the free markets.

    We are now in the midst of another fundamental change in the nature of monopoly. While the Grangers and Senator Sherman saw the first emergence of privately organized monopolies, we are experiencing the emergence of new durable forms of monopoly power altogether, the likes of which the Grangers and Senator Sherman could not even begin to fathom. These monopolies are driving a Republican realignment away from big business and—under President Trump’s leadership—toward the working class that is reconnecting the party with its roots, recognizing antitrust as a critical tool in protecting individual liberty.

    In Senator Sherman’s day, a monopoly could control prices and exclude competition. Today’s online platforms can do so much more. They control not just the prices of their services, but the flow of our nation’s commerce and communication. These platforms play a critical role in our digital public square. They are key not only to the ordinary citizen’s free expression, but also to how elections are won or lost, and how our news is disseminated or not.

    This point is being made again and again by members of the new right who are driving the realignment in antitrust policy. Sohrab Ahmari points out that just as conservatives fear Tyranny.gov, they should fear Tyranny.com. Oren Cass underscores how “[c]onservativism is hugely skeptical of power.” Senate Antitrust Subcommittee Chair Mike Lee has explained that “concentrated economic power can be just as dangerous as concentrated political power,” and other influential Senators like Josh Hawley and Chuck Grassley similarly support robust antitrust enforcement aimed at tackling unchecked market power. Vice President Vance has been similarly outspoken—he has decried the “weird idea that something can’t be tyrannical if it comes through the operation of a free market” amidst an environment where companies “control the flow of information” in our society.

    I echoed this growing sentiment on the right at my confirmation hearing earlier this year when I testified that “we have grown to appreciate that personal liberty and economic liberty are closely connected; that in many ways they are two sides of the same coin. And Americans have also come to see that economic liberty often hinges on competitive markets.”

    So that’s the first principle of America First Antitrust—antitrust enforcement serves the deep-rooted conservative goal of protecting individual liberty from the tyranny of coercive monopoly power. And it serves those goals where it matters most, to protect our liberty online and to ensure that we protect Americans on pocketbook issues such as housing, healthcare, groceries, transportation, insurance, entertainment, and similar markets that directly impact their lives.

    Antitrust law enforcement should adhere to the rule of law and respect binding precedent and the original meaning of the statutory text.

    The next core conservative value underpinning our antitrust enforcement begins with the important acknowledgement that government itself can be a coercive force that threatens our liberty. This is the so-called Tyranny.gov I just talked about. Conservatives have long been skeptical of government regulation that deprives businesses of their economic freedom and makes our economy less dynamic and prosperous. We must respect originalism and the rule of law and ensure that our enforcement derives from the will of the democratically elected Congress as interpreted by the courts.

    A truly conservative approach to antitrust law starts with first principles and text. This means that antitrust agencies should enforce the laws passed by Congress, not the laws they wish Congress had passed. Perhaps most importantly, antitrust in the United States is law enforcement. It is not regulation. Congress enacted the antitrust laws as a legal regime, declined to provide any authority to regulate the details of the Sherman or Clayton Acts, and instead gave the Attorney General the duty to pursue cases before the courts as she does any other action. To recognize federal antitrust law as law enforcement in the American tradition requires a strong commitment to our Constitutional separation of powers, including Executive enforcement prerogative, statutory meaning, and judicial precedent. A faithful humility to law’s limits is the cornerstone of much conservative legal theory. If we are true to our principles, antitrust cannot be an exception.

    In the play A Man for All Seasons, Saint Thomas More discusses an England “planted thick” with the common law and says he would “give the Devil benefit of law” before accepting the lawless reality of a society without them.

    The English common law tradition of Saint Thomas More has more to do with federal antitrust enforcement than many realize. Senator Sherman designed the Sherman Act to incorporate a general body of common law in the American states and England on restraints of trade and monopoly. That is why the Act used specific terms of art from the common law, including “restraint of trade” and “monopolize,” whose original public meaning must be understood with respect to the common law that they emerged from. In so doing, the Sherman Act incorporated prohibitions on price-fixing and concerns with restraints of trade harming both workers and end consumers, among many other foundational principles of the common law. The antitrust laws must be interpreted in light of their purpose and context to codify the common law and state antitrust laws.

    Respecting the rule of law critically requires giving meaning to the statutory text and applying the binding precedents interpreting it—both old and new. Innovations in economic theory and practice may shape more recent law, but they do not render older precedent a dead letter. That is the Supreme Court’s prerogative.

    As we move forward with merger enforcement, there will be important debates about the weight we should place on older versus newer precedent as we make enforcement decisions. Those are important debates to have, and I have an open mind. But at the end of those discussions, our merger enforcement will apply our prosecutorial discretion based on the best interpretations of the laws on the books, and analysis of economic facts and data, respecting the original public meaning of the statutory text and the binding nature of Supreme Court and other relevant precedent. This is a deeply conservative position and there is nothing radical about it. To the contrary, what is radical is the notion that we should as antitrust enforcers ignore the text of the law and divorce ourselves from binding precedent, old and new alike.

    Respecting the statutory text also helps us defend ordinary Americans who need competition for their work to raise wages and improve working conditions. When Congress prohibited restraints of trade, the term was understood to include restraints on working a trade, as Justice Story explained in his commentaries on the common law. Or as Justice Kavanaugh recently said in Alston, “price-fixing labor is price-fixing labor.”

    Our recent Las Vegas nursing case is a great example. A jury convicted a Nevada man of a three-year conspiracy to fix the wages of home healthcare nurses by capping their wages. Hundreds of hard working nurses were affected, and they deserved better. Nursing work is not only important and difficult, but it is a backbone of our middle class and our communities. I am so proud of our team for standing up for those nurses—that is what America First Antitrust is all about.

    We will also stand up for workers when dominant firms impose restraints of trade, whether directly on workers or on the businesses who employ workers for them. Because the antitrust laws protect labor market competition, any conduct that harms competition for workers can violate not only the spirit but the letter of the antitrust laws.

    Antitrust law enforcement should support deregulation by enabling free market competition that prevents the need for government regulation of consolidated power.

    The last conservative value I’d like to talk about today is a preference for litigation over regulation. Conservatives abhor anticompetitive government regulations that unnecessarily sap the free markets of dynamism. Aggressive antitrust enforcement supports a competitive process that enables markets to regulate themselves, providing a bulwark against market power that often leads to regulatory intervention.

    In recent decades, we have seen markets tilt toward regulation as they became more concentrated. The poster child here is the regulatory intervention that followed the 2008 financial collapse. You all were mostly kids when the 2008 financial collapse wreaked havoc on the economy, but those of us living in D.C. saw financial institutions that were considered “too big to fail” rapidly succumb to new regulation in the wake of the collapse.

    For many, an important question that arose was less about the merits or demerits of the regulations that followed in the wake of 2008, and more about how these financial institutions became “too big to fail” in the first place. Relatedly, many questioned whether these regulations could have been avoided had these markets not become so highly concentrated. Finally, they questioned the role antitrust played in allowing this state of affairs to exist.

    This view was at the heart of the enforcement philosophy of one of my most famous predecessors as AAG, Robert Jackson who earned public acclaim as the lead Nuremberg prosecutor after World War II and as a Supreme Court associate justice. In a 1937 speech, then-AAG Jackson noted that “[t]he antitrust laws represent an effort to avoid detailed government regulation of business by keeping competition in control of prices.” Through the antitrust laws, he said, “[i]t was hoped” that the government could “confine its responsibility to seeing that a true competitive economy functions.” As Robert Jackson noted then, enforcement of the antitrust laws “is the lowest degree of government control that business can expect.” This is a limited role I am happy to take on and defend today.

    As I have analogized, antitrust is a scalpel, and regulation is a sledgehammer. Free markets often fail, and one cannot wish away monopolies and cartels with false economic theories of self-correction. The scalpel is necessary to make targeted, incisive cuts to remove the cancer of collusion and monopoly abuse. That is America First conservatives’ preferred approach to cure market ills. It imposes government obligations only on parties that violate the law, and only for the limited time necessary to restore competition. In contrast, ex ante regulations cover all parties in an industry for time immemorial, permanently distorting the free market rather than merely curing diseases that were destroying the market.

    Worse still, a system of anti-competitive regulation can be co-opted by monopolies and their lobbyists, such that the state’s power actually amplifies, rather than diminishes, corporate power, and leads to the proliferation of government regulations that serve corporate interests rather than the people and drown out new innovations. Scholars like George Stigler have explored regulatory capture and how an industry can “use the state for its purposes,” seeking regulations that operate primarily for the industry’s benefit, for example to control entry or insulate prices. Corporate lobbyists using their power to undermine free markets is ubiquitous in our system, and small but powerful groups can dominate regulatory processes at the expense of the diffuse interests of individual citizens. The alliance of Big Business and Big Government must be broken.

    To combat against such laws and regulations that stifle rather than promote competition, we have launched the Anticompetitive Regulations Task Force. Consistent with the Trump Administration’s deregulatory efforts, the Antitrust Division’s Task Force will seek to identify and eliminate laws and regulations that undermine the operation of the free market and harm consumers, workers, and businesses. We look forward to working with the FTC and with partner agencies throughout the government on these efforts.

    Let me finish where I started, with an appreciation for the economic conditions here in the Midwest and a healthy dose of humility at the challenges we face re-centering the American people in the functioning of our economy. America First Antitrust cares deeply about the average American in the heartland, and our efforts will focus on those markets that most directly affect their lives. We are here to serve all Americans and wish to move away from the deeply technocratic and elitist mindset that has imbued antitrust law and enforcement for several decades.

    I humbly submit that if a farmer in Indiana or Iowa cannot make sense of our work, the fault lies with us, not with the farmer. I may not be invited to cocktail parties in Georgetown or speaking engagements at Stanford or Cornell Law School following my remarks here today, but I will gladly trade this for coffee with Senator Grassley at Cracker Barrel or his own beloved Dairy Queen whenever he can fit me in his schedule.

    We will not restore the vitality to our long-forgotten communities overnight. It will take complementary work across many domains—from trade to antitrust to deregulatory policy and so many others.

    But with President Trump’s clear commitment to fight in all those arenas for this country’s forgotten people, and with deep-rooted conservative principles to guide us, I believe we can build a truly great future for our children.

    I look forward to that work.

    Thank you.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Five ways to make cities more resilient to climate change

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul O’Hare, Lecturer in Human Geography and Urban Development, Manchester Metropolitan University

    John_T/Shutterstock

    Climate breakdown poses immense threats to global economies, societies and ecosystems. Adapting to these impacts is urgent. But many cities and countries remain chronically unprepared in what the UN calls an “adaptation gap”.

    Building climate resilience is notoriously difficult. Economic barriers limit investment in infrastructure and technology. Social inequities undermine the capacity of vulnerable populations to adapt. And inconsistent policies impede coordinated efforts across sectors and at scale.

    My research looks at how cities can better cope with climate change. I have identified five ways to catalyse more effective – and ultimately more progressive – climate adaptation and resilience.

    1. Don’t just ‘bounce back’ after a crisis

    When wildfires, storms or floods hit, all too often governments prioritise rebuilding as rapidly as possible.

    Though understandable, resilience doesn’t just entail coping with the effects of climate change. Instead of “bouncing back” to a pre-shock status, those in charge of responding need to encourage “bouncing forward”, creating places that are at less risk in the first place.

    After the Christchurch earthquake in February 2011, the New Zealand authorities “built back better”, improving building codes and regulations and relocating vulnerable communities. Critics suggested reconstruction provided too much uncertainty and failed to acknowledge private property rights. But the rebuild did encourage better integration of planning policies and land use practices.



    Read more:
    ‘Build back better’ sounds great in theory, but does the government really know what it means in practice?

    Swales and sustainable urban drainage in Gorton climate resilient park, Manchester, UK.
    Paul O’Hare, CC BY-NC-ND

    2. Informed by risk

    It can be difficult to predict what the consequences of a crisis might be. Cities are complex, interconnected places. Transboundary risks – the consequences that ripple across a place – must be taken into account.

    The best climate adaptation plans recognise that vulnerability varies across places, contexts and over time. The most effective are holistic: tailored to specific locations and every aspect of society.

    Assessments must also consider both climatic and non-climatic features of risk. In 2015, in the UK, a flood affected one of Lancaster’s electrical substations, causing a city-wide power failure that took several days to rectify. In this instance, as with so many others, people had to deal not just with the direct impacts of flooding, but the ‘cascading’ or knock-on impacts of infrastructure damage.



    Read more:
    Giving rivers room to move: how rethinking flood management can benefit people and nature

    Many existing assessments have limited scope. But others do acknowledge how ageing infrastructures and pressures to develop land to accommodate ever intensifying urban populations exacerbate urban flood risk. Others too, such as the recently published Cambridge climate risk plan, detail how climate risk intersects with the range of services provided by local government.

    Systems thinking – an approach to problem-solving that views problems as part of wider, interconnected systems – can be applied to identify interdependencies with other drivers of change.

    Good risk assessments will, for example, take note of demographics, age profiles and the socio-economic circumstances of neighbourhoods, enabling targeted support for particularly vulnerable communities. This can help ensure communities and systems adapt to evolving challenges as climate change intensifies, and as society evolves over time.

    Complex though this might be, city leaders can access advice about improving risk assessments, including from the C40 network, a global coalition of 100 mayors committed to addressing climate change.

    3. Transformative action

    There is no such thing as a natural disaster. The effects of disasters including floods and earthquakes are influenced by pre-existing, often chronic, social and economic conditions such as poverty or poor housing.

    Progressive climate resilience looks beyond the immediacy of shocks, attending to the underlying root causes of vulnerability and inequality. This ensures that society is not only better prepared to withstand adverse events in the future, but thrives in the face of uncertainty.

    Progressive climate resilience therefore demands tailored responses depending on the population and place. In Bangladesh, for instance, communities are building floating gardens to grow crops during floods. These enhance food security and provide a sustainable livelihood option in flood-prone areas.

    Floating vegetable gardens in Bangladesh.
    Mostafijur Rahman Nasim/Shutterstock



    Read more:
    Climate change isn’t fair but Tony Juniper’s new book explains how a green transition could be ‘just’

    4. Collective approaches

    Effective climate resilience demands collective action. Sometimes referred to as a “whole of society” response, this entails collaboration and shared responsibility to address the multifaceted challenges posed by a changing climate.

    The most effective initiatives avoid self-protection, of people, buildings and cities alike, and consider both broader and longer-term risks. For instance, developments not at significant risk should still incorporate adaptation measures including rainwater harvesting or enhanced greening to lower a city’s climate risk profile and benefit local communities, neighbouring authorities and surrounding regions.

    So, progressive resilience is connected, comprehensive and inclusive. Solidarity is key, leveraging resources to address common challenges and fostering a sense of shared purpose and mutual support.

    Solar panels on the surface of a reservoir not only provide a source of renewable energy but also provide shade and therefore help conserve water.
    Tom Wang/Shutterstock

    5. Exploiting co-benefits

    The most effective resilience projects exploit co-benefits – what the UN calls “multiple resilience dividends” – to leverage additional benefits across sectors and policies, reducing vulnerability to shocks while addressing other social and environmental challenges.

    In northern Europe, for example, moorlands can be restored to retain water helping alleviate downstream flooding, but also to capture carbon and provide vital habitats for biodiversity.

    In south-East Asia solar panels installed on reservoirs generate renewable energy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, while providing shade to reduce evaporation and conserve water resources during droughts.

    In short, adaptation is obviously crucial for tackling climate change across the globe. But the real challenge is to deal with the impacts of climate change while simultaneously creating communities that are fairer, healthier, and better equipped to face any manner of future risks.

    Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

    Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 40,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

    Paul O’Hare receives funding from the UK’s Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). Award reference NE/V010174/1.

    – ref. Five ways to make cities more resilient to climate change – https://theconversation.com/five-ways-to-make-cities-more-resilient-to-climate-change-252853

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Polis Signs State Budget that Balances Fiscal Responsibility with Important Investments in Education and Public Safety

    Source: US State of Colorado

    DENVER – Today, Governor Polis signed SB25-206, the 2025-2026 State Budget into law, prioritizing fiscal responsibility while increasing funding for education and public safety, and other major priorities like health care, economic development, and higher education.

    “Despite the challenging budget environment facing our state, I’m proud of our work to deliver a balanced budget that prioritizes the issues that matter most to Coloradans. This collaborative process led to a budget that invests in education and public safety, while ensuring we protect reserves that help our state during uncertain economic times. I want to thank Mark Ferrandino, Director of our Office of State Planning and Budgeting, and the JBC members who worked so hard to pass this budget,” said Governor Jared Polis.

    Fee Decreases: To help save Coloradans money, this budget reduces vehicle registration fees for two years by $3.70 for each vehicle.

    Education: After fully funding Colorado’s schools in last year’s budget, this year Colorado is building on that work with an additional $150 million in FY 2025–26 to jumpstart the new, student-centered school finance formula. This budget also includes an additional $13.1 million to support special education funding across the state.

    Public Safety: This budget provides $15 million ongoing for critical public safety communication infrastructure, supporting over 1,000 local, regional, state, tribal, and federal public safety entities. This budget also sets aside $10 million to address youth delinquency, specifically $3.3 million for grants from the Division of Criminal Justice to prevent at-risk youth from entering the criminal justice system. The budget also provides $2.4 million to invest in community corrections placement, increasing capacity. Additionally, this budget implements Colorado’s Proposition KK, designating $30.0M in spending authority to crime victims’ services, $8 million for mental health services, and $1 million for school safety. This budget also sets aside funding to ensure that the families of fallen officers get the support they need after losing their loved one.

    Fiscal Responsibility: This budget maintains Colorado’s fiscal reserves, helping the state weather the increased uncertainty due to federal funding freezes and tariffs.

    Read the full transmittal letter.

    ###
     

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Investing in American leadership in quantum technology: the next frontier in innovation

    Source: Microsoft

    Headline: Investing in American leadership in quantum technology: the next frontier in innovation

    Artificial intelligence has captured the public imagination—and with good reason. It’s transforming how we work, create, learn, and navigate the world. But as AI carries the headlines, we also are on the cusp of another technological frontier: quantum computing. Long the domain of theory, quantum technologies are edging closer to reality, with profound implications for the world and American national competitiveness and security. As basic research and private sector advancements accelerate, a new global race is picking up steam. Now is the time for the United States and its allies to double down and invest in their strengths to claim the quantum frontier.

    Quantum technologies harness the mysterious and powerful behaviors of particles at the atomic level, offering unprecedented capabilities in computing, communication, and sensing. A single quantum computer at scale could offer more computing power than collectively exists in all of today’s computers. And like AI, quantum computing not only has the potential to transform entire sectors of our economy, but tackle previous insurmountable problems, opening pathways in science, medicine, and technology. The possibilities for chemistry, drug discovery, materials, energy, and agriculture provide promise in solving some of the defining challenges of our time.

    Microsoft’s recent quantum breakthrough adds to the breadth and pace of quantum science innovation. The development of our Majorana quantum chip leverages the unique properties of so-called “Majorana quasiparticles,” creating qubits that are more stable and less prone to decoherence. This approach promises to overcome one of the biggest challenges in quantum computing, enabling the construction of scalable and more efficient quantum systems. We believe it’s the type of advancement that can help accelerate the timeline for practical quantum applications.

    Countries around the world understand the criticality of quantum technology to their own economic competitiveness and security. During his confirmation hearing earlier this year, Michael Kratsios, the White House Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), rightfully emphasized that the shape of the global order “will be defined by whomever leads across AI, quantum, nuclear, and other critical and emerging technologies.” It is no surprise that over the past decade, governments around the world have poured resources into the fiercely competitive global quantum race. China, in particular, seeks to challenge American leadership in quantum through significant investments in infrastructure, research, and workforce skilling.

    The Trump administration’s long-standing leadership in quantum science

    Since the earliest days of quantum sciences, the United States has led the research and development of this technology. While most believe that the United States still holds the lead position, we cannot afford to rule out the possibility of a strategic surprise or that China may already be at parity with the United States. Simply put, the United States cannot afford to fall behind, or worse, lose the race entirely.

    The Trump administration understands well the national imperative and the risks of falling behind. During his first term, President Trump set the foundation for sustained leadership in the quantum sciences. This included the passage of the National Quantum Initiative Act in December 2018 (currently up for reauthorization), which accelerated quantum research and development. The Trump administration inaugurated the National Quantum Coordination Office (NQCO) within the OSTP. This office was empowered to oversee interagency coordination, serve as a central point of contact for federal quantum activities, and promote public outreach and early application of quantum technologies. These initiatives underscored the administration’s commitment to maintaining the American leadership and fostering quantum innovation.

    Last month, President Trump emphasized that actions during his first term “established the foundation for national quantum supremacy” and tasked newly confirmed Director Kratsios to “blaze a trail to the next frontiers of science.” Meeting the moment demands another round of decisive action—one that must be rooted in the very principles that gave rise to the past century of American primacy in the sciences.

    Harnessing America’s heritage of scientific innovation

    For the last 80 years, the United States has led the world with its scientific and technological prowess, resulting in transformative products and capabilities. This federally funded science and technology ecosystem is essentially America’s golden goose. It generates immense wealth and benefits for society by supporting scientific progress that in turn drives economic growth, extends life expectancy, and boosts national power. In many respects, it is the envy of the world.

    The United States has not always prioritized federal funding in scientific research. In fact, before World War II, the United States played a minor role in supporting research at U.S. colleges and universities. Instead, research institutions relied on philanthropic endowments or funding from private companies, often with vested interests. “Curiosity-driven” science, a cornerstone of discovery and innovation, was stymied in the process.

    This limitation changed dramatically after World War II when the federal government recognized the strategic importance of scientific research. In November 1944, thinking ahead to the end of the war, President Franklin D. Roosevelt wrote to Director of the Office of Scientific Research and Development, Vannevar Bush, asking how the successful application of scientific knowledge to wartime problems could be carried over into peacetime—and requesting recommendations on a national policy for science. This initiative led to the creation of many of the research institutions and funding mechanisms that have driven American innovation for decades.

    For 80 years, American innovation has been driven by two critical ingredients. The first is basic research. This is based on curiosity rather than a profit motive, supported by federal funding, and pursued mostly by scientists at our universities and national labs. The second is private sector investment in product development by companies of all sizes. The United States, more than any other country, has mastered the process of bringing these together.

    This combination has led to spectacular discoveries with profound implications for our health, safety, and quality of life. Innovative cancer treatments, the laser, MRI, touchscreens, GPS, the internet, and even artificial intelligence are just a few of the successes from federal investment in research. These innovations have not only advanced science and improved lives but have also created entirely new industries and millions of jobs.

    The United States will need this extraordinary combination of resources more than ever to sustain its quantum leadership, especially as China invests more in its own quantum work.

    China’s focus on gaining quantum supremacy

    Since at least 2000, China has made quantum technology a cornerstone of its national technological strategy and has invested heavily to assert dominance in the quantum sciences. Over this time, China’s public spending on overarching R&D has grown 16-fold, placing it second in the world behind the United States for total spending. It surpassed Japan in 2009 and the combined R&D expenditures of the European Union countries over a dozen years ago, in 2013.

    The scale and focus of China’s efforts continue to accelerate. Last year alone, China announced a 10 percent increase in R&D with public reports indicating that China has increased government spending in quantum research to approximately $15 billion. This represents more than double what the European Union has pledged in quantum spending and eight times what the U.S. government previously planned to allocate. And earlier this year, China launched a government-backed venture fund worth 1 trillion yuan (approximately $138 billion) to support high-risk, long-term projects across various sectors, including quantum computing.

    In addition to state-directed quantum R&D funding, China has prioritized quantum infrastructure and domestic capabilities. The creation of the National Laboratory for Quantum Information Sciences, backed by over $1 billion, alongside a separate $10 billion investment in key projects such as the Micius satellite[1], and the Beijing–Shanghai backbone, underscores China’s ambition to dominate quantum technology—with the Chinese government hoping this institutional infrastructure will provide it with a significant advantage in developing and deploying quantum technologies at scale.[2] Moreover, during the last five years, China has methodically nationalized quantum efforts to pursue strategic, government-coordinated efforts that transition scientific breakthroughs into practical applications.[3]

    The importance of the federal research triad

    Given these coordinated efforts in China, sustained American quantum leadership will require continuing support across the federal government. Coordinated in substantial part by OSTP, American strength rests in substantial part on three federal agencies that collectively serve as the driving force of this leadership. The Department of Defense (DOD), the Department of Energy (DOE), and the National Science Foundation (NSF) possess the legislative authority and institutional capability to advance quantum technology research and development under existing Congressional mandates. This “research triad” provides a resilient science and technology research infrastructure as a bulwark against threats to our technological superiority. Indeed, perhaps more than any military capability, this American research triad is largely responsible for the preeminence of the United States’ global leadership over the past century.

    Each prong of this triad uniquely and collectively contributes to ensuring American technological superiority.

    For example, DOD, through the military labs and defense industrial base, provides a strong and reliable foundation for military readiness and battlefield dominance. There are several notable examples of research efforts funded by DOD for military applications that eventually found enormous civilian uses—the internet, GPS, and voice recognition are among countless other breakthrough technologies.

    DOE, through the network of national laboratories and university partnerships, provides a vital link to state and local communities across a range of national security priorities, such as maintenance of our strategic weapons (e.g., our nuclear weapons arsenal), energy security and innovation, and high-performance computing.

    And the NSF is perhaps the most robust frontline agency that supports workforce development goals in addition to promoting hugely important translational research through federal grants. Specifically, the NSF provides critical incentives for U.S. students to enter STEM fields from early education through post-graduate schooling by way of subsidizing their apprenticeships in research laboratories in colleges and institutions so they can learn from leading scientists and engineers who otherwise would not have the funds or resources to take on students.

    Three strategic actions to ensure American quantum leadership

    Winning the quantum race will require us to deploy and reinvest in our greatest American strengths: our intellect, our curiosity, and our drive to innovate and build. All these qualities are carried forward by the three great and enduring federal agencies that comprise our research triad. We will need to activate all three to succeed in the race to develop next-generation quantum technologies. More specifically, to win this race, we must deploy our research triad in three key areas: driving innovation through robust government-funded quantum research and innovation; developing quantum talent and a skilled quantum workforce; and directing efforts to secure the quantum supply chain.

    These strategic actions—described more fully below—will require DOD, DOE, and the NSF to work together to ensure our competitive edge in the face of intense global competition.

    1. Increase funding for quantum research and development

    To ensure leadership in quantum research, the U.S. government should consider prioritizing federal funding in quantum technologies through a directed approach. A survey by the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF), a Washington-based think tank, suggested that China’s centralized funding approach might offer comparative advantages over the fragmented approach in the United States, where competing priorities can hinder systemic progress.

    To start with, the United States cannot win the quantum race without significant and sustained federally funded quantum research. While federal funding in quantum sciences more than doubled between 2019 and 2022 (from $456M in FY 2019 to $1,041M in FY2022), this funding started to decline during the last three years of the Biden Administration (from $1,041M in FY2022 to $998M in President Biden’s requested budget authority for FY25).[4] This means that the United States is not keeping pace—either with itself or with our global competitors.

    The first and most important step this Administration must take is fully funding research and grant programs in the basic and fundamental sciences across DOD, DOE national labs, and the NSF. As noted above, this research triad has been largely responsible for the sustained period of American technological leadership. We cannot make strides in the quantum race without reinvesting and building on these critical capabilities.

    Specific to the quantum sciences, Congress can begin by reauthorizing the National Quantum Initiative Act and this administration should work to ensure that all its programs are fully funded. This must include the Quantum Leap Challenge Institutes funded through the NSF, as well as the important work being led by the DOE’s National Quantum Initiative Centers. These initiatives were established through the National Quantum Initiative Act and are already demonstrating results, with each dollar of federal funding typically leveraging additional private sector investment. Expanding these proven programs would spur innovation in every region of the country while advancing American leadership in critical technologies of strategic importance.

    But even as we expand federal funding for the basic sciences and quantum research, the administration must simultaneously increase funding for government evaluation and validation programs that are focused on identifying scientific breakthroughs and supporting their continued development. DARPA’s Quantum Benchmarking Initiative (QBI) is the nation’s flagship program and must be expanded as public and private sector investments in quantum technology begin to bear fruit and achieve tangible results.

    2. Promote workforce and talent development

    Winning the quantum race requires the world’s best talent. While the United States and its institutions—both public and private—have thus far been able to leverage unique, highly skilled technical talent, the state of the domestic talent pipeline is alarming and requires immediate action. At a topline level, the U.S. science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce is comprised of 36.8 million people of which foreign-born individuals make up 43 percent of doctorate-level scientists and engineers. That number is likely to increase given the wide gap between the United States and global competitors at the undergraduate level. In 2000, for example, the United States awarded 900,000 undergraduate degrees in STEM fields, compared to 2 million degrees in China and 2.5 million in India.[5]

    It is therefore no surprise that, when including all education levels, India and China were the leading birthplaces of foreign-born STEM workers in the United States, accounting for 29 percent and 12 percent respectively. The good news is that many international students have chosen to stay in the United States after completing their studies, contributing to the country’s technology innovation ecosystem. For example, according to the 2024 State of U.S. Science and Engineering Report, from 2018-2021, temporary visa holders—primarily from China or India—represented 37 percent of U.S. science and engineering research doctorate recipients. Over 70 percent of these doctorate recipients expressed an intention to reside in the United States following graduation. The same report indicated that when these doctorate recipients were surveyed in 2021 across all countries of citizenship and degree fields, the 5-year stay rate for those who were on temporary visas at graduation was 71 percent and the 10-year stay rate was 65 percent.

    In the quantum fields specifically, the number of quantum job postings globally outstrips qualified talent by as much as three to one. Currently, the European Union has the highest concentration of quantum talent, followed by India, China, and then the United States.[6] The United States faces a critical shortage of quantum-ready talent, particularly as other nations invest significant resources in their own national quantum programs and quantum research capabilities. Without concerted action by the federal government to address this skilling gap, even the most advanced quantum research programs will fail to translate into practical capabilities or economic benefits.

    The Trump administration can begin by launching a series of concerted efforts to expand the domestic pipeline. One historical analog is the National Defense Education Act of 1958, enacted in response to the Sputnik challenge. The NDEA provides a useful precedent for how targeted federal investment in technical education can rapidly address strategic workforce gaps.

    For starters, comprehensive STEM education programs must be introduced at all levels of education, from primary schools to universities, to develop a robust domestic pipeline of talent. Research has shown that elementary and secondary education in mathematics and science are the foundation for entry into postsecondary STEM majors and STEM-related occupations. To develop this pipeline, the Trump administration can leverage the existing strength and reach of the NSF. NSF programs, such as those specifically focused on the quantum sciences like the National Q-12 Education Partnership, are ready-made vehicles to promote awareness of STEM and quantum technology in K-12 institutions.

    Second, the United States can provide grants for quantum research and education to encourage students to pursue careers in this field, focusing not only on traditional four-year colleges but also community colleges and vocational programs that are often entry points for many Americans pursuing higher education. In 2021, the U.S. government supported 15 percent of full-time STEM graduate students (mostly doctoral degree students), a decline from the most recent high of 21 percent in 2004. Here, again, the administration should activate and expand NSF research initiatives, including the NSF Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) and Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) programs,[7] as well as those focused specifically on the quantum sciences such as the Next Generation Quantum Leaders Pilot Program envisioned by the CHIPS and Science Act. The National Quantum Virtual Laboratory is another promising initiative that would create shared research infrastructure and make quantum education more accessible to students and researchers across the country. Collectively, these national incentives enable the best and brightest of the world to conduct their cutting-edge research in the labs of the United States as opposed to the labs of our adversaries.

    Beyond looking to the NDEA to attract and develop the unique talent to lead the world in quantum development, the Trump administration can focus on three additional priorities.

    First, building on the themes described above, the administration should address the current talent gap in the current STEM workforce. Although there is no substitute for graduate degree programs to drive innovation in the quantum sciences, the broader quantum ecosystem would benefit greatly from an increase in the STEM workforce. To this end, the administration can again utilize the reach of the NSF to promote adult education, retraining, and professional development programs to facilitate current workers’ transition into quantum-related roles.

    Second, research universities also play a pivotal role as powerful economic engines in their communities, often ranking among the largest employers in their congressional districts while generating high-tech spin-off companies that create well-paying jobs. The presence of federally-funded research and development centers (FFRDCs) and university-affiliated research centers (UARCS)—which are not-for-profit organizations established to meet special long-term engineering, research, development, or other analytic needs—also attract private sector investment and create innovation clusters. But most importantly, these entities lead to organic skilling initiatives to up-level the existing labor market.

    Finally, with regard to foreign talent, it’s imperative that the United States continue to attract the world’s best and brightest. This requires developing fast-track immigration pathways for highly skilled individuals with unique technical expertise in the quantum sciences, and expanding the number of visas available to employ quantum STEM PhDs trained at American institutions. This also requires the United States to promote, coordinate, and potentially fund international research initiatives with strategic allies to facilitate cross-pollination of expertise and develop the talent pool within a sphere of select, like-minded countries.

    This includes deepening ties with strategic allies to advance our collective success in the quantum race. Denmark, for example, has continued the great legacy of Niels Bohr by creating a vibrant hub for quantum innovation—one that benefits not only Denmark, but the entire Nordic region and the United States. Through a steady, long-term strategy that has brought together the government, academic, private sector, and startup communities—including multilateral institutions, such as NATO’s Deep Tech Lab-Quantum hosted at the Niels Bohr Institute—Denmark has become a hotbed for quantum talent, as well as quantum research and early commercialization. For our part, Microsoft has benefited greatly from this rich ecosystem of talent and innovation through the Microsoft Quantum Lab on the outskirts of Copenhagen, where later this year we will expand our presence by opening a new state-of-the-art quantum research center.

    3. Ensure supply chain security for quantum technologies

    Securing our leadership in quantum technology requires a reliable supply chain and onshoring of key capabilities within the United States. This is a complex task that cannot be achieved without direct action by the federal government that tightly aligns to specific strategic objectives. To that end, the Trump administration could task the National Quantum Initiative Advisory Committee or another board of advisors to develop a detailed national strategy and execution plan aimed at de-risking the quantum supply chain. This strategy would focus on making the supply chain more independent, increasing the availability of quantum components, lowering prices, and introducing incentives to encourage the private sector to make the necessary investments in the United States for chip fabrication and assembly.

    More specifically, the U.S. strategy to secure the quantum supply chain must include at least three critical action items. First, the federal government can take a direct role through the Departments of Commerce and Energy to promote the diversification of essential quantum components and materials. This can be achieved through government-organized long-term purchase agreements and the deployment of strategic capital for widely needed components such as dilution refrigerators, superconducting cables, amplifiers, circulators, attenuators, lasers, and fiber at frequencies relevant for quantum technologies.

    Second, the administration should work to establish specialized facilities dedicated to the fabrication, packaging, prototyping, and manufacturing of quantum systems and their essential components, such as cryogenic systems, lasers, and advanced chips. By developing, testing, and ultimately producing essential components domestically, this initiative would reduce our dependence on foreign sources and work to mitigate the risk of supply chain disruptions.

    Finally, and most importantly, it is imperative to onshore domestic manufacturing of advanced technologies tailored for quantum devices and additional capabilities needed by American companies and research organizations. This includes design and fabrication of advanced lasers and optics, amplifiers, and advanced chip design and fabrication. It also includes critical capabilities for domestic cryogenic electronics fabrication and design, advanced metrology to characterize chips for quantum computing, and advanced packaging and 3D integration for quantum components.

    The way forward

    At the start of his second term, President Trump signed an executive order to advance American leadership in artificial intelligence. President Trump should now do the same with quantum by setting national priorities that support robust funding, promote a skilled workforce, and protect supply chain security through incentivized onshoring. Taken together, these strategic actions will not only bolster our nation’s security and competitive edge against competitors and adversaries, but it will also drive innovation and economic growth at home towards a new frontier of American prosperity.

    [1] Karen Kwon, “China Reaches New Milestone in Space-Based Quantum Communications,” Scientific American, June 29, 2020, https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/china-reaches-new-milestone-in-space-based-quantum-communications.

    [2] One likely goal of these massive projects is undoubtedly to signal that the People’s Republic of China backs these investments, thereby attracting and retaining skilled professionals. According to the 2024 State of U.S. Science and Engineering Report developed, a regular report mandated by Congress, China is the top overall producer of science and engineering publications and international patents. For decades, the United States was the unparalleled leader in science and engineering doctorate awards until 2019 when we were surpassed by China. That being said, the United States remains the destination of choice for internationally mobile students, hosting 15% of all international students worldwide in 2020. National Science Board, The State of U.S. Science and Engineering 2024, March 2024, https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20243/talent-u-s-and-global-stem-education-and-labor-force.

    [3] Hodan Omaar and Martin Makaryan, How Innovative is China, Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, September 2024, https://www2.itif.org/2024-chinese-quantum-innovation.pdf.

    [4] National Science and Technology Council:  Subcommittee on Quantum Information Science, National Supplement to the President’s FY 2025 Budget, April 24, 2025, https://nqi.gov/supplement-fy2025-budget.

    [5] National Science Board, “The State of U.S. Science and Engineering 2024,” March 2024, https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20243/talent-u-s-and-global-stem-education-and-labor-force.

    [6] McKinsey & Company, “Quantum Technology Monitor,”  April 2023,  https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/business functions/mckinsey digital/our insights/quantum technology sees record investments progress on talent gap/quantum-technology-monitor-april-2023.pdf (defining quantum talent as “[g]raduates of master’s level or equivalent in 2019 in biochemistry, chemistry, electronics and chemical engineering, information and communications technology, mathematics and statistics, and physics.”).

    [7] National Science Foundation, “NSF Research Experiences for Undergraduates,” accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.nsf.gov/funding/initiatives/reu; National Science Foundation, “NSF 24-503: Research Experiences for Teachers in Engineering and Computer Science,” accessed April 24, 2025, https://www.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/research-experiences-teachers-engineering-computer-science/nsf24-503/solicitation.

    Tags: AI, quantum, STEM, Technology, United States

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI: ReversingLabs Named Winner of the Global InfoSec Awards at RSA 2025 Conference

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    ReversingLabs Spectra Assure® Named Most Advanced Software Supply Chain Security Solution

    SAN FRANCISCO, April 28, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — RSAC 2025: Booth N-4428 — ReversingLabs (RL), the trusted name in file and software security, today announced that Spectra Assure has been named a winner in the Top Global InfoSec Awards in the Most Advanced Software Supply Chain Security category from Cyber Defense Magazine (CDM), the industry’s leading electronic information security magazine.

    “At this year’s RSA conference, conversations about software supply chain security threats remain front and center, with awareness shifting from threats hiding within open source to identifying and eliminating malware and tampering within the largest and most under-addressed attack surface for enterprises today, third-party commercial software,” said Mario Vuksan, CEO and co-founder, ReversingLabs. “We are excited that Cyber Defense Magazine has recognized Spectra Assure, which is helping software vendors and enterprise buyers see and stop supply chain threats they never could before with their legacy AST solutions.”

    The 2025 Global InfoSec Award winners were announced today during RSAC 2025 in San Francisco. You can access the complete list of winners at http://www.cyberdefenseawards.com.

    “ReversingLabs embodies three major features we judges look for to become winners: understanding tomorrow’s threats, today, providing a cost-effective solution, and innovating in unexpected ways that can help mitigate cyber risk and get one step ahead of the next breach,” said Gary S. Miliefsky, Publisher of Cyber Defense Magazine.

    ReversingLabs at RSAC 2025
    In addition to the award, RL executives will be on-site at this week’s RSA Conference at Booth #N-4428, where attendees can hear about Spectra Assure and the recent news that it has expanded support for CycloneDX Extended Bill of Materials (xBOMs), including Cryptographic Bill of Materials (CBOM), Software-as-a-Service Bill of Materials (SaaSBOM), and Machine Learning Bill of Materials (ML-BOM), providing the most comprehensive xBOM and risk analysis for fully compiled commercial software.

    RL executives will be speaking about current software supply chain challenges and opportunities. Details include:

    • ReversingLabs: What’s in Your Commercial Software?
    • Executive: RL Chief Trust Officer Saša Zdjelar
    • Time: Tuesday, April 29 from 12:40 PM – 1:00 PM PT
    • Location: Briefing Center, South Expo Hall, S-2100
    • Topic:  How the attacks on SolarWinds, CodeCov, and 3CX show that enterprises need a better tool to identify the risks in third-party commercial software beyond vulnerabilities. Come learn why SBOMs and questionnaires won’t protect your business from third-party software risks like malware and tampering and how two F100 companies use binary analysis to stay safe.

    Additionally, the RL booth will feature the second annual RL Book Club at RSAC. This year’s authors include:

    • Michael Sikorski, author of Practical Malware Analysis: The Hands-On Guide to Dissecting Malicious Software
      Date / Time: Tuesday, April 29 at 2 pm PT
    • Joseph Menn, author of Cult of the Dead Cow: How the Original Hacking Supergroup Might Just Save the World
      Date / Time: Wednesday, April 30 at 2 pm PT

    For complete details on all ReversingLabs RSA activities and to schedule a meeting, visit here. For additional details on the award-winning Spectra Assure software supply chain security solution, click here.

    About ReversingLabs
    ReversingLabs is the trusted name in file and software security. We provide the modern cybersecurity platform to verify and deliver safe binaries. Trusted by the Fortune 500 and leading cybersecurity vendors, RL Spectra Core powers the software supply chain and file security insights, tracking over 422 billion searchable files with the ability to deconstruct full software binaries in seconds to minutes. Only ReversingLabs provides that final exam to determine whether a single file or full software binary presents a risk to your organization and your customers.

    About Cyber Defense Magazine
    Cyber Defense Magazine is the premier source of cyber security news and information for InfoSec professionals in business and government. We are managed and published by and for ethical, honest, passionate information security professionals. Our mission is to share cutting-edge knowledge, real-world stories and awards on the best ideas, products, and services in the information technology industry. We deliver electronic magazines every month online for free, and special editions exclusively for the RSA Conferences. CDM is a proud member of the Cyber Defense Media Group. Learn more about us at https://www.cyberdefensemagazine.com and visit https://www.cyberdefensetv.com and https://www.cyberdefenseradio.com to see and hear some of the most informative interviews of many of these winning company executives. Join a webinar at https://www.cyberdefensewebinars.com and realize that infosec knowledge is power.

    Media Contact
    Doug Fraim
    Guyer Group
    Doug@Guyergroup.com

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Heinrich, Luján Blast Trump Admin’s Attacks on Head Start, Demand RFK Jr. Immediately Unfreeze Head Start Funding & Reverse Firings of Early Childhood Education Workers

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-New Mexico)
    In a letter to RFK Jr., Heinrich & Luján demand answers on Trump Admin’s actions to undermine Head Start as Trump reportedly plans to eliminate the program
    WASHINGTON — U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) and U.S. Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), one of only two Head Start graduates to serve in the Senate, sent a letter to Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to demand the Trump Administration stop its attacks on Head Start programs. In their letter, Heinrich and Luján reminded Secretary Kennedy of his legal obligation to administer Head Start, and demanded that HHS immediately unfreeze Head Start funding, reverse the mass firing of Head Start workers, and stop  gutting offices that ensure high-quality early childhood education services are available for thousands of children and families in New Mexico and nationwide.
    In New Mexico, Head Start and early Head Start programs serve 8,800 children living below the poverty line, including 271 children experiencing homelessness, and 139 children in foster care in 2022. 
    “We write to express our strong opposition to the actions you have taken to directly attack and undermine the federal Head Start program. Since day one, this Administration has taken unacceptable actions to withhold and delay funding, fire Head Start staff, and gut high-quality services for children. Already this year, this Administration has withheld almost $1 billion in federal grant funding from Head Start programs, a 37 percent decrease compared to the amount of funding awarded during the same period last year,” the senators wrote in a letter to Secretary Kennedy. “It is abundantly clear that these actions are part of a broader effort to ultimately eliminate the program altogether, as the Administration reportedly plans to do in its fiscal year 2026 budget proposal.”
    The senators detailed how the program plays an instrumental role in supporting kids and families across the country, writing: “Head Start provides early childhood education and comprehensive health and social services to nearly 800,000 young children every year in communities across this country, and employs about 250,000 dedicated staff. Head Start is a critical source of child care for working families, particularly in rural and Tribal communities, where Head Start programs are often the only option for high-quality child care services. Head Start programs ensure children receive appropriate health and dental care, nutrition support, and referrals to other critical services for parents, such as job training, adult education, nutrition services, and housing support.”
    “You even acknowledged the value of Head Start following a recent visit to a Virginia Head Start center,” the senators wrote, contrasting that statement of support with the Trump administration’s actions. “However, as a result of your actions to withhold and delay funding and undermine the administration of this vital program, Head Start centers are in serious jeopardy and have already had their day to day operations impacted. Programs are increasingly worried that they will not be able to make payroll, pay rent, and remain open to serve the hundreds of thousands of children and families who depend on their services in communities across the nation.”
    “Since the very start of this Administration, Head Start programs have been under attack,” the senators wrote, detailing office closures and funds that were frozen for Head Start grants across the country. “At one point, the National Head Start Association reported 37 programs serving nearly 15,000 children across the country could not access their federal funding. Head Start programs operate with thin margins and on short-term budgets from HHS, and without any communication from the Administration about the status of funding, programs were forced to temporarily close or to lay off staff.”
    The senators underscored how the gutting of Head Start offices and the firing of staff who keep the federal program running puts the entire program in jeopardy, “On April 1st, you abruptly closed five of the ten regional offices that help local grantees administer Head Start programs in 22 states. This left hundreds of programs without dedicated points of contact to address mission critical issues like approving grant renewals and modifications, investigating child health and safety incidents, and providing training and technical assistance to ensure high-quality services for children. While some grantees were assigned a new program specialist, we understand many have not been receiving responses to their inquiries. This is on top of the estimated 97 Office of Head Start central office staff that were terminated due to their probationary status and the recent reduction in force. You promised ‘radical transparency’ as Secretary, yet it is unclear how these actions will improve Head Start programs, and you and your staff refuse to respond to basic inquiries and requests for information.”
    Importantly, the senators noted that if Head Start funding is kept frozen by the Trump Administration, many more programs could be forced to close.
    “Head Start grantees are still waiting on payments and grant renewals from the Office of Head Start, including programs whose grants end on April 30th, 2025. These notices should have gone out by now, yet we are concerned to hear programs report they have received little to no correspondence regarding their grant renewals,” the senators continued, detailing how local Head Start programs are receiving no notice for the path forward for grant funding. “Additionally, because we started fiscal year 2025 under a short-term continuing resolution, as is usual, some grantees have only received partial funding for the first few months of the year. But with a full year funding bill in place, these grantees should have received full funding by now, yet some are reporting that they have not received the full amount of their grants and will run out of funds this month or next. On Wednesday, April 16th, the delays in Head Start funding led to the closure of Head Start centers serving more than 400 children in Sunnyside, Washington.”
    “The Administration has a legal and moral obligation to disburse Head Start funds to programs and to uphold the program’s promise to provide high-quality early education services to low income children and families across this country,” the senators stated. “There is no justifiable reason for the delay in funding we have seen over the last two months, and you have refused to offer any kind of explanation.”
    The senators concluded by warning that eliminating Head Start would be devastating, demanding answers on the Trump Administration’s actions, and demanding the reversal of these actions: “[W]e urge you to immediately reinstate fired staff across all Offices of Head Start, and cease all actions to delay the awarding and disbursement of funding to Head Start programs across this country.”
    Community leaders in New Mexico are weighing in on the grave consequences of the Trump Administration’s continuous assault on Head Start for children’s futures:
    “As a Head Start Leader for over 40 years, I have witnessed firsthand the transformative impact Head Start has on children, families, and communities. Eliminating Head Start would be nothing less than a national tragedy. It would be a direct attack on the country’s most vulnerable children and families – those who have the least and need the most.” said Patricia Grovey Evans, President of New Mexico Head Start Association.
    “Defunding the Head Start program would be a grave injustice to young Zuni children, who depend on this vital resource to embark on their educational journey steeped in cultural identity and moral values. Early childhood education is not merely about teaching; it lays the foundation for self-awareness and community connection that will guide them throughout their lives. Cutting this crucial funding threatens to strip away their opportunity to nurture the skills and cultural heritage essential for their growth and future success,” said Anthony Sanchez, Head Councilman for Zuni Tribe.
    “Jemez Pueblo’s Walatowa Head Start Language Immersion Program offers a unique and valuable community-based education delivered solely in our Towa language. Education of our youngest community members is important and to have that education provided in our native language is of the utmost importance. As Native people, it was vital that our Head Start program incorporated the Pueblo’s vibrant traditional calendar through art, music and dance while also incorporating other subjects like math and science. Walatowa Head Start Language Immersion Program serves as a model for other tribal Head Start programs who wish to teach the children in their native language. Our community worked for over a decade to make this education culturally responsive and if funding for Head Start were to disappear, so would our community’s work. We cannot allow this to happen,” said Carnell Chosa, First Lieutenant Governor of Jemez Pueblo.
    “As someone working on the front lines of early childhood education in New Mexico, I am deeply alarmed by the proposed cuts to Head Start in President Trump’s leaked budget. At the Now Mexico Association for the Education of Young Children (NMAEYC), we see firsthand how essential this program is especially for families inour rural and underserved communities. Head Start has been a cornerstone for opportunity and stability for low-income families for 60 years. Eliminating this program would jeopardize early learning, health, and nutrition services for more than 150,000 children across the country, including thousands here in New Mexico. Head Start is not just a program- it’s a lifeline. Gutting this critical funding, would harm our most vulnerable children, undermine family stability, and set our state back for generations. Continued investment in Head Start is not optional – it’s essential to ensuring that every New Mexico child, regardless of zip code, has a fair shot at success,” said Alicia B. Borrego, MBA, Executive Director of New Mexico Association for the Education of Young Children.
    “Children are our most precious resource. Cutting funding for Head Start and Early Head Start, which serve nearly 8,800 of New Mexico’s most vulnerable children, jeopardizes our children’s future, our community’s wellbeing, and our economy. These programs provide vital education and support families and their health, improving immunization rates, healthcare access, and social-emotional, language, and cognitive development. While New Mexico has made bold investments in early childhood, strong federal support is essential for every child to succeed in school and to flourish in life,” said Gabrielle Uballez, Executive Director of New Mexico Voices for Children.
    “Head Start has been a massively important force in changing the game for young children. The science tells us that 85% of brain development happens before age 5, so this is a common sense investment, and one that has contributed to decades of American prosperity,” said Kate Noble, President and CEO of Growing Up New Mexico.
    “Thanks to my experience working as a Head Start teacher in Santa Fe, I’ve seen firsthand how the Head Start Program change lives – giving our youngest leaners the solid foundation they need to succeed in school and beyond. Cutting this program would mean turning our backs on the children who need us most. This program isn’t just early education; it’s lifeblood for families who are doing their best with so little. Taking it away would break something sacred in our community.” said Deyanira Contreras, Director of Kids Campus at SFCC.
    Alongside Heinrich and Luján, the letter is signed by U.S. Senators Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tim Kaine (D-Minn.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Minn.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Angus King (I-Maine), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), and Mark Warner (D-Va.).
    The full text of the letter is here and below:
    Dear Secretary Kennedy:
    We write to express our strong opposition to the actions you have taken to directly attack and undermine the federal Head Start program. Since day one, this Administration has taken unacceptable actions to withhold and delay funding, fire Head Start staff, and gut high-quality services for children. Already this year, this Administration has withheld almost $1 billion in federal grant funding from Head Start programs, a 37 percent decrease compared to the amount of funding awarded during the same period last year. It is abundantly clear that these actions are part of a broader effort to ultimately eliminate the program altogether, as the Administration reportedly plans to do in its fiscal year 2026 budget proposal.
    Head Start provides early childhood education and comprehensive health and social services to nearly 800,000 young children every year in communities across this country, and employs about 250,000 dedicated staff. Head Start is a critical source of child care for working families, particularly in rural and Tribal communities, where Head Start programs are often the only option for high-quality child care services. HeadStart programs ensure children receive appropriate health and dental care, nutrition support, and referrals to other critical services for parents, such as job training, adult education, nutrition services, and housing support.
    You even acknowledged the value of Head Start following a recent visit to a Virginia Head Start center, where you said, “I had a very inspiring tour. I saw a devoted staff and a lot of happy children. They are getting the kind of education and socialization they need, and they are also getting a couple of meals a day.”
    However, as a result of your actions to withhold and delay funding and undermine the administration of this vital program, Head Start centers are in serious jeopardy and have already had their day to day operations impacted. Programs are increasingly worried that they will not be able to make payroll, pay rent, and remain open to serve the hundreds of thousands of children and families who depend on their services in communities across the nation.
    Since the very start of this Administration, Head Start programs have been under attack. On January 27th, 2025, the Office of Management and Budget issued a memo (M-25-13) that suddenly froze the disbursement of grant funding for federal programs and services government-wide, including Head Start. Despite the Administration’s clarification that Head Start programs would not be the target of the funding freeze, many Head Startprograms across the country were unable to draw down their grant funds through the Payment Management System (PMS) for weeks. At one point, the National Head StartAssociation reported 37 programs serving nearly 15,000 children across the country could not access their federal funding. Head Start programs operate with thin margins and on short-term budgets from HHS, and without any communication from the Administration about the status of funding, programs were forced to temporarily close or to lay off staff. In Wisconsin, the National Centers for Learning Excellence, which serves more than 200 children and their families, shut down for a week and laid off staff due to the funding freeze.
    On April 1st, you abruptly closed five of the ten regional offices that help local grantees administer Head Start programs in 22 states. This left hundreds of programs without dedicated points of contact to address mission critical issues like approving grant renewals and modifications, investigating child health and safety incidents, and providing training and technical assistance to ensure high-quality services for children. While some grantees were assigned a new program specialist, we understand many have not been receiving responses to their inquiries. This is on top of the estimated 97 Office of Head Start central office staff that were terminated due to their probationary status and the recent reduction in force. You promised “radical transparency” as Secretary, yet it is unclear how these actions will improve Head Start programs, and you and your staff refuse to respond to basic inquiries and requests for information.
    On March 14th, 2025, the Office of Head Start (OHS) notified all Head Start programs that “the use of federal funding for any training and technical assistance or other program expenditures that promote or take part in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives” will not be approved and that any questions should be directed to regional offices. Programs have not received any guidance for what would be considered “DEI” but this policy is potentially in direct conflict with statutory and regulatory program requirements, such as providing culturally and linguistically appropriate instructional services for English learners. Many programs cannot direct questions to regional staff, as half of regional offices were abruptly closed, and as unprecedented actions are being taken to delay and withhold funding, Head Start programs have been intentionally left with little to no guidance.
    Head Start programs are now arbitrarily required to provide justifications for each draw down of funds that is necessary to operate their programs, despite already receiving a federal grant award for these purposes. As of April 14th, Head Startprograms have reportedly received correspondence from an email address “defendthespend@hhs.gov” requiring programs to submit a “specific description of why the funds are necessary and why they are aligned to the award” before programs can have funding disbursed. It has been reported that political appointees must sign off on every draw down of funds. This creates an illusion of improving oversight but only serves to add unnecessary red tape by requiring the manual sign off on hundreds of thousands of individual actions annually across the Department based on two to three sentence justifications. Already some grantees have reported delays in receiving funds, and have reported that furloughs or closures are imminent if funds are not released. For an administration that purports to value local autonomy and efficiency in federally funded programs, your actions have achieved the exact opposite.
    Finally, Head Start grantees are still waiting on payments and grant renewals from the Office of Head Start, including programs whose grants end on April 30th, 2025. These notices should have gone out by now, yet we are concerned to hear programs report they have received little to no correspondence regarding their grant renewals. Additionally, because we started fiscal year 2025 under a short-term continuing resolution, as is usual, some grantees have only received partial funding for the first few months of the year. But with a full year funding bill in place, these grantees should have received full funding by now, yet some are reporting that they have not received the full amount of their grants and will run out of funds this month or next. On Wednesday, April 16th, the delays in Head Start funding led to the closure of Head Start centers serving more than 400 children in Sunnyside, Washington.
    The Administration has a legal and moral obligation to disburse Head Start funds to programs and to uphold the program’s promise to provide high-quality early education services to low income children and families across this country. The fiscal year 2025 appropriations act provided $12.3 billion for Head Start, the same as the fiscal year 2024 level. The Head Start Act includes an explicit formula for how appropriated funds should be allocated. There is no justifiable reason for the delay in funding we have seen over the last two months, and you have refused to offer any kind of explanation. However, this week leaked fiscal year 2026 budget documents indicated the Office of Management and Budget was directing the Department, consistent with the Administration’s proposal to eliminate Head Start in fiscal year 2026, to “ensure to the extent allowable FY2025 funds are available to close out the program.” If this explains any of the delay in awarding fiscal year 2025 funding, we want to be clear, no funds were provided in fiscal year 2025 to “close out the program,” and it would be wholly unacceptable and likely illegal if the Department tries to carry out this directive.
    Finally, the leaked budget documents provided a justification, albeit brief, for eliminating Head Start in fiscal year 2026 that makes this Administration’s priorities clear and puts the Department’s actions over the last several months in context. The Administration argues that eliminating Head Start, “is consistent with the Administration’s goals of returning education to the States and increasing parental choice.” It is shocking to see an argument that eliminating a program that provides comprehensive early childhood care and education to 800,000 children and their families would increase parental choice. It is particularly concerning to see that argument in the context of the significant delay in awarding fiscal year 2025 appropriated funds and what that indicates about the intent behind the Department’s actions. We believe it is obvious that eliminating Head Start would be detrimental to hundreds of thousands of children and families. Similarly, we believe it is obvious that delaying funding like we have seen over the last two months, forcing Head Startprograms to close, and leaving families to scramble to find quality, affordable alternatives puts the education and well-being of some of the most vulnerable young children in America at risk. In our view, that is unacceptable.
    Therefore, we urge you to immediately reinstate fired staff across all Offices of HeadStart, and cease all actions to delay the awarding and disbursement of funding to HeadStart programs across this country.
    Please provide us with a written response to the questions below no later than 10 days from receipt:
    1. Will you reinstate the staff who administer Head Start programs and reopen the closed regional offices responsible for overseeing Head Start programs in 22 states?
    a) When is HHS going to share information on the reorganization plan for the consolidation of the regional offices?
    b) Please provide the contact information for each program specialist designated to the 22 states who lost their regional office.
    c) Who is responsible for ensuring there are no delays or lapses in funding, nor any disruptions to Head Start program operations now that these states do not have a regional office?
    2. How many employees at the Offices of Head Start have been terminated, including the five regional offices and the central office?
    a) Which officials at HHS were involved in the staffing reduction decisions for OHS and what planning, if any, was undertaken prior to these reductions? Please describe the events that unfolded and name each office that was involved in the decision. Further, please name the official(s) who approved the staffing reductions.
    3. Can you confirm that the Administration will distribute all Head Start funds appropriated by Congress to Head Start programs in FY 25, as required by the HeadStart Act?
    4. Please provide a list of all grantees with 5-year Head Start grant renewals that startbetween now and the end of the fiscal year: May 1st, June 1st, July 1st, August 1st, and September 1st.
    a) Will any funding be delayed for grantees that are due to receive their annual funding on May 1st or beyond?
    5. Why are funding awards delayed for grantees that received partial awards during the first continuing resolution for FY25?
    a) When can HHS guarantee that all funds will be awarded for partially funded Head Start programs?
    6. What is the “Tier 2” department for review that is delaying drawn down for HeadStart programs in the Payment Management System?
    a) When should programs expect to receive their funds?
    b) Please provide all communication that went to Head Start grantees on the new review process.
    7. What guidance and clarifications have been provided to Head Start grantees on DEI expenditures?
    a) How is HHS evaluating Head Start programs’ expenditures and grant awards for DEI?
    b) What justifications are being used to prohibit DEI?

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: expert reaction to power outages across Spain and Portugal

    Source: United Kingdom – Science Media Centre

    Scientists comment on power outages across Iberian Peninsula, possibly caused by induced atmospheric vibration.

    Professor Solomon Brown, Professor of Process and Energy Systems at the University of Sheffield, said:

    “My understanding is that the power systems are connected through ‘interconnectors’ in the same way that Scotland and the rest of the GB network are connected, and also GB with other parts of Europe. This means that there is interdependency between the networks but also that they will have to be re-started separately.

    “As the two networks have gone down they will have to be re-powered, which means that the grid operator will slowly bring on key generators matched with users (so that production and consumption of electricity match) in regions of the network that slowly expand until the whole system is back on and can then be reconnected to external networks. This process can take a number of hours and may have to be attempted more than once if things don’t go smoothly.”

    Declared interests

    Professor Solomon Brown “No interests to Declare”

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Rector of the State University of Management joined the Public Council under the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: State University of Management – Official website of the State –

    On April 28, an order was published “On Amendments to the Composition of the Public Council under the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation” signed by the Minister of Economic Development Maxim Reshetnikov.

    In accordance with the document, the rector of the State University of Management, Vladimir Stroyev, joined the Public Council as a representative of the Interregional Public Movement for Interethnic Harmony “Beacons of Friendship”.

    “The historical and cultural project “Beacons of Friendship. Towers of the Caucasus” was born at the State University of Management in 2016. Since then, dozens of trips and events have been held aimed at strengthening interethnic relations between the peoples of our country and drawing attention to the problems of preserving the cultural and historical heritage of the peoples of Russia,” Vladimir Vitalyevich recalled.

    Let us recall that in 2024, Vladimir Stroyev was awarded the jubilee medal “100 years of statehood of the Republic of Ingushetia” for the long-term cooperation of the State University of Management with the Republic of Ingushetia, which began with the implementation of the project “Beacons of Friendship. Towers of the Caucasus”.

    We congratulate our rector on his new achievement and wish him successful work for the benefit of our country and his native State University of Management!

    Subscribe to the TG channel “Our GUU” Date of publication: 04/28/2025

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Galaxy empowered: Empowering Teachers in the Age of AI and Digital Transformation

    Source: Samsung

    The role of educators is evolving, and collaboration is key to empowering teachers in the age of AI and digital transformation. At the  Galaxy Empowered educators summit in Delhi, thought leaders shared their perspectives on ethical AI integration, student-centric learning, and the future of education.
     
    Technology is here to aid education, and with the right skills, teachers can equip students for the future.
    Education leaders are loving Galaxy empowered, Hear from them about the programme:
     
    
     

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Remarks by President António Costa at the joint press conference with Prime Minister of Bulgaria Rossen Jeliazkov

    Source: Council of the European Union

    In the context of his visit to Bulgaria, European Council President António Costa visited the Trakia University in Stara Zagora. Addressing the press, he highlighted the importance of strengthening Europe’s economy, security and cohesion. He also praised Bulgaria’s efforts in innovation, research and defense, emphasising its contribution to a more prosperous and secure EU.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI: Hedge Funds Down-shifted on Pro-Growth Positions During Q1 2025

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    NEW YORK, April 28, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Unlimited, an asset management firm and ETF sponsor that uses proprietary technology to provide low-cost, alternative strategies to a variety of investors, today published its Q1 2025 Hedge Fund Barometer, which showed a significant reversal of pro-growth positions in both U.S. equities and corporate bonds over the quarter as well as an increase in bets on gold.

    According to Unlimited’s proprietary technology, hedge fund managers came into the year with relatively low conviction and modest views but subsequently ramped up pro-growth positions including long the U.S. dollar, and credit spread and equity bets in line with increased expectations of U.S. growth from the new administration. The majority of those positions were reversed starting in February with the exception of extending bullish positions on gold.

    “Hedge fund positioning shows some of the lowest conviction in the direction of asset prices that we have seen in decades,” said Bob Elliott, CEO and CIO of Unlimited and portfolio manager of actively-managed ETFs. “Those positions were a dramatic transition from the beginning of the quarter when hedge funds were ramping up their bullish bets on the U.S. economy. The prominence of policy volatility likely triggered managers’ reluctance to hold significant directional positions.”

    Hedge funds eked out modestly positive performance in the first quarter with the mix of sub-strategy returns largely reversing the moves of the previous quarter. Emerging Market funds outperformed meaningfully as Chinese stocks surged meanwhile Equity Long/Short and Event Driven strategies came in weak.

    1Q25 Hedge Fund Strategy Performance, Gross of Fees

    • Industry Return: 1.7%
    • Best Performing Fund Style: Emerging Markets 6.3%
    • Worst Performing Fund Style: Event Driven -0.8%

    Unlimited’s Hedge Fund Barometer showed other notable moves during the quarter included:

    • Bearish outlook on oil shifted towards neutral bullish positioning in Chinese and Japanese equities
    • Notable underweight in U.S. biotech
    • Equity Long/Short managers remain bearish on U.S. small and mid-cap companies

    Click here to view a video on how Unlimited’s technology works.

    About Unlimited
    Founded in 2022 by Bob Elliott, Bruce McNevin and Matt Salzberg, Unlimited is an investment firm using proprietary technology to create strategies that offer lower-cost access to 2 & 20-style alternative investment strategies, such as hedge funds, to a wide variety of investors. Mr. Elliott has built innovative hedge fund strategies for more than two decades, including at Bridgewater Associates, the world’s largest hedge fund. Mr. McNevin is a Professor of Economics at New York University and has held various data science positions at hedge funds Clinton Group and Midway Group, along with positions at Bank of America and BlackRock. Mr. Salzberg serves as a Managing Partner at Material and Board Director of Unlimited. Learn more at unlimitedfunds.com.

    For informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment advice. The data shown herein represents past performance and should not be construed as providing any assurance or guarantee as to returns that may be realized in the future. No representation is being made that any investment will or is likely to achieve profits or losses similar to those shown herein. No investment strategy or risk management technique can guarantee return or eliminate risk in any market environment.

    Media Contacts:  
    Sarah Lazarus Zach Kouwe
    Dukas Linden Public Relations Dukas Linden Public Relations
    +1 617-335-7823 +1 551-655-4032
    sarah@dlpr.com zkouwe@dlpr.com

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Teachers in South African schools may be slow to report rape of girls: study shows why

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Ayobami Precious Adekola, Postdoctoral Researcher, University of South Africa

    In South Africa, the age of consent for sex is 16 years old. Engaging in sexual activity with someone under the age of 16 is considered statutory rape, even if the minor consents as defined under the law that applies to adults.

    In December 2021, South Africa’s Department of Basic Education introduced a policy aimed at reducing the country’s high rates of teenage pregnancy and sexual exploitation. It requires educators to report cases where older sexual partners impregnate learners under 16 years of age.

    We are researchers in sexual and reproductive health who have been working on a decade-long community engagement project focused on improving HIV prevention and related challenges among learners. The project is in the Vhembe district of Limpopo province, South Africa, bordering Zimbabwe. Sexual health practices among young people here remain a pressing concern, due to high rates of unprotected sex, sexually transmitted infections, HIV and unplanned pregnancies.

    As part of the project, we conducted a study of the statutory rape reporting policy for schools. It showed a disconnect between the policy’s intent and implementation. We found that some rural teachers were unaware of the policy, were not sure what they were supposed to do, or faced cultural, social and systemic barriers that left them feeling powerless to act.

    The result is that the child protection law is failing the learners it was designed to safeguard.

    Because teachers are often some of the first adults to become aware of statutory rape cases, it’s crucial to equip them to deal with disclosures appropriately, navigate reporting protocols confidently, and engage support systems effectively and help prevent future sexual abuse of learners.

    Lack of awareness of policy

    Our research was conducted at eight public primary and high schools in the Soutpansberg North school circuit of Limpopo. All the schools are in rural, under-resourced and poor communities. There is a high number of HIV infections and unplanned teenage pregnancies in the schools where the study was conducted. The true incidence rate of rape is different because it’s not always reported.

    We engaged 19 educators (16 of them female) through group discussions.

    Teachers expressed confusion and frustration over the lack of formal communication and training on the statutory rape reporting policy. Some were unaware that such a policy existed. One admitted:

    Honestly, I wasn’t even aware that we had a policy on statutory rape. It’s not something we’ve ever discussed in our school.

    Another teacher said:

    I know there’s a policy, but I’m unsure where to find it or exactly what it says. As educators, we need to be informed about policies, but it feels like no one communicates them effectively to us.

    Cultural and socioeconomic barriers

    Beyond a lack of awareness, the discussions suggested that socio-cultural norms hinder the implementation of the statutory rape policy in rural areas.

    The study highlighted that intergenerational relationships are normalised in some rural communities. In these cases, families may depend financially on the older male partner, making them reluctant to report such relationships as criminal offences.

    Read more: Rape culture in South African schools: where it comes from and how to change it

    In some cases, families tacitly support relationships between young girls and older men in exchange for financial support, making such arrangements difficult to challenge.

    A participant shared:

    It’s difficult because some parents tolerate these relationships as normal and support their kids to sleep with older men, who in turn provide for the family.

    Teachers encounter immense social pressure when faced with statutory rape cases. In tight-knit rural communities, reporting a case could mean accusing a neighbour, relative, or local authority figure. This creates a moral dilemma for educators who want to protect learners but fear community backlash.

    As one participant put it:

    If I report it, they might turn against us.

    These socio-cultural dynamics create a culture of silence that protects perpetrators rather than victims.

    What’s missing

    The study also found that a lack of training on statutory rape policies is a barrier to effective implementation. Teachers reported feeling unprepared to handle the legal and emotional complexities of reporting statutory rape cases.

    There’s been no training at all. We hear about the policy, but they don’t teach us how to implement it or what steps to take if something happens.

