This report details reported and cleared violent crime offenses among tribally operated law enforcement agencies using data from the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics and the Federal Bureau of Investigation's National Incident-Based Reporting System. Key findings include that tribally operated law enforcement agencies reported 3,780 violent crime offenses in 2023, an 11% decline from the 4,250 reported in 2022. In addition, the number of rape offenses reported by tribally operated law enforcement agencies declined 23% from 540 in 2022 to 410 in 2023. The numbers of homicides, robberies, and aggravated assaults reported in 2023 was not significantly different from 2022. In addition, in 2023, 55% of total violent crime offenses were cleared by tribally operated law enforcement agencies compared to 54% in 2024. Lastly, the percentage of cleared homicide offenses declined from 61% in 2022 to 42% in 2023. Similarly, the percentage of robbery offenses cleared in 2023 (29%) declined from 2022 (42%).

Abuse Survivor Resentencing (ASR) offers reduced prison terms to defendants who experienced family violence or sexual abuse at the time of their crime, if they can prove that (1) the abuse experience contributed to their crime, and (2) the abuse experience was not adequately considered in the original sentence. This paper documents the emergence of ASR in the statutory landscape of the states and the federal government, explains how it works, and describes its impact thus far. These statutes vary along two principal dimensions: victimization (the range of abusive experiences that might qualify a person for consideration) and criminalization (the crimes that are eligible for resentencing). While defense attorneys and victims play some role in ASR courtroom proceedings, prosecutors tend to speak with the loudest voice. As a result, tension has arisen between broad legislative language and the operation of these statutes in actual cases, limiting the relief that petitioners have achieved so far. The paper concludes by identifying loopholes in the ASR framework and suggesting fixes , including requiring prompt hearings after petition filings and allowing appellate courts to review petitions and conduct fact-finding inquiries.

In an effort to establish common expectations for college preparedness among incoming students, some states or higher education systems have adopted common admissions policies applicable to first-time, first-year students seeking admission at four-year institutions. Statewide or systemwide admissions standards commonly include minimum measures of academic performance, including class rank, high school GPA, completion of high school coursework or standardized assessment scores. In some states, these policies apply across all public four-year institutions. In other states, they apply within a particular public higher education system. For example, states with multiple public university systems may have separate systemwide policies rather than a single statewide policy. While some states grant individual institutions autonomy over additional requirements, more than half of states require a baseline of academic standards for admission to postsecondary institutions. Florida has a common system-wide admissions policy set by the Board of Governors with some alternative opportunities for students who do not meet the system-wide requirements. Thirty states have either a statewide or systemwide admissions policy for four-year institutions. One additional state, Minnesota, has been identified since a previous comparison in 2022. Twenty-seven states’ admissions policies provide alternative opportunities for admission to students who do not meet minimum standards. Seventeen states have direct admissions policies or programs for high school students who meet certain criteria.

Public schools are facing a major set of challenges, including concerns about students’ mental health, chronic absenteeism, learning loss, high teacher attrition rates, and teacher shortages. Often policymakers, funders, leaders of education improvement efforts, and other stakeholders treat these challenges separately, developing different strategies to address each one. This fragmented approach, however, overlooks the one factor that influences all school conditions: the school principal. By virtue of their role, principals influence the experiences of every person in the school and thus play a key role in improving student and teacher outcomes. Strengthening and investing in school leadership is also an equity strategy, given that effective principals have even larger effects in schools serving students from historically underserved communities. This report, which summarizes existing research about principals’ effects, explains the importance of investing in and leveraging school leadership for mitigating the challenges currently facing schools. Principals are the single most influential factor shaping student learning, teacher retention, and school climate — making leadership investment one of the highest-leverage strategies available to policymakers seeking to improve education. Principal turnover is associated with declines in achievement and higher teacher turnover, with the heaviest impacts falling on high-poverty schools that can least afford it. Because principals influence all the issues facing public schools today, preparing and supporting principals to be best equipped to handle them is one of the best investments policymakers can make.

The Education Scorecard provides a mixed picture of American education: a post-pandemic math rebound and early signals that comprehensive literacy reforms are beginning to pay off, but signs that middle-income districts are lagging behind. The scorecard uses data from the Stanford Education Data Archive (SEDA), which links state test results for roughly 35 million grade 3–8 students in 2022–2025 to a common national scale to track district-level changes in achievement across the country. Key findings include a U-shaped recovery, with larger improvements among the highest-income and the lowest-income school districts in the country, Middle-income districts (those with between 30% and 70% of students receiving federally subsidized lunches) have seen the least improvement on average. The recovery in achievement in the highest-poverty districts seems largely driven by the federal pandemic relief funding. Without that relief, the average high-poverty district would have remained at its 2022 level of achievement. The 2025 scores offer the first signs of a turnaround in reading. After the pandemic, math achievement rebounded immediately, with the annual rate of improvement returning to pre-2013 levels in 2022–2024. In reading, however, achievement continued to decline through 2024. All of the states which improved in reading between 2022 and 2025 were implementing evidence-based reading instruction—often referred to as the “science of reading” reforms (Maryland, Louisiana, Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana, Mississippi, Montana, and District of Columbia). Nevertheless, many states that were implementing multiple elements of science of reading reforms have yet to turn around (e.g., Florida, Arizona, and Nebraska).

In Florida’s coastal areas, the tidal zone causes corrosion of steel reinforcement in bridge waterline pile cap footings, which support elements like piers and columns. This corrosion leads to costly and time consuming repairs. One potential solution is to use corrosion-resistant fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) reinforcing bars instead of steel. However, although Florida bridges typically use steel bars up to size No. 11 (1.375 in), no standards currently exist for No. 11 FRP bars. This study identifies what further research is needed to use larger FRