Melody Mann is the 2026 recipient of the DC Sociological Society Irene B. Taeuber Graduate Student Paper Award for a PhD student. Mann is a student at the University of Maryland, College Park. Her paper is ਸਾਨੰ  ਪਸ਼ਾਣੋ  “Recognize Us: Surveying the Empirical Representation of Punjabi Families’ Perceptions on Early Intervention and Disabilities.” The paper’s abstract reads, 

This mixed methods study employs a scoping review, thematic analysis, and content analysis to examine how producers of scientific knowledge treat Punjabi families in early childhood disability and special education research focused on the broader South Asian diaspora. Drawing on Critical Disability Theory, I examine how researchers engage with Punjabi families in demographic reporting, cultural contextualization, and methodological sensitivity. Findings reveal the systematic erasure of Punjabi families, with all 14 of the studies either grouping them under “South Asian” or omitting them entirely. None of the studies provided detailed Punjabi-specific demographic data, and fewer than three quarters of the studies acknowledged contextual factors. The representation of disability in a Punjabi cultural framework was limited, with one in five  studies failing to provide culturally tailored discussions of early intervention. Moreover, cultural sensitivity was inconsistent, with slightly more than one quarter of studies acknowledging cultural adaptation in their methods and discussions. The lack of disaggregated data and culturally responsive methodologies in disability and early intervention research reveals an epistemic gap and perpetuates the marginalization of Punjabi families.

Melody is an RWJF Health Policy Research Scholar, first-generation Punjabi American scholar and former classroom teacher. Melody utilizes community-centered healing, intersectionality, and the social model to sustain diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice within historically marginalized populations navigating the early phases of disabilities and services, particularly within Punjabi families.

Mann will be honored at the 2026 DCSS Awards Reception on April 30, 206. More information about the graduate student paper awards, including a list of previous winners, is available on the DCSS website.

Samantha R. DeCapua is the 2026 recipient of the DC Sociological Society Irene B. Taeuber Graduate Student Paper Award for an MA student. DeCapua is a student at The George Washington University. Her paper is “Housed but Uninhabitable: Housing Instability and its Impacts on Active-Duty Military.” The paper’s abstract reads,

Current research commonly explores experiences of housing instability among veterans, but it fails to address housing instability among active-duty service members. Poor housing quality and housing instability are linked to negative health outcomes, social disruptions, and economic instability. Thus, the current study explores two questions: (1) How do enlisted, active-duty service members experience housing instability and in what forms? (2) What are the personal and professional impacts of housing instability? Qualitative interviews were conducted with ten single active-duty military service members, who resided in barracks. The interviews revealed that service members face poor housing condition and quality, describing their barracks as “moldy,” “depressing,” and reminiscent of “an abandoned asylum.” These living conditions negatively impacted service members’ mental and physical health and work; thus, they sought other locations, such as off-post living and couch-surfing, to sleep, relax, shower and do laundry. These findings highlight the need for military housing reform for junior service members to preserve their well-being, retention and readiness.

Prior to entering her graduate program, DeCapua attended Widener University, where she studied sociology and criminal justice, and commissioned as a Second Lieutenant in the US Army. She has served on active duty for nine years, and following graduation, will join the faculty at the United States Military Academy in the Department of Behavioral Sciences and Leadership. There she will be teaching courses on families and criminology. Her research interests include the family, violence, welfare, and work. 

DeCapua will be honored at the 2026 DCSS Awards Reception on April 30, 2026. More information about the graduate student paper awards, including a list of previous winners, is available on the DCSS website.

[The post from 2/20/26 follows; an additional recent perspective is below that post]

Both Inside Higher Ed and WLRN Public Media from South Florida reported in recent weeks on a newly revised version of a textbook for the Introduction to Sociology course that is apparently being mandated for use at some Florida public colleges and universities.

According to IHE, “Compared to the original 669-page textbook, the new version is just 267 pages. Unlike the original, the state-approved version doesn’t include chapters on media and technology, global inequality, race and ethnicity, social stratification, or gender, sex and sexuality. It also scraps a section on the government-led genocide of Native Americans. And while the original uses the word ‘transgender’ 68 times and ‘racism’ 115 times, the former term appears only once in the new textbook and the latter six times.”

The WLRN article adds that, “The state decided to create the new textbook—edited by staff of the Board of Governors alongside a work group of sociologists—after the Board of Governors, which oversees higher education in Florida, determined that all of the books being used for Introduction to Sociology courses violated new academic restrictions imposed by state law.”

The WLRN article quotes Dawn Carr, a sociologist at Florida State University who participated in the state work group, as calling the textbook a “stop-gap solution. … either sociologists sat at the table to help create a new textbook, or colleges and universities across the state would be forced to remove Introduction to Sociology as a core course offered to incoming students.”