    Another teacher added:

    There is no formal memo from the circuit office and from our school governing body meetings; it was never introduced as an agenda item.

    The absence of confidential reporting mechanisms further complicates the situation. Teachers fear that reporting cases could lead to retaliation from the community or even threats to their safety. The lack of a standardised anonymous reporting system leaves teachers feeling vulnerable and unsupported.

    Teachers indicated that fear of community backlash led them to prioritise managing learner pregnancies over investigating potential rape cases. Some said it was the parents’ responsibility to report rape.

    Read more: South Africa’s stance on teenage pregnancy needs a radical review: what it would look like

    Proposed solutions

    We recommend a few ways to improve reporting of statutory rape:

    Mandatory training for educators: The education department should ensure that all teachers understand their legal obligations and know how to navigate reporting procedures.

    Confidential reporting systems: Establishing secure and anonymous reporting channels.

    Community awareness campaigns: Programmes to help shift harmful cultural norms and make it easier to report statutory rape. Campaigns should emphasise the importance of protecting minors and the legal consequences of statutory rape.

    Interdisciplinary support networks: Schools should collaborate with social workers, legal professionals, and mental health experts to provide educators with the support and resources needed to handle statutory rape cases.

    Bridging the gap between South Africa’s statutory rape policy and what actually happens in rural areas is a social justice imperative that affects the most vulnerable members of society.

    – Teachers in South African schools may be slow to report rape of girls: study shows why
    – https://theconversation.com/teachers-in-south-african-schools-may-be-slow-to-report-rape-of-girls-study-shows-why-253992

    MIL OSI Africa –

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Who do Africans trust most? Surveys show it’s not the state (more likely the army)

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Koffi Améssou Adaba, Enseignant et chercheur en sociologie politique, Université de Lomé

    A recent Afrobarometer study has shown declining trust in public institutions over the past decade among African citizens. Study findings call into question the credibility and legitimacy of state institutions like the presidency, parliament and security forces, including the police. The study also shows that many Africans still believe in traditional and religious figures, raising concerns about the effectiveness of governments. It also highlights the disconnect between state officials and the public. The Conversation Africa asked Koffi Améssou Adaba, a political sociologist and one of the authors of the Afrobarometer study, to unpack this loss of trust and its implications.

    What are the main findings of the study?

    The study, conducted by Afrobarometer in 39 countries, reveals a general decline in trust in public institutions in Africa over the past decade.

    The study assessed trust levels in 11 types of institutions and leaders. These are religious leaders, the president, opposition parties, ruling parties, the military, parliament, local councils, national electoral commissions, the police, courts, and traditional leaders.

    Conducted through face-to-face interviews in the language chosen by the respondent, Afrobarometer surveys enable national results to be obtained with margins of error of +/-2 to +/-3 percentage points at a 95% confidence level. This analysis of 39 countries is based on 53,444 interviews.

    Surveys have been conducted since 1999. Since 2012, we have observed that trust in most institutions has decreased. Only three institutions still have majority support as reflected by the percentage of respondents who said they trusted those entities. These are religious leaders (66%), the army (61%), and traditional leaders (56%). In contrast, political institutions aren’t earning much public trust. The presidency, parliament, police and courts all have trust levels below 50%.

    This trend differs across regions. East and west Africa report higher levels of trust than central, southern and north Africa.

    At the national level, Tanzania, Niger and Burkina Faso have the highest trust levels. In contrast, Gabon, Eswatini and São Tomé and Príncipe are among the most distrustful countries.

    Since 2011, trust in parliament has dropped by 19 percentage points. The ruling party’s trust level has fallen by 16 points, followed by the presidency (-12) and the courts (-10). Despite the overall decline, some countries – like Tanzania, Togo and Mali – are seeing increased trust in certain institutions.

    What do these trends tell us?

    Institutional trust is vital for political stability and effective governance, regardless of whether a regime is democratic or authoritarian. Even authoritarian governments seek some level of popular support to strengthen their power. When citizens perceive institutions as responsible, transparent and effective, they are more likely to trust and support them. This trust leads people to expect good results when dealing with the state.

    The perception of efficiency, transparency and integrity is fundamental to building this trust. The observed decline in trust could undermine the legitimacy of governments and might hinder development, particularly in developing countries.

    Informal institutions (religious and traditional leaders) and the army enjoy stronger support than official institutions. Trust in religious leaders varies widely – from 34% in Tunisia to at least nine out of ten citizens in countries like Tanzania (94%), Senegal (92%), Nigeria (90%) and Ethiopia (90%).

    This pattern raises important questions about the role of these informal institutions in governance.

    Are there any red flags that need to be addressed?

    Major public institutions like the presidency, parliament, justice system and police should inspire confidence. They are expected to inspire trust because of their direct interactions with citizens. However, the low confidence in these institutions raises doubts about their effectiveness and strengthens the influence of informal institutions.

    The study also highlights a surprising trend: despite widespread rejection of coups d’état, many Africans continue to trust the military. This trust may help explain the acceptance of recent military-led transitions in several countries.

    One reason for this trust could be limited interaction with the military. Unlike the police, who are more present in daily life, the army is less exposed to criticism and tensions. As a result, it enjoys a more favourable image than other institutions.

    How can confidence in institutions be restored?

    Here are some steps to consider:

    • Strengthen transparency and fairness: Improve the performance of institutions and fight corruption to restore public confidence.

    • Engage informal institutions: Include religious and traditional leaders in governance processes, such as mediation and transitional justice efforts.

    • Pursue institutional reforms: Define the role of traditional leaders in public affairs to prevent political interference and enhance their contributions to governance.

    • Improve public services: Citizens’ perceptions are shaped by their direct interactions with institutions. For example, fair and effective policing can boost public trust.

    Citizens trust institutions based on their ability to deliver results. To address the erosion of trust, leaders must promote inclusive governance.

    Trust is fundamental to good governance and democracy. Strengthening it should be a top priority for African governments.

    – Who do Africans trust most? Surveys show it’s not the state (more likely the army)
    – https://theconversation.com/who-do-africans-trust-most-surveys-show-its-not-the-state-more-likely-the-army-252902

    MIL OSI Africa –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Round table within BIMAC-2025: how to provide the industry with personnel

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: Saint Petersburg State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering – Saint Petersburg State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering –

    On April 24, a round table was held at SPbGASU as part of the VIII International Scientific and Practical Conference “Information Modeling in Construction and Architecture Problems” (BIMAC-2025) dedicated to the issues of developing digital competencies of students of secondary vocational education institutions (SVE) in the construction sector.

    The event brought together representatives of public organizations, educational institutions, customer companies and students to discuss current trends in personnel training and the implementation of information modeling technologies.

    SPbGASU trains personnel together with industry partners

    Polina Fedyuchek, Victoria Vinogradova

    Vice-Rector for Continuing Education at SPbGASU Victoria Vinogradova said that the university continues to actively work on the application of TIM technologies in the educational process, closely cooperating with leading enterprises in the construction industry, and emphasized that all initiatives at the university – from school projects to scientific developments – are implemented jointly with industrial partners, which ensures the practical orientation of personnel training. She also noted that the university positions itself not just as an educational institution, but as an integration center that unites educational, scientific and project activities. SPbGASU is becoming a platform for professional dialogue between all participants in the construction process – from students to the heads of large companies.

    “We are creating an environment where future specialists can gain not only theoretical knowledge, but also practical experience working with real projects,” noted Victoria Vinogradova. “Our partners are actively involved in developing educational programs, organizing internships and internships, and supervising diploma projects.” Particular attention is paid to creating conditions for professional growth. The university offers various formats of interaction: from corporate training for company employees to joint scientific research.

    “Openness to cooperation is one of our key principles,” emphasized Victoria Vinogradova. “We are ready to discuss new initiatives and joint projects that will contribute to the development of the construction industry and the training of highly qualified personnel who meet the requirements of the digital age.”

    In conclusion of her report, Victoria Vinogradova invited interested organizations to work together in several areas: the implementation of scientific and design developments, the creation of an open environment for digital projects, and the development of students’ project activities. According to her, such a comprehensive approach allows training specialists who can work effectively in the modern conditions of the digitalized construction industry immediately after graduation.

    The role of professional associations

    Elena Parikova, Development Director – Head of the NOSTROY Project Office, gave a presentation on the experience of the NOSTROY SPO Consortium in the field of digital competencies formation. She emphasized the importance of information modeling technologies and presented the consortium’s initiatives in this area.

    Particular attention was paid to personnel training. Elena Parikova noted that the industry is facing a shortage of specialists – from 300 to 700 thousand digital personnel. In higher education institutions, TIM programs are implemented in bachelor’s, master’s and postgraduate programs, including such areas as “Construction” and “Information systems and technologies”. In secondary vocational education, the federal state educational standard for the specialty 08.02.15 “Information modeling in construction” has been implemented, which provides training in technical support of TIM, design of structures and management of digital models.

    Elena Parikova noted that NOSTROY is also developing additional educational programs, including professional retraining, advanced training, and corporate training. Of particular interest were the projects “Digital Construction Classes” developed by SPbGASU for schoolchildren, and the online course “From Idea to Practice of Digitalization of the Construction Industry”, developed jointly with the RF Competence Center.

    Elena Parikova also spoke in detail about the implementation of the educational initiative “TIM-elective of SPbGASU. SPO League 2025” and the All-Russian TIM-championship of SPbGASU. SPO League 2025. She noted that NOSTROY President Anton Glushkov notes the importance of digitalization of the industry and training of qualified personnel and emphasizes that the championship has become the first all-Russian competition for students of the vocational education system after the approval of the new Federal State Educational Standard (FSES) for the specialty 08.02.15, expressing confidence that the participants will make a significant contribution to the development of the construction industry.

    In conclusion, Elena Parikova noted that the development of digital competencies requires joint efforts of educational institutions, businesses and regulators, and invited all interested parties to cooperate.

    Deputy Head of the Office of the National Association of Designers and Surveyors (NOPRIZ) Nadezhda Prokopyeva gave a report on the development of a system for independent assessment of the qualifications of specialists in the field of information modeling. In her speech, she emphasized the importance of fulfilling the order of the President of the Russian Federation from 2018 on the modernization of the construction industry through the introduction of TIM technologies.

    Nadezhda Prokopyeva noted that NOPRIZ and the Association of Software Developers “Domestic Software” are joining forces to develop TIM technologies. As part of the development of digital competencies in the construction industry, NOPRIZ has entered into an agreement with the Association “Domestic Software”, which unites Russian software developers. This partnership is aimed at harmonizing professional standards and qualification requirements with the capabilities of domestic TIM solutions. Joint work will allow adapting independent qualification assessment programs to Russian software products, as well as facilitating the training of specialists who are proficient in national digital tools.

    Particular attention was paid to the updated professional standard “Specialist in the field of information modeling in construction”, which came into force on March 1, 2025. The standard establishes five levels of qualification – from technical support of TIM to management of information modeling processes at the organizational level. On its basis, the Federal State Educational Standard of Secondary Vocational Education 08.02.15 “Information Modeling in Construction” has already been developed, which is implemented by 34 educational institutions of secondary vocational education.

    Nadezhda Prokopyeva spoke in detail about the independent qualification assessment system, which has been conducted since 2017 on the basis of Federal Law No. 238-FZ. Currently, examination centers operate in Moscow, Krasnoyarsk, Yekaterinburg, Novosibirsk, Irkutsk and Veliky Novgorod. The exam includes both a theoretical part with questions on the regulatory framework and practical tasks on working with TIM software products.

    An important area of work for NOPRIZ is cooperation with the country’s leading construction universities to update educational programs in accordance with professional standards. In conclusion, Nadezhda Prokopyeva noted that the introduction of an independent qualification assessment system ensures a high professional level of specialists and increases confidence in TIM technologies in the construction industry.

    Polina Fedyuchek, Deputy Director for Development of the Association of SRO “OsnovaProekt”, gave a report on the role of self-regulatory organizations in training specialists for the construction industry. In her speech, she emphasized the importance of the active participation of self-regulatory organizations in issues of personnel shortage and digitalization of the construction industry.

    Polina Fedyuchek emphasized the importance of implementing state strategic documents – the Strategy for the Development of the Construction Industry and Housing and Public Utilities of the Russian Federation for the Period up to 2030 with a Forecast up to 2035 and the Concept for Training Personnel for the Construction Industry and Housing and Public Utilities up to 2035. These documents define the need for digitalization of the industry and the creation of a system of continuous professional education, where SROs act as a link between educational institutions, businesses and regulators.

    Particular attention was paid to the implementation of the educational initiative “TIM-elective. SPO League”, launched by the Association of SRO “OsnovaProekt” together with SPbGASU in 2024. The pilot project covered six colleges from different regions of Russia, training 150 students and 29 teachers. In 2025, the program expanded significantly: now 32 educational institutions are participating in it, including colleges from Moscow, St. Petersburg, Novosibirsk, Khabarovsk and other cities. The total number of students reached 787 people, of which 631 are students and 146 are teachers. The program includes 308 hours of training in key areas of TIM technologies: architecture, structures, engineering systems and others. She also noted that these educational initiatives are being implemented with the involvement of exclusively domestic software developers.

    “Support for young specialists and development of regional human resources potential remain our priorities,” noted Polina Fedyuchek. “Programs like the TIM-optional course not only help prepare qualified specialists, but also help reduce the personnel shortage in the regions.”

    In conclusion, the speaker expressed confidence that further development of the self-regulation system and strengthening of interaction with educational institutions and government agencies will allow for successful resolution of the challenges facing the industry, including digitalization and training of qualified personnel.

    As noted by Leonid Shelkovnikov, Head of the TIM Department of Kairos-Engineering LLC, a teacher at the Perm Construction College, the discrepancy between the qualifications of personnel and the needs of the labor market is a consequence of a major problem – the lack of a unified state approach to the use of information modeling technology, namely the choice of software. Educational institutions at the state level are prohibited from teaching imported software products, but construction organizations are allowed to use foreign software, including with violation of the copyrights of the departed vendors.

    “The rapid obsolescence of knowledge due to the rapid transformation of the construction industry, the effective implementation of new technologies in the conditions of “turbulence” of the economy, the lack of dialogue between enterprises of the real sector of the economy and educational institutions – this is what is worth paying attention to in the near future. Growth points lie in the close interaction of educational institutions with the construction industry, the information technology industry. Therefore, it is necessary to move towards the set goals: try to select the required software for the educational process, look for technology partners in the conditions of uncertainty of state policy in the field of application of TIM. At the same time, we are all waiting for the formation of a unified methodology for training TIM personnel in the country, we are trying to convince both students and ourselves of the need to achieve technological sovereignty of the Russian construction industry through import substitution of software products and the applied standards for information transfer,” Leonid Shelkovnikov emphasized.

    What do experts expect from the educational process?

    Leonid Shelkovnikov, Maria Lemekhova and Alexey Zubkov

    The head of the educational project of the company “ASCON”, the manager of the competence “Technologies of information modeling BIM” of the Agency for the development of skills and professions Olga Chernyadyeva clarified who a TIM teacher is. This is a certified specialist in the main BIM tools, who has experience in solving real problems of the industry and strives to constantly develop along with the update of the functionality of BIM tools and the construction industry.

    “The professional skills competitions were created at the request of the industry. The tasks include the basic principles of BIM technologies (multi-vendor, teamwork, work with exchange formats), current tasks and skills in demand by the industry, taking into account current BIM standards and professional standards. As part of the TIM Championship of SPbGASU, training intensives are held on working with BIM tools, as well as on teaching methods,” said Olga Chernyadyeva.

    She added that BIM management, the StroimProsto hackathon, the Professionals Championship movement, the TIM-Leaders All-Russian competition, and the Summer BIM School help develop the competencies of all members of the professional community.

    Maria Lemekhova, Head of the Department for Work with the Federal Targeted Program at JSC Baltic Shipyard, noted that shipbuilding is also currently implementing TIM technologies and is facing similar personnel problems.

    “Shipbuilding, like the construction industry, is unthinkable today without information modeling. At shipyards, we use TIM approaches to create ships, vessels and infrastructure. Our experience can be useful for solving problems in architecture and construction – from design optimization to life cycle management of objects. Digital twins of ships and TIM technologies in shipbuilding are the “marine version” of construction solutions. Integration of approaches will help overcome common challenges,” explained Maria Lemekhova.

    She emphasized that digitalization of shipbuilding is a key element of the strategy of technological sovereignty. It covers not only the introduction of robotics and automation, but also the transformation of human resources. The transition to the concept of “Shipbuilding 4.0” requires training specialists capable of working with digital twins, ship lifecycle management systems (PLM) and artificial intelligence. The United Construction Corporation (JSC “USC”), which includes the Baltic Shipyard, is taking steps to restructure the educational system through projects such as “Plant-VTUZ”, combining training with practical training at enterprises. For example, students of the St. Petersburg Marine Technical University (SPbGMTU) are involved in the creation of digital twins of ships, which reduces the adaptation period for graduates in production.

    “Only through the integration of digital platforms, updating retraining programs and creating attractive conditions for young people will we be able to overcome the personnel crisis,” noted Maria Lemekhova.

    Construction allows you to leave a mark on history and realize your creative potential, because each project is unique and requires an individual approach, agreed Alexey Zubkov, project manager of the service of the director for construction of social facilities of the LSR Group and a graduate of St. Petersburg State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering.

    “LSR traces its history back to 1993 and in 30 years has become one of the leading construction holdings in the country. Now the LSR Group continues to increase construction and production volumes, following a proven strategy and maintaining established traditions. We follow new standards and requirements for the design of buildings and structures, including the use of modern technologies (for example, TIM). And we understand that the most important thing in any company, regardless of its size and profile of activity, is people. Therefore, we pay great attention to our many thousands of personnel, creating conditions for effective work and providing the broadest opportunities for professional and career growth. We will be glad to see young specialists in our teams,” said Alexey Zubkov.

    In addition, teachers from colleges from Perm, Belgorod, Rostov-on-Don, Veliky Novgorod and St. Petersburg spoke at the round table and shared their opinions on the educational initiative “TIM-elective SPbGASU. SPO League 2025”. The speakers outlined the issues that, in their opinion, need to be improved by next year, and thanked SPbGASU and the Association of SRO “OsnovaProekt” for organizing such an interesting and significant event.

    The participants of the round table agreed that the development of TIM technologies requires close interaction between educational institutions, businesses and regulators. Particular attention was paid to the need to adapt educational programs to rapidly changing industry requirements.

    The event became a platform for exchanging best practices and defining the vector of further cooperation in the field of digitalization of the construction industry.

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: 28 April 2025 News release GOARN marks 25 years of advancing global health emergency preparedness and response

    Source: World Health Organisation

    The Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network (GOARN), an initiative coordinated by the World Health Organization (WHO), marks its 25th anniversary today. Since its inception in April 2000, the network has been at the forefront of the global fight against health emergencies. By leveraging the expertise of global partners – facilitating alerts, deploying rapid support capacities, and strengthening capacities – it has significantly enhanced country-level operations and strengthened regional development, playing a critical role in health preparedness and response.

    “GOARN is a vital part of the global health architecture,” said Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO Director-General. “Through the network, countries get the expert support they need to respond to health emergencies, and to enhance their own capacities for preparedness and response. This means faster, more effective responses and more lives saved.”

    GOARN was created in response to the need for better coordination during global health emergencies. While many partner organizations were sending teams to assist during emergencies, there was a lack of coordination which hindered the overall effectiveness of these responses. It was also clear that no single institution could address all components of a response alone. GOARN was thus born following an international meeting organized by WHO in Geneva on 26&ndasg;28 April 2000. Some 121 representatives from 67 partner institutions discussed the growing challenge of epidemic-prone and emerging diseases, and the urgent need to build a global network based on existing partnerships to address these threats.

    In October 2000, GOARN played a key role in responding to the major Ebola outbreak in Gulu, Uganda – marking a significant milestone in what would evolve into a quarter-century of pivotal global health responses.

    “As one of the first responders deployed during the Ebola outbreak in Uganda 25 years ago, I witnessed firsthand the evolution of our response efforts and GOARN’s role,” said Dr Mike Ryan, Executive Director of WHO’s Health Emergencies Programme and Deputy Director-General of WHO.  “When I returned to Uganda earlier this year for another Ebola response, I was immensely proud to see how strong the national capacities have become, led by the Ministry of Health with the support of WHO and GOARN partners. GOARN is an example of how multilateralism works to save lives. To this day, I wear the orange GOARN lanyard alongside my blue WHO one to show my respect for and pride in this network.”

    GOARN leverages the expertise of its partner institutions to address global health challenges. Operating as a unified international community, the network has responded swiftly and effectively to public health threats by deploying technical experts to ensure the right expertise is in the right place at the right time. GOARN’s goal is to strengthen countries’ capacities and help build strong, resilient systems for response to emergencies.

    GOARN ensures that the experts are well-trained and equipped with the right skills before they’re deployed where they are needed most, fostering seamless collaboration for swift, coordinated, and impactful responses.

    GOARN has now grown into a network of over 310 institutions, including national public health agencies, nongovernmental organizations, UN agencies, academic, and other technical organizations. GOARN has responded to over 175 public health emergencies in 114 countries, deploying more than 3645 international responders who integrate within national responses, collaborating with thousands of national professionals to strengthen and enhance local efforts. The network has tackled major global public health events, including outbreaks of SARS, Ebola virus disease, Marburg virus disease, COVID-19, mpox, cholera, yellow fever, disasters such as floods and earthquakes, and war. GOARN has deployed expertise in epidemiology, disease surveillance, case management, clinical care, infection prevention and control, risk communication and community engagement, and others. These efforts have also delivered hands-on training to hundreds of national teams, bolstering their immediate response capacity and long-term resilience.

    “Looking back over the past 25 years, it’s remarkable to see how GOARN has evolved from a visionary concept to an indispensable network in the global health emergency landscape,” said Ray R. Arthur, PhD, Director, Global Disease Detection Operations Center, CDC (retired) and Former Chair of the GOARN Steering Committee. “As an early participant in establishing the network and as former chair of the Steering Committee, I witnessed firsthand the commitment and collaboration that drove the network’s success. GOARN has not only facilitated rapid response to public health emergencies but has also been instrumental in strengthening global health, ensuring that countries are better prepared for the challenges of tomorrow. It’s an honour to see the network continue to grow and play such a vital role in protecting public health worldwide.”

    Today, GOARN is a vital pillar in the Global Health Emergency Corps ensuring a well-coordinated health emergency workforce, centered in countries and connected regionally and globally. The 25-year milestone marks a significant evolution of GOARN’s role in preparedness and response. Rather than deploying large numbers of international professionals across every field, GOARN now brings in only the necessary expertise to address critical gaps on the ground. Paired with the focus on capacity strengthening and training initiates, GOARN has demonstrated the effectiveness of its mandate and efforts empowering countries to manage emergencies themselves.

    GOARN calls on all Member States, partners and the global community to continue working together to build a global health emergency architecture that is resilient, equitable, and capable of addressing future health challenges.
     

    Voices from GOARN, past and present

    Dr Mohannad Al-Nsour, Executive Director, Eastern Mediterranean Public Health Network (EMPHNET), current Chair of the GOARN Steering Committee:
    “As the world faces the growing threats of epidemics, conflict, and humanitarian crises, GOARN’s role has never been more vital. The network is being called to respond in increasingly complex environments – where conflict is more widespread, and public health emergencies unfold alongside deep humanitarian challenges. GOARN must continue to evolve, expanding its reach and strengthening collaboration to meet these urgent needs.”

    Daniela Garone, Infectious Diseases Specialist and International Medical Coordinator, Médecins Sans Frontières, current Co-Deputy Chairs of the GOARN Steering Committee and Dr Edmund Newman, Director, UK Public Health Rapid Support Team (UK-PHRST):
    “Reflecting on GOARN’s 25 years of advancing global health emergency preparedness and response, we are proud to be active partners of a network that has been instrumental in saving lives and strengthening health response systems around the world. From its humble beginnings to its current role as a vital pillar in global health response, GOARN has demonstrated the power of collaboration and expertise in tackling public health emergencies. As we look to the future, we remain committed to supporting countries in building resilient public health systems and ensuring that our collective efforts continue to evolve in response to the growing challenges of global health. Together, we will continue to foster stronger partnerships and be ready for whatever comes next.”

    Myriam Henkens MD, MPH, Senior Health Adviser, Médecins Sans Frontières, former member of GOARN Steering Committee:
    “For 25 years, GOARN has been a cornerstone in the global response to health emergencies. As a proud participant, MSF has been working alongside GOARN to strengthen health systems and ensure a more effective global response to the challenges of tomorrow. The collaborative spirit and shared expertise across the network have made a real difference in the field, and I’m proud to have been part of this journey.”

    Gail Carson, Director of Network Development at ISARIC Pandemic Sciences Institute, University of Oxford and former Chair of the GOARN Steering Committee (2022–2024):
    “Serving as Chair of the GOARN Steering Committee from 2022 to 2024 was one of the greatest honours of my career. But my connection to this network goes back much further—to GOARN’s first response to Ebola in Uganda. Over the past 25 years, I’ve seen firsthand how this global community of experts supports countries in times of crisis, delivering trusted, timely, and lifesaving technical assistance. Today, GOARN continues to evolve to meet new and complex challenges. What hasn’t changed is its core strength: GOARN remains the partner you can count on when a health emergency hits.”

    John S Mackenzie, Emeritus Professor and former Chair of the GOARN Steering Committee:
    “GOARN was born from a visionary belief that global outbreak response could be stronger through coordinated action. I was proud to serve on its first Steering Committee, and those 14 years remain among the most fulfilling of my career. GOARN continues to grow as a powerful force in global public health – driven by collaboration, expertise, and an enduring spirit of service.”

    Pat Drury, former GOARN Manager:
    “GOARN has been more than just a professional milestone—it has been a journey of saving lives and making a real difference in the face of some of the world’s most challenging outbreaks, from Ebola, and SARS to COVID-19. The network’s strength is its ability to connect people, and institutions, knowledge and expertise in real time, turning alerts into rapid responses. As the challenges have grown, so have the stakes. In an increasingly polarised world, GOARN’s role in mobilizing science, and fostering trust has never been more vital. Congratulations on 25 years of extraordinary impact, and thank you to the countless individuals who make this mission possible.”

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Teachers in South African schools may be slow to report rape of girls: study shows why

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Ayobami Precious Adekola, Postdoctoral Researcher, University of South Africa

    2A Images via Getty Images

    In South Africa, the age of consent for sex is 16 years old. Engaging in sexual activity with someone under the age of 16 is considered statutory rape, even if the minor consents as defined under the law that applies to adults.

    In December 2021, South Africa’s Department of Basic Education introduced a policy aimed at reducing the country’s high rates of teenage pregnancy and sexual exploitation. It requires educators to report cases where older sexual partners impregnate learners under 16 years of age.

    We are researchers in sexual and reproductive health who have been working on a decade-long community engagement project focused on improving HIV prevention and related challenges among learners. The project is in the Vhembe district of Limpopo province, South Africa, bordering Zimbabwe. Sexual health practices among young people here remain a pressing concern, due to high rates of unprotected sex, sexually transmitted infections, HIV and unplanned pregnancies.

    As part of the project, we conducted a study of the statutory rape reporting policy for schools. It showed a disconnect between the policy’s intent and implementation. We found that some rural teachers were unaware of the policy, were not sure what they were supposed to do, or faced cultural, social and systemic barriers that left them feeling powerless to act.

    The result is that the child protection law is failing the learners it was designed to safeguard.

    Because teachers are often some of the first adults to become aware of statutory rape cases, it’s crucial to equip them to deal with disclosures appropriately, navigate reporting protocols confidently, and engage support systems effectively and help prevent future sexual abuse of learners.

    Lack of awareness of policy

    Our research was conducted at eight public primary and high schools in the Soutpansberg North school circuit of Limpopo. All the schools are in rural, under-resourced and poor communities. There is a high number of HIV infections and unplanned teenage pregnancies in the schools where the study was conducted. The true incidence rate of rape is different because it’s not always reported.

    We engaged 19 educators (16 of them female) through group discussions.

    Teachers expressed confusion and frustration over the lack of formal communication and training on the statutory rape reporting policy. Some were unaware that such a policy existed. One admitted:

    Honestly, I wasn’t even aware that we had a policy on statutory rape. It’s not something we’ve ever discussed in our school.

    Another teacher said:

    I know there’s a policy, but I’m unsure where to find it or exactly what it says. As educators, we need to be informed about policies, but it feels like no one communicates them effectively to us.

    Cultural and socioeconomic barriers

    Beyond a lack of awareness, the discussions suggested that socio-cultural norms hinder the implementation of the statutory rape policy in rural areas.

    The study highlighted that intergenerational relationships are normalised in some rural communities. In these cases, families may depend financially on the older male partner, making them reluctant to report such relationships as criminal offences.



    Read more:
    Rape culture in South African schools: where it comes from and how to change it

    In some cases, families tacitly support relationships between young girls and older men in exchange for financial support, making such arrangements difficult to challenge.

    A participant shared:

    It’s difficult because some parents tolerate these relationships as normal and support their kids to sleep with older men, who in turn provide for the family.

    Teachers encounter immense social pressure when faced with statutory rape cases. In tight-knit rural communities, reporting a case could mean accusing a neighbour, relative, or local authority figure. This creates a moral dilemma for educators who want to protect learners but fear community backlash.

    As one participant put it:

    If I report it, they might turn against us.

    These socio-cultural dynamics create a culture of silence that protects perpetrators rather than victims.

    What’s missing

    The study also found that a lack of training on statutory rape policies is a barrier to effective implementation. Teachers reported feeling unprepared to handle the legal and emotional complexities of reporting statutory rape cases.

    There’s been no training at all. We hear about the policy, but they don’t teach us how to implement it or what steps to take if something happens.

    Another teacher added:

    There is no formal memo from the circuit office and from our school governing body meetings; it was never introduced as an agenda item.

    The absence of confidential reporting mechanisms further complicates the situation. Teachers fear that reporting cases could lead to retaliation from the community or even threats to their safety. The lack of a standardised anonymous reporting system leaves teachers feeling vulnerable and unsupported.

    Teachers indicated that fear of community backlash led them to prioritise managing learner pregnancies over investigating potential rape cases. Some said it was the parents’ responsibility to report rape.



    Read more:
    South Africa’s stance on teenage pregnancy needs a radical review: what it would look like

    Proposed solutions

    We recommend a few ways to improve reporting of statutory rape:

    Mandatory training for educators: The education department should ensure that all teachers understand their legal obligations and know how to navigate reporting procedures.

    Confidential reporting systems: Establishing secure and anonymous reporting channels.

    Community awareness campaigns: Programmes to help shift harmful cultural norms and make it easier to report statutory rape. Campaigns should emphasise the importance of protecting minors and the legal consequences of statutory rape.

    Interdisciplinary support networks: Schools should collaborate with social workers, legal professionals, and mental health experts to provide educators with the support and resources needed to handle statutory rape cases.

    Bridging the gap between South Africa’s statutory rape policy and what actually happens in rural areas is a social justice imperative that affects the most vulnerable members of society.

    Azwihangwisi Helen Mavhandu-Mudzusi receives funding from the South African Medical Research Council for this study.

    Ayobami Precious Adekola does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Teachers in South African schools may be slow to report rape of girls: study shows why – https://theconversation.com/teachers-in-south-african-schools-may-be-slow-to-report-rape-of-girls-study-shows-why-253992

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Who do Africans trust most? Surveys show it’s not the state (more likely the army)

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Koffi Améssou Adaba, Enseignant et chercheur en sociologie politique, Université de Lomé

    A recent Afrobarometer study has shown declining trust in
    public institutions over the past decade among African citizens. Study findings call into question the credibility and legitimacy of state institutions like the presidency, parliament and security forces, including the police. The study also shows that many Africans still believe in traditional and religious figures, raising concerns about the effectiveness of governments. It also highlights the disconnect between state officials and the public. The Conversation Africa asked Koffi Améssou Adaba, a political sociologist and one of the authors of the Afrobarometer study, to unpack this loss of trust and its implications.

    What are the main findings of the study?

    The study, conducted by Afrobarometer in 39 countries, reveals a general decline in trust in public institutions in Africa over the past decade.

    The study assessed trust levels in 11 types of institutions and leaders. These are religious leaders, the president, opposition parties, ruling parties, the military, parliament, local councils, national electoral commissions, the police, courts, and traditional leaders.

    Conducted through face-to-face interviews in the language chosen by the respondent, Afrobarometer surveys enable national results to be obtained with margins of error of +/-2 to +/-3 percentage points at a 95% confidence level. This analysis of 39 countries is based on 53,444 interviews.

    Surveys have been conducted since 1999. Since 2012, we have observed that trust in most institutions has decreased. Only three institutions still have majority support as reflected by the percentage of respondents who said they trusted those entities. These are religious leaders (66%), the army (61%), and traditional leaders (56%). In contrast, political institutions aren’t earning much public trust. The presidency, parliament, police and courts all have trust levels below 50%.

    This trend differs across regions. East and west Africa report higher levels of trust than central, southern and north Africa.

    At the national level, Tanzania, Niger and Burkina Faso have the highest trust levels. In contrast, Gabon, Eswatini and São Tomé and Príncipe are among the most distrustful countries.

    Since 2011, trust in parliament has dropped by 19 percentage points. The ruling party’s trust level has fallen by 16 points, followed by the presidency (-12) and the courts (-10). Despite the overall decline, some countries – like Tanzania, Togo and Mali – are seeing increased trust in certain institutions.

    What do these trends tell us?

    Institutional trust is vital for political stability and effective governance, regardless of whether a regime is democratic or authoritarian. Even authoritarian governments seek some level of popular support to strengthen their power. When citizens perceive institutions as responsible, transparent and effective, they are more likely to trust and support them. This trust leads people to expect good results when dealing with the state.

    The perception of efficiency, transparency and integrity is fundamental to building this trust. The observed decline in trust could undermine the legitimacy of governments and might hinder development, particularly in developing countries.

    Informal institutions (religious and traditional leaders) and the army enjoy stronger support than official institutions. Trust in religious leaders varies widely – from 34% in Tunisia to at least nine out of ten citizens in countries like Tanzania (94%), Senegal (92%), Nigeria (90%) and Ethiopia (90%).

    This pattern raises important questions about the role of these informal institutions in governance.

    Are there any red flags that need to be addressed?

    Major public institutions like the presidency, parliament, justice system and police should inspire confidence. They are expected to inspire trust because of their direct interactions with citizens. However, the low confidence in these institutions raises doubts about their effectiveness and strengthens the influence of informal institutions.

    The study also highlights a surprising trend: despite widespread rejection of coups d’état, many Africans continue to trust the military. This trust may help explain the acceptance of recent military-led transitions in several countries.

    One reason for this trust could be limited interaction with the military. Unlike the police, who are more present in daily life, the army is less exposed to criticism and tensions. As a result, it enjoys a more favourable image than other institutions.