ASA Vice President Victor Ray posted an interview on his blog with Florida International University sociologist Zachary Levenson about “state censorship, how faculty are coping (or not), and how the uncertainty around what can be safely taught is designed to put faculty on edge.” (Part 2 of that interview is here.)

Another FIU sociologist, Katie Rainwater, joined Levenson to author a commentary for the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, “Florida is replacing free inquiry with political indoctrination.” 

(See a previous DCSS news item on this topic from February 2024.)

[Added 4/13/26] Additional perspective from a Florida Atlantic University faculty member and union leader, "Pre-Compliance: How They Get Us To Do It" (Mar 26, from the Higher Ed Labor United blog)]

Unbreaking is “a community-powered knowledge-making project, made by a growing collective of volunteers with experience in journalism, tech, mutual aid, government, research, and organizing.” The website publishes updates on topics such as immigration, Medicaid, medical research funding, archives and history, and "Equality at Work: Decimating the Federal Workforce."

The collective behind the site explains, "The United States is experiencing institutional collapse at a speed and scale that are difficult to understand, especially through feeds and updates that atomize our attention. We believe that mapping the damage done and its human costs — and the pushback and resilience work already underway — is necessary groundwork for building and retaining political agency." They distribute weekly newsletters that your website editor has found very thorough and informative.

Unbreaking is "making a special request right now for new volunteers to join our immigration team.  Unbreaking is run in the spirit of a mutual aid cooperative, with researchers, writers, editors, and community organizers working collaboratively to create and maintain our timelines and explainers. We welcome both experts in government as well as curious and interested observers."

[This item is an excerpt from an article from the Federation of Associations in Behavioral & Brain Sciences]

What is Happening at AHRQ?

April 9, 2026

Federal science and research agencies have faced highly publicized attacks over the past year, with the Trump administration aiming to slash budgets and restrict research. Although the scientific community has been largely successful in encouraging Congress to provide robust funding and some specific protections, many agencies continue to face enormous challenges. In particular, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) has been hit especially hard. Supporters continue to work diligently to save it.

Why is AHRQ a Target?

The agency has long been a target of Republicans, who see its research as duplicative of the work being done at and funded by other federal agencies, such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). However, the NIH mission is more on understanding organ systems and treating disease while PCORI’s research is narrower in scope, focusing primarily on patient-centered comparative clinical research. In contrast, AHRQ works on health services research (HSR) and primary care research (PCR) that explores how to best translate understanding and treatments into real-world change.

The Trump administration has also homed in on AHRQ in its mission to end so-called “woke” programs at federal agencies. In its two most recent president’s budget requests (PBRs), the administration has flagged AHRQ for significant cuts, claiming it funds research not aligned with the administration’s health priorities (i.e., Make American Healthy Again). The fiscal year 2027 (FY27) PBR states that the agency’s digital health portfolio is “harmful” (p. 23).

What is Being Done About it?

The stakeholder community has strongly pushed back against these attacks. In particular, the Friends of AHRQ — of which FABBS is a member — has advocated on the Hill for robust funding and staffing for the agency. In the final FY26 appropriations, Congress provided AHRQ with about $345 million, just a 7 percent cut, and left the agency intact, not moving any of its programs elsewhere. FY26 bill language also requires that HHS appropriately staff the agency so it can execute on the appropriations.

[Ed. note: The original article includes links to related articles and advocacy resources.]

[Original news item posted here 4/7/26 and updated 4/9. Call for action from COSSA follows]

Both Nature and Science reported on April 3, 2026 that NSF plans to eliminate its Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences (SBE) directorate based on the President's Fiscal Year 2027 budget request. Although the President's budget request typically represents only the beginning of federal spending negotiations, actions during the past year have short-circuited the usual appropriation process and resulted in widespread cuts to agencies and programs throughout the federal government.

According to the report in Nature, "The White House seeks to slash the NSF budget by nearly 55%, to $4 billion. The proposal also cuts all funding for the NSF division that funds research on the social sciences and economics. At an internal all-hands meeting on Friday, NSF leaders announced that they would dissolve the agency’s Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences directorate based on the budget request, according to two NSF staff members who shared information anonymously in order to speak freely. The NSF’s budget request to Congress states that the agency will shut down the SBE but maintain SBE “grants that align with Administration priorities, such as in behavioral and cognitive science, and all impacted employees will be transferred to other parts of the agency”." (Complete article requires subscription)

Regarding NSF, Science reports, "Each of NSF’s eight research directorates would get a cut, as would the agency’s Office of Polar Programs. And the request calls for the elimination of NSF’s Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences (SBE), which last year awarded $154 million in grants in fields including archaeology, bioanthropology, cultural anthropology, cognitive science, linguistics, and social psychology. Ongoing SBE grants that “align with Administration priorities, such as in behavioral and cognitive science,” would be moved to other parts of the agency. It proposes to separately fund one SBE project, the $44 million National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, which tracks data on U.S. competitiveness in science, technology, engineering, and math fields." [The report in Science covers multiple agencies and seems to be accessible without a subscription.]