    How can confidence in institutions be restored?

    Here are some steps to consider:

    • Strengthen transparency and fairness: Improve the performance of institutions and fight corruption to restore public confidence.

    • Engage informal institutions: Include religious and traditional leaders in governance processes, such as mediation and transitional justice efforts.

    • Pursue institutional reforms: Define the role of traditional leaders in public affairs to prevent political interference and enhance their contributions to governance.

    • Improve public services: Citizens’ perceptions are shaped by their direct interactions with institutions. For example, fair and effective policing can boost public trust.

    Citizens trust institutions based on their ability to deliver results. To address the erosion of trust, leaders must promote inclusive governance.

    Trust is fundamental to good governance and democracy. Strengthening it should be a top priority for African governments.

    Koffi Améssou Adaba does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Who do Africans trust most? Surveys show it’s not the state (more likely the army) – https://theconversation.com/who-do-africans-trust-most-surveys-show-its-not-the-state-more-likely-the-army-252902

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI: What Real AI Business Transformation Means: Insights from Forbes Tech Council and Intetics Live Webinar

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    NAPLES, Fla., April 28, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Intetics Inc., a leading global technology company specializing in custom software development and digital transformation, is proud to announce the publication of an insightful article by President and CEO Boris Kontsevoi in Forbes Technology Council. Titled “AI-Driven Business Transformation: Will You Fade Away or Forge the Future?”, the article delivers a powerful call to action for business leaders navigating the era of AI.

    In the piece, Boris Kontsevoi emphasizes that AI is no longer optional for companies that aim to stay competitive. Drawing parallels between historic labor transformations and today’s digital revolution, he argues that businesses must move beyond basic AI tool deployment and embrace AI as a core strategic asset.

    “The next five years will define the winners and losers of the AI revolution. Companies that fail to integrate AI into their operational core risk becoming irrelevant,” – Boris Kontsevoi warns.

    The article outlines:

    • The Evolution of Labor — tracing economic progress from ancient systems to today’s AI-driven future.
    • The Five Levels of AI Maturity — a framework guiding companies from simple automation to autonomous organizational intelligence.
    • Best Starting Projects — real-world examples such as AI-powered troubleshooting assistants and sales automation tools that deliver measurable impact.
    • AI Implementation Best Practices — clear guidelines for companies starting or refining their AI journeys.

    Boris Kontsevoi also highlights a key Intetics innovation: Enterprise Knowledge Assistant (EKA), which exemplifies how businesses can move beyond off-the-shelf AI tools to build customized, transformational solutions.

    This latest contribution underscores Intetics’ commitment to helping organizations worldwide harness the full potential of AI to drive meaningful, sustainable growth.

    Read the full article here.

    Upcoming Webinar: “How AI Agents Fixed Our SDLC”

    In continuation of the insights shared in the article, Intetics invites technology leaders, project managers, and innovation enthusiasts to its exclusive webinar, “How AI Agents Fixed Our SDLC”.

    Participants will see first-hand how AI-driven solutions boosted project efficiency by 18% — without overhauling entire systems. The session will include:

    • Real-world demos of AI integration with Jira, GitHub, Slack, and Confluence.
    • How AI Knowledge Keepers provide instant, reliable answers to team queries.
    • Step-by-step examples of how AI improves workload estimation and delivery speed.

    Learn more and register here: https://bit.ly/3S80nZN

    About Intetics
    Intetics Inc. is a leading American technology company providing custom software application development, distributed professional teams’ creation, software product quality assessment, and “all-things-digital” solutions built with SMAC, RPA, AI/ML, IoT, blockchain, and GIS/UAV/LBS technologies. Based on proprietary pioneering business models of Offshore Dedicated Team® and Remote In-Sourcing®, an advanced Technical Debt Reduction Platform (TETRA™) and measurable SLAs for software engineering, Intetics helps innovative organizations capitalize on global talent with our in-depth engineering expertise based on our Predictive Software Engineering framework. Intetics core strength lays in design of software products in conditions of incomplete specifications. We have extensive industry expertise in Education, Healthcare, Logistics, Life Sciences, Finance, Insurance, Communications, and custom ERP, CRM, Intelligent Automation and Geospatial solutions. Our advanced software engineering background and outstanding quality management platform, along with an unparalleled methodology for talent acquisition, team building and talent retention, guarantee that our clients receive exceptional results for their projects. At Intetics, our outcomes do not just meet clients’ expectations, they have been exceeding them for a quarter of a century. Intetics operates from multiple offices in the USA, Europe and Latin America, hiring the best talent available worldwide. Intetics is ISO 9001 (quality) and ISO 27001 (security) certified and a Microsoft Gold, Amazon, and UiPath Silver partner. The company’s innovation and growth achievements are reflected in winning prestigious titles and awards, including Inc5000, Software 500, CRN 100, American Business, Deloitte Fast 50, European IT Excellence, Best European BPO, Stevie People’s Choice, Clutch and ACQ5 Awards, IAOP Global Outsourcing 100 and Fortune Innovative 300 lists.

    Learn more: www.intetics.com

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Armstrong welcomes Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins to ND, thanks her for responsiveness

    Source: US State of North Dakota

    Gov. Kelly Armstrong today participated in a roundtable discussion with U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins in Fargo, welcoming her to North Dakota and thanking her for the Trump administration’s responsiveness to farmers and ranchers, calling it a “huge benefit” to North Dakota and its agriculture sector.

    “North Dakota farmers and ranchers are the best in the world, and we appreciate Secretary Rollins coming to Fargo to hear firsthand about the challenges and opportunities facing our ag producers as they feed and fuel the world,” Armstrong said. “We look forward to working with Secretary Rollins and the entire Trump administration to strengthen U.S. food security, expand markets and restore fairness to international trade relationships, and roll back unnecessary regulations that restrict producers and increase costs for consumers.”

    Rollins’ visit to North Dakota comes less than 70 days after her confirmation as the nation’s 33rd agriculture secretary on Feb. 13. During today’s roundtable with ag producers and researchers, agribusinesses and commodity groups at the Peltier Complex at North Dakota State University, Rollins announced the U.S. Department of Agriculture is releasing over $340 million in disaster assistance for farmers, ranchers and rural communities, including over $5 million for North Dakota to help rebuild electric infrastructure following damage from severe storms and wildfires.

    Rollins was hosted in Fargo by U.S. Sen. John Hoeven, a senior member of the Senate Agriculture Committee and chairman of the Senate Agriculture Appropriations Committee. Following the roundtable, Armstrong joined Rollins for lunch with members of NDSU’s Student Ag Ambassadors.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Armstrong highlights benefits to students as he signs bill requiring phone-free K-12 public schools

    Source: US State of North Dakota

    A new law requiring K-12 public schools in North Dakota to adopt phone-free school policies may be the most impactful legislation of this session, Gov. Kelly Armstrong said as he signed the bill today surrounded by students, school officials, legislators and First Lady Kjersti Armstrong at Centennial Elementary School in Bismarck.

    House Bill 1160 requires all personal electronic communication devices to be securely stowed and inaccessible to students during instructional time from the start of the school day until dismissal at the end of the day – commonly referred to as a “bell-to-bell” phone-free policy. The law becomes effective Aug. 1.

    “This is a game changer for our public schools, giving students the freedom to focus on learning and to interact with teachers and friends without the constant tug of their cell phones and addictive social media,” Armstrong said. “We appreciate the legislators, education leaders, teachers, parents, students and other stakeholders who worked incredibly hard to pass this bill in just four weeks, because this can’t wait two more years. We need to act now for the academic success, mental health and overall well-being of our students.”

    Armstrong and Lt. Gov. Michelle Strinden championed the phone-free schools legislation with State Superintendent Kirsten Baesler, HB 1160 lead sponsor Rep. Jim Jonas, Sen. Michelle Axtman and others through bill amendments introduced in late March. The amended version of HB 1160 passed the Senate 42-4 and the House 82-8 last week.

    Baesler noted at least 25 states have laws or policies that ban or restrict students’ use of electronics in school or encourage local districts to enact their own policies. She said that during her more than 12 years as state superintendent, she has heard from teachers with increasing urgency that student mental health challenges have become overwhelming, making it challenging to teach even the most basic material.

    “We had to ask ourselves – are we willing to take steps to prevent the student mental health crisis from getting worse? House Bill 1160 takes those steps. It limits student use of personal electronic devices during school hours, with appropriate exceptions for instructional or medical reasons,” Baesler said. “This law gives students the gift of attention, connection, and presence. We are removing the constant pull of comparison and distraction and replacing it with space to learn and grow.”

    The proposal still allows for the use of tablets and other school-issued electronic devices for learning, while also including exceptions for students who need personal electronic devices for medical reasons or as part of an individual education plan, or IEP. Schools will have flexibility in deciding how to stow personal electronic devices.

    Bismarck Public Schools Superintendent Jeff Fastnacht commended the governor, first lady and lieutenant governor for their leadership in supporting student well-being and academic success through the signing of HB 1160, saying it “reflects a shared understanding of the importance of minimizing unnecessary distractions during the school day.”

    “At Bismarck Public Schools, we are committed to ensuring our classrooms remain places where students can focus, engage meaningfully with their peers and teachers, and grow both academically and socially. This legislation reinforces that commitment and provides clarity for schools, families, and communities as we work together to foster environments where learning thrives,” Fastnacht said. “We appreciate the state’s partnership in prioritizing the needs of North Dakota students and look forward to continued collaboration to support effective learning environments across Bismarck and throughout the great state of North Dakota.”

    Jonas, the West Fargo lawmaker who sponsored HB 1160 and introduced the phone-free amendments with Axtman, said the bill is “the culmination of a decade and a half of North Dakota schools trying to negotiate cell phone policies, trying to solve the problem of how much it distracts students from being engaged in learning.”

    “Educators have been advocating for tougher and more uniform approaches that allow them to spend more time teaching in their classrooms and less time policing cell phone use,” Jonas said. “Teachers don’t want to be the phone police. They want to teach.”  

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Open Day at the Polytechnic University brought together thousands of future students

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: Peter the Great St Petersburg Polytechnic University – Peter the Great St Petersburg Polytechnic University –

    Before the start of the admissions campaign, the Polytechnic University held an Open Day. On April 27, more than 4,000 applicants and their parents visited the Main Academic Building of the university. For those who could not come in person, a live broadcast was organized in the Polytechnic group for applicants on VKontakte.

    The event was opened by the Vice-Rector for Continuing and Pre-University Education of SPbPU Dmitry Tikhonov, who spoke about the advantages of studying at the Polytechnic University and the prospects for students. Then the responsible secretary of the Admissions Committee Vitaly Drobchik acquainted the participants with the key changes in the admission rules for the 2025 academic year.

    After the official part, the guests were able to visit the institutes’ stands, where they learned about the training areas and asked questions to the teachers and students. Various activities and presentations were prepared for the university’s guests. The Civil Engineering Institute held master classes on digital construction, life safety, and product design. Those interested in the humanities were able to learn about the professions of a digital linguist, psychologist, and specialist in foreign regional studies. The Institute of Biomedical Systems and Biotechnology held a master class on experiments with food pigments. The Institute of Industrial Management, Economics, and Trade organized a master class on commodity science, where schoolchildren learned to quickly determine the quality of products and identify signs of non-compliance with standards and possible counterfeiting.

    The SPbPU Career Development Department presented job opportunities to applicants in an interactive format. Specialists talked about practices, internships and options for cooperation with the university’s partners. Organizations that offer targeted training at the university were also presented.

    In addition, participants could visit a photo booth and take a sightseeing tour of the campus. At special consultation stands, guests of the university talked with employees of the Admissions Committee, activists of the United Student Council of Dormitories, representatives of the Black Bears-Polytech sports club and specialists of the Center for Work with Applicants.

    At the end of the event, participants were treated to an impressive scientific show from the Institute of Physics and Mathematics, as well as an awards ceremony for the winners of the university competition.

    The live broadcast was hosted by the Director of the Contingent Formation Center Varvara Sotova and a student of the Institute of Energy Victoria Chernova. They explained in detail the nuances of admission this year and talked about participation in the projects of the State Corporation Rosatom. The broadcast can be viewed inrecords in a group.

    The Open Day once again confirmed the leading position of the Polytechnic University, the relevance of our scientific developments and educational programs. There was a lot of excitement near the career guidance zones of each institute. And the university strategy adapted for presentation to schoolchildren aroused keen interest among applicants and parents, because we are talking about success and prospects. We see how the interest of young people in engineering areas and the use of modern technologies related to artificial intelligence, digital engineering, new materials is growing. It is especially valuable that applicants come to us not just for a diploma, but for the competencies of the future, which will allow them to become sought-after specialists in high-tech industries, – noted Dmitry Tikhonov.

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Q&A on Recent Issues

    Source: US State of Connecticut

    Q: What should faculty, staff, or student workers do if they are approached or contacted by federal immigration authorities?

    A: Be polite and professional. Ask for appropriate identification if not easily recognizable. Immediately notify the UConn’s Office of the General Counsel (OGC) at 860-486-5796 or UConn Police at 860-486-4800. After hours contact OGC by email at Nicole.Gelston@uconn.edu. UConn OGC will ensure a valid search warrant, subpoena, or other enforceable legal document before releasing any documents, computers, records, or reports to government agents or law enforcement official unless otherwise required by law.

    Q: What if authorities contact me seeking student information?

    A: Remember that federal student privacy law, known as FERPA, apply. In light of that, don’t share personal student information including class schedules until you receive confirmation from OGC or the police. OGC will coordinate with departments the provision of any records to government agents or law enforcement officials.

    Q: Which campus locations are accessible to federal authorities?

    A: Federal law enforcement authorities may access any area of campus if they have a judicial warrant, meaning a warrant signed by a judge, authorizing them to do so. Otherwise, they may access areas of campus that are considered public, and parts of campus that are not considered public if they are provided with consent to do so by an authorized campus official or, if a dwelling, the resident. An administrative warrant, which is distinct from a judicial warrant, would not give authorities the ability to access non-public areas of campus without consent.

    Q: What spaces on UConn’s campuses are considered public and what are not considered public?

    A: As a public university, most of our campus spaces are considered public. However, there are exceptions to this, including: residence halls, faculty and staff offices, clinical care spaces, and other spaces that are locked when not in use or can only be accessed using a key card. It is virtually impossible to definitively designate every space on UConn’s campuses as public vs. not public as it would depend on a number of factors. Fortunately, faculty, staff, and students do not have to make this determination themselves, or try to decipher what is a judicial warrant versus an administrative warrant, or decide on the spot whether or not to release information – this is why anyone who may encounter federal authorities, including faculty teaching in a classroom, should contact the General Counsel or UConn Police.

    Q: What protections do I have if I am sued as a result of activities undertaken in the course of my employment? 

    A: Under state law, state employees sued due to actions taken within the scope of their employment are entitled to be provided a defense by the state through the Office of the Attorney General as long as such actions were not wanton, malicious or reckless or the Attorney General determines such representation would not be appropriate.  Any such employee would also typically be indemnified by the state in the event there was any monetary judgment awarded against them.  These rights are codified in state statute at sections 4-165 and 5-141d of the Connecticut General Statutes.

    Q: What do I do if I am served with a lawsuit or receive a threat of litigation concerning my University role or employment?

    A: Do not respond to any correspondence from the complainant or their attorney without first contacting the Office of the General Counsel and your direct supervisor.

    Q: What do I do if I am served with a subpoena or other legal document?

    A: As an employee at the University, you may encounter a situation in which a state marshal or other process server who is paid to deliver legal documents asks you to accept service of a legal document during the course of your workday. While less common, you may also receive these legal documents by mail or email. Typically, these legal documents consist of:

    • Subpoena: A subpoena is a written order issued by a court, attorney, or administrative agency. A subpoena generally requires a person to provide testimony and/or documents in connection with a legal proceeding, such as a deposition, court hearing or a trial. A subpoena is not a lawsuit against the University or the employee.
    • Summons and Complaint: A summons and complaint are the documents used to initiate a lawsuit.

    If you are asked to accept service of a subpoena or summons and complaint/lawsuit on behalf of the University or another employee, you should decline and inform the process server to contact the Office of the General Counsel.

    Exception: The only exception to the above is if the subpoena or summons specifically names you, as opposed to the University or another employee. In that situation, you can accept service of the subpoena or summons on your own behalf.  If you are unsure, contact the Office of the General Counsel before accepting any documents.

    Q: What do I do if I receive such documents by email or accidently accept service of such documents?

    A: Contact the Office of the General Counsel as soon as possible because these documents are time sensitive and failure to alert our office can result in adverse legal consequences.

    Please also feel free to contact the Office of the General Counsel at any time if you have any questions.

    Office of the General Counsel
    John J. Budds Building
    343 Mansfield Road
    (860) 486-5796

    generalcounsel@uconn.edu

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: A Message to the University Community

    Source: US State of Connecticut

    To the UConn Community:

    We write to share updates on issues related to actions taken by the federal government in recent weeks and to reiterate guidance previously provided to the community on current issues. Please note that additional information and resources will be shared as they become available.

    **

    SEVIS Revocations. As reported last week, 13 international students at UConn – 12 current students and one recent graduate completing postgraduate training – had their Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) records terminated, which threatened to cause serious disruptions in their academic careers. We have learned that all of the impacted students at UConn have now had their SEVIS records restored by the federal government, meaning absent some other unexpected change, they should be able to resume their studies and work at UConn uninterrupted. UConn continues to work to provide support for all the impacted students and will share new information as it becomes available.