See "A Note from COSSA" (Consortium of Social Science Associations) posted on April 7: "...this year the threat is even more serious, potentially existential for the social and behavioral science community."

Report from the Federation of Associations in Behavioral & Brain Sciences, "NSF Taking Steps to Dismantle SBE Directorate" (Apr 9)

[Updated 4/11] Call for Action from COSSA: "Tell Congress to Save NSF's Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences Directorate!" COSSA is also providing a "Save SBE Toolkit" and other resources. See also the notice from the American Political Science Association (Apr 10). Also, Statement from Computing Research Association (CRA) (Apr 9).

[4/9/26] American Statistical Association comments to USDA in response to its call for input on opportunities, challenges, and emerging areas in statistical data, analysis, and research. [PDF]

[Original post 4/1/26]

From the IPUMS Center for Data Integration

Federal Register Notice: USDA Statistical Products

Comment period ends April 9

"IPUMS users may be interested in this request for information from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in the Federal Register focused on the USDA’s statistical and economic products. Among its statistical products, USDA provides standardized food security survey modules for broad use and, until recently, sponsored collection of food security data via the Current Population Survey (CPS) and National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) (see our blog on food security in U.S. federal data to learn more). This request for information is an opportunity to respond to the termination of these data collection efforts and to describe their importance to your work."

U.S. Census Bureau to Conduct Pilot With U.S. Postal Service for 2026 Operational Test

MARCH 23, 2026 — "The U.S. Census Bureau last month announced it has modified its 2026 Census Test sites to Huntsville, Alabama, and Spartanburg, South Carolina. These sites were selected to give the Census Bureau the opportunity to explore how working with the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) could increase effectiveness and how to improve in-field enumeration processes for the 2030 Census.

"Starting on May 1, the Census Bureau will invite approximately 154,600 households in Spartanburg and Huntsville to respond to the test online in English only via computer, smartphone and tablet. Phone and mail responses will not be offered."

See the complete 3/23/26 announcement on the Census website

See coverage from the Associated Press (note the final paragraph) and earlier coverage from NPR.

See the previous DCSS post providing information on the process leading up to this test.

From the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA)

Urge Congress to Prioritize Robust Science Funding!

"Congressional appropriators are preparing legislation that will determine funding for federal science and statistical agencies for the next year (FY 2027). With recent attacks on the scientific research enterprise—including funding cuts, grant delays/cancellations, reorganization proposals, abrupt terminations, and mass layoffs— it is essential that our community fights for federal science funding and the scientific workforce. The stakes have never been higher.
 
"Now is the time to write to your Members of Congress to urge that they prioritize funding in FY 2027 for research and statistics by supporting increased appropriations for the National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, Institute of Education Sciences, National Institute of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Census Bureau, International Education and Foreign Language Programs, and the federal statistical system."

Read more and take action in the COSSA Action Center

[Update, 3/25/26] Authors Guild: "Bartz v. Anthropic Settlement: What Authors Need to Know" IMPORTANT: The Claims Deadline Is March 30

"Make sure to file a claim even if your publisher is filing one. You could be entitled to approximately $3,000 for each of your books that is included in the Works List if you are a sole copyright owner or approximately $1,500 if you have a publisher (with certain exceptions)"

Original post from 8/23/25

"Earlier this summer, a federal court in California issued a major ruling in Bartz v. Anthropic, one of the copyright class action lawsuits involving AI. The court held that a trial should occur over whether Anthropic’s downloading of millions of books from the pirate websites Library Genesis (“LibGen”) and Pirate Library Mirror (“PiLiMi”) infringed the rights of copyright holders. (It also held that Anthropic’s use of books to train AI was fair use, a holding with which the Authors Guild disagrees.) On July 17, the court certified a class comprised of legal and beneficial owners of the rights in copyright-registered books downloaded by Anthropic from these sites.

"It is important to remember that this case is a class action, a special kind of lawsuit allowed under federal law to address the claims of a large group commonly harmed by a defendant’s conduct. Here, the conduct at issue is Anthropic’s mass downloading and retention of books from pirate websites.

"The Authors Guild is helping to coordinate publicity about the class action through various other creators’ groups to make sure that all authors whose books were illegally downloaded by Anthropic are notified. 

"You do not need to do anything to be a member of the class. But to help ensure that you receive notices relating to your participation in the suit (including the opportunity to opt out of it), you should provide your current contact information and book titles to the court-appointed class counsel at the class action website."