    **

    Department of Education “Dear Colleague Letter.” In February, the U.S. Department of Education issued what is known as a “Dear Colleague Letter” to educational institutions with guidance regarding federal laws that prohibit discrimination. On March 1, the department followed-up with an FAQ. On Thursday, April 24, a federal judge in Maryland issued a nationwide stay of the letter. The court found that the letter set forth new legal obligations and therefore the government should have followed the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act, which it failed to do. The stay is in effect until the conclusion of the related lawsuit that led to the order.

    **

    New NIH, DOE Policies. The UConn Office of the Vice President for Research has updated its Federal Research Funding FAQ page to reflect new policies recently issued by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). The page can be accessed with your UConn NetID and password.

    **

    Potential Interactions with Federal Authorities. UConn is not aware of any instance of federal immigration authorities recently traveling to any of our campuses. The university continues to receive questions from community members about what to do if they encounter immigration authorities at UConn or are contacted by immigration authorities; which spaces on campus can or cannot be accessed by authorities and under what circumstances; and what their rights and protections are under the law more generally.

    The university has posted answers and background information on these issues.

    **

    Our Support Staff. In light of recent events, many UConn staff members at UConn are working tirelessly behind the scenes, directly supporting individuals within the campus community who have been affected. This is particularly true for those dedicated to assisting our students, such as the Dean of Students and the Center for International Students and Scholars in Global Affairs.

    With limited staff available, the committed few we rely on are putting in extraordinary time and effort to meet the needs at hand. We encourage you to show them your support. Before reaching out with questions, we ask all faculty and staff to first review the guidance and resources that have been thoughtfully prepared. Taking a moment to consult these materials will help ensure that our colleagues can concentrate their efforts where they’re most needed.

    As noted above, additional information and resources will be shared as they become available. The President, Provost, and Vice President for Research, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship are in regular communication with representatives from both the state and federal governments to stay updated and determine the best course of action moving forward.

    Anne D’Alleva

    Provost and Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs

    Nathan Fuerst

    Vice President for Student Life and Enrollment

    Daniel Weiner

    Vice President for Global Affairs

    Jeffrey Hines

    Interim Vice President and Chief Diversity Officer

    Nicole Gelston

    General Counsel

    Pamir Alpay

    Vice President for Research, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: What have the Democrats achieved in Trump’s first 100 days?

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Richard Hargy, Visiting Research Fellow in International Studies, Queen’s University Belfast

    The Democratic response to the first 100 days of Donald Trump’s second term has been sluggish. It has made many Congressional Democrats, and party members, anxious about what the party can do to push back against the president’s fast-moving agenda.

    “None of this feels like you’re fighting for us … The words are great, but I’m really not seeing any action,” said an exasperated constituent at a town hall event held in March by Colorado Democratic Senator Michael Bennet.

    According to reports, much of the anger in the room was aimed at the Democrats lacklustre fightback against Trump, and specifically a decision by some Democratic senators to support a Republican government funding bill in order to avert a federal government shutdown.

    Democrat Senate leader Chuck Schumer’s decision to support this bill attracted criticism from within the party. Opponents argued that rejecting the bill and forcing a government shutdown would have required Trump and Republicans to rethink their strategy and negotiate a more palatable deal with Democrats. Schumer, however, argued that it was a far worse option to allow “Trump to take even much more power via a government shutdown”.

    Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi offered a sharp critique of Schumer’s approach, saying “America has experienced a Trump shutdown before — but this damaging legislation only makes matters worse. Democrats must not buy into this false choice. We must fight back for a better way”.

    Some within the party viewed this as a missed opportunity by Democrats to portray themselves as an active opposition to Trump’s agenda, especially as Republicans currently control both parts of Congress – the US House of Representatives and the Senate.

    To progress to a vote on a bill in the Senate requires 60 votes. With 52 yes votes on their government-funding bill, Republicans needed eight Democrats to switch sides. Schumer could have sunk the bill and shut down the federal government. But, as Time magazine’s Philip Elliott said, while Democrats had this option, they “lacked the bandwidth to sell it as the other guys’ fault, or put forth a unified plan on how to reopen the government on better terms”.

    Nevertheless, the outcry within Democrat circles was fierce. Prominent progressive Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York said that “there is a deep sense of outrage and betrayal”. The fallout exposed wider divisions within the party, as well as friction between Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.

    Polling data released in March showed Democrats with a favourability score of 29%, the party’s lowest point since 1992. This came as some of the Democrats’ major financial backers were publicly critical of the party’s ineffective and lethargic opposition and withheld financial backing.

    Democrat Chuck Schumer voted with the Republicans.

    Effective Democratic opposition will require sustained work, which connects with and mobilises voters. Darrell M. West, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington, said that previous victories “demonstrated that long-term success involves many steps, from … political alliance-building to candidate recruitment, fundraising, registration drives, and get-out-the-vote efforts”.

    Some Democrats in Congress are trying to hold the Trump administration accountable. Congressman James Raskin of Maryland and California Senator Adam Schiff have convened “shadow hearings” to highlight what they allege to be dubious decisions. Other Democrats have signed onto several court briefs that have challenged some of Trump’s executive orders.


    How is Donald Trump’s presidency shaping up after 100 days? Here’s what the experts think. If you like what you see, sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter.

    Other notable Democrats are mounting a fightback by trying to rally their supporters. Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont have held a series of rallies that saw huge crowds of over 200,000 people turn out in mainly Republican-supporting states to hear their anti-Trump message. Sanders declared that the “future of the Democratic Party is not going to rest with the kind of leadership that we’ve had”.

    Arguably the defining moment from this turbulent three-month period of Trump’s second term was the president’s “Liberation Day” announcement on April 2, when he imposed sweeping new tariffs on many major trading partners across the world.

    The economic turmoil that followed presented Democrats with a political opportunity. Yet their immediate response was restrained and lacklustre.

    As the economic shock waves from Trump’s tariff blitz reverberated, Jonathan Chait, staff writer at the Atlantic, asked why was Trump facing sharper political attacks from his allies than he is from the putative opposition.

    Weeks of market mayhem have given Democrats an opening to challenge Republican dominance in Washington ahead of next year’s midterm elections. A recent Morning Consult poll showed Democrats, for the first time in four-years, enjoying a three percentage point advantage (46% to 43%) over Republicans on economic competency.

    Democrats will have greater leverage if Trump’s tariff policies lead to inflation, and prices rising or even a recession.

    There’s just over 18 months until the next set of national elections in the US. In that time Democrats face the challenge of reconnecting with voters.

    Leah Greenberg, co-founder of the progressive grassroots organisation, Indivisible, gave an ominous judgement of the party’s current predicament, stating there have been “a lot of episodes over the last few months that have really soured people on whether the Democratic Party has … a clear assessment of the danger it’s facing right now”.

    This warning aside, three elections held at the beginning of April gave Democrats cause for some optimism. In a contest for a Wisconsin Supreme Court seat, the Trump-backed candidate, who was supported financially by the president’s ally Elon Musk, lost by a significant margin in a state that Trump won last November.

    In two congressional races in Florida, while the Republicans held both seats, results were far closer than those seen two years ago, signalling some disapproval of Republican policy.

    Elaine Kamarck, a Brookings fellow, believes that the large demonstrations that have sprung up around the country over the past months have started to alter the mood within the Democratic party, and that’s something they can build on.

    Richard Hargy does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. What have the Democrats achieved in Trump’s first 100 days? – https://theconversation.com/what-have-the-democrats-achieved-in-trumps-first-100-days-255139

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: From withheld cancer drugs to postcode lotteries in treatment: why people in police custody are missing vital medications

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Gethin Rees, Senior Lecturer in Sociology, Newcastle University

    NottmCity/Shutterstock

    When someone is taken into police custody, they don’t lose their basic rights, including access to healthcare. But new research suggests that, for many people detained by police in England, getting the care they need can be anything but straightforward.

    Our research investigated healthcare provision inside police custody suites and uncovered a troubling reality: people held in custody often face long delays in receiving vital treatments. In some cases, they’re denied their medication altogether – even when they have serious health conditions.

    This isn’t just a bureaucratic hiccup. These delays and denials can pose real risks to people’s health and wellbeing, especially for those already living with chronic conditions or acute mental health issues.

    Healthcare inside police custody isn’t always provided by the NHS. Instead, police forces across England commission providers through a competitive tender process. These providers then employ healthcare professionals who are responsible for treating detainees and responding to emergencies.

    But our research found that the system doesn’t always work as it should. In many cases, the healthcare professionals are not based full-time at custody suites. Instead, one professional may be expected to cover several sites, often dozens of miles apart. It’s not unusual for a healthcare professional to be responsible for multiple suites spread over 50 miles or more.

    That means when someone in custody needs medical attention – say, for prescribed medication – the healthcare professional may not be there. And even if they are, they’re likely to be balancing demands from several locations and having to try to prioritise those people that need attention most urgently. This triage process, while necessary under current conditions, can result in significant and dangerous delays.

    Delays, denials and disbelief

    Delays are often compounded by another issue: distrust.

    Our data – including interviews with healthcare staff, police officers and people with lived experience – showed that many custody staff are deeply sceptical about detainees’ claims regarding their medication. There’s a strong concern that detainees might be seeking drugs or exaggerating their needs, which leads to staff adopting a highly cautious approach.

    In practice, this means that detainees are often made to wait at least six hours before receiving any medication – because they need to wait until they can be sure that any drugs taken before arrest will have metabolised. This practice is aimed at reducing the risk of overdose, but has been criticised by experts, including the Faculty of Forensic and Legal Medicine, a charity founded by the Royal College of Physicians. It also paints every detainee as dishonest by default.

    Across interviews and custody logs, research found repeated examples of vulnerable people missing doses of medication – whether for mental health, diabetes, or pain management.
    Andrii Spy_k/Shutterstock

    Even when people bring their own prescribed medicine, officers and staff may refuse to administer it unless it’s in its original box with the full pharmacy label – a condition that many can’t meet, especially if they were arrested suddenly.

    One person we interviewed described being detained while undergoing treatment for cancer. Despite explaining his situation, he was left without his medication.

    I can live with not having food for a couple of hours, but you can’t live with not having your medication when you’re due it … They had to take me to hospital to make sure I was all right.

    His experience was not an outlier. Across interviews and custody logs, we saw repeated examples of vulnerable people missing doses of medication – whether for mental health, diabetes, or pain management – because the system either didn’t believe them or wasn’t equipped to help them in time.

    Closing the care gap

    Based on our findings, we made a series of recommendations to improve healthcare in police custody. Two are critical to ensure that detainees receive timely access to essential medications.

    First, every custody suite should have a dedicated healthcare professional embedded on site. This would significantly reduce delays in treatment, ensuring that detainees are promptly assessed and cared for by qualified clinicians.

    Second, standardise the list of available medications across all providers police custody healthcare. A universal list of approved treatments would ensure consistency and fairness, no matter where someone is detained.

    These recommendations have already been echoed by the Independent Custody Visitors Association and the Faculty of Forensic and Legal Medicine. Implementing them could make a real difference to people’s safety and dignity during custody.

    Police custody is often a place of crisis. It receives some of society’s most vulnerable people – those experiencing mental illness, substance use issues, homelessness, or poverty.

    These are people who already face barriers to healthcare in daily life. Detention shouldn’t become another one.

    Timely, appropriate, and compassionate care isn’t just something that is nice to have. It’s a human right. And right now, in too many custody suites, that right is being denied.

    Gethin Rees receives funding from the Economic and Social Research Council.

    – ref. From withheld cancer drugs to postcode lotteries in treatment: why people in police custody are missing vital medications – https://theconversation.com/from-withheld-cancer-drugs-to-postcode-lotteries-in-treatment-why-people-in-police-custody-are-missing-vital-medications-255054

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI: Torrey Jacoby Joins Rate as Vice President of Mortgage in Houston

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    CHICAGO, April 28, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Rate, a leader in fintech mortgage solutions, welcomes Torrey Jacoby to Rate as Vice President of Mortgage, based in Houston. A top 1% originator both locally and nationally, Torrey brings more than a decade of experience and a track record of consistent production—closing over $62 million in 2024 alone. As Rate continues to grow in Texas and nationwide, Torrey’s customer-first approach and deep roots in the Houston market are a strong match for our fintech-powered, loan officer–driven model.

    “I’ve always believed that customer service is the foundation of long-term success in this business,” said Jacoby. “That’s how you earn referrals for life. After seven great years at my previous company, I knew it was time to make a move to a platform built for top producers, with the tools and support to take things to the next level.”

    Torrey began his mortgage career in Houston in 2011, shortly after graduating from Pepperdine University and moving from California. He has been a President’s Club winner for the past 10 years and has built his business on trust, responsiveness, and results. He lives in Houston with his wife, Victoria (Tori), and their two children, Hudson (5) and Georgie (2).

    “Torrey represents exactly the kind of leadership and production mindset we value at Rate,” said Todd Heaton, EVP and Western Divisional Manager for Rate. “He’s a powerhouse originator who’s built his business on relationships and repeat referrals. We’re proud to have him on board.”

    About Rate

    Rate Companies is a leader in mortgage lending and digital financial services. Headquartered in Chicago, Rate has over 850 branches across all 50 states and Washington D.C. Since its launch in 2000, Rate has helped more than 2 million homeowners with home purchase loans and refinances. The company has cemented itself as an industry leader by introducing innovative technology, offering low rates, and delivering unparalleled customer service.

    Honors and awards include Best Mortgage Lender for First-Time Homebuyers by NerdWallet for 2023; HousingWire’s Tech100 award for the company’s industry-leading FlashClose℠ digital mortgage platform in 2020, MyAccount in 2022, and Language Access Program in 2023; the most Scotsman Guide Top Originators for 11 consecutive years; Chicago Agent Magazine’s Lender of the Year for seven consecutive years; and Chicago Tribune’s Top Workplaces list for seven straight years.

    Visit rate.com for more information.

    Media Contact

    press@rate.com

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: ARRAY Technologies Names Brian Pitel General Manager, Latin America

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    ALBUQUERQUE, N.M., April 28, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — ARRAY Technologies (NASDAQ: ARRY) (“ARRAY” or the “Company”), a leading provider of tracker solutions and services for utility-scale solar energy projects, has named Brian Pitel as its general manager, Latin America. He will be based in São Paulo, Brazil.

    With a career spanning more than two decades across technology and renewable energy in the Brazilian and Latin American markets, Pitel brings deep expertise in the local markets and regulatory environments. His track record of growing business operations through strategic partnerships led to his ascension at General Electric (GE), where he began as a senior sourcing and logistics manager before becoming general manager of its Latin America branch.

    “Brian’s impressive background in the energy sector combined with his expertise in the Brazilian and Latin American markets made him the perfect fit to lead ARRAY’s growth objectives in the region,” said Neil Manning, President and Chief Operating Officer at ARRAY. “He has an ability to anticipate trends and manage business relationships, which will help us expand our global footprint and reinforce our leadership in renewable energy innovation.”

    Pitel will oversee all of ARRAY’s operations in Brazil and Latin America, fostering efficiency, compliance, and alignment with regional and global objectives. He will play a critical role in supporting existing customers and exploring new market opportunities as ARRAY continues its mission to provide smart, sustainable, and cost-effective solar energy solutions.

    “The solar industry is entering a pivotal moment as we work to realize the impact of recent investments, and I admire ARRAY’s dedication to advancing clean energy across Latin America,” said Pitel. “I look forward to working with the leadership team to drive strategic growth in the region and shape the next generation of solar tracking solutions.”

    Since 2024, Pitel had served as senior advisor and new business development leader at Grupo GA230, a Brazilian manufacturer of components for the oil and gas and renewable energy sectors. He was previously at GE, managing its Latin America supply chain before rising to a general manager position in 2020. Pitel began his career at United Technologies Corporation, starting as a sourcing specialist and eventually relocated to Brazil to lead materials management and logistics at the UTC Otis Elevator factory in Sao Paulo. Pitel graduated from the University of Minnesota and has master’s degrees from RPI Lally School of Management and Purdue University.

    About ARRAY
    ARRAY Technologies (NASDAQ: ARRY) is a leading global provider of solar tracking technology to utility-scale and distributed generation customers who construct, develop, and operate solar PV sites. With solutions engineered to withstand the harshest weather conditions, ARRAY’s high-quality solar trackers, software platforms and field services combine to maximize energy production and deliver value to our customers for the entire lifecycle of a project. Founded and headquartered in the United States, ARRAY is rooted in manufacturing and driven by technology – relying on its domestic manufacturing, diversified global supply chain, and customer-centric approach to design, deliver, commission, train, and support solar energy deployment around the world. For more news and information on ARRAY, please visit arraytechinc.com.

    Forward Looking Statements
    This press release contains forward-looking statements. These statements are not historical facts but rather are based on the Company’s current expectations and projections regarding its business, operations and other factors relating thereto. Words such as “may,” “will,” “could,” “would,” “should,” “anticipate,” “predict,” “potential,” “continue,” “expects,” “intends,” “plans,” “projects,” “believes,” “estimates” and similar expressions are used to identify these forward-looking statements. These statements are only predictions and as such are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to predict. Actual results may differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors. Forward-looking statements should be evaluated together with the risks and uncertainties that affect our business and operations, particularly those described in more detail in the Company’s most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and other documents on file with the SEC, each of which can be found on our website www.arraytechinc.com. Except as required by law, we assume no obligation to update these forward-looking statements, or to update the reasons actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements, even if new information becomes available in the future.

    Media Contact
    Nicole Stewart
    505-589-8257
    nicole.stewart@arraytechinc.com

    Investor Relations
    ARRAY Technologies, Inc.
    Investor Relations
    investors@arraytechinc.com

    The MIL Network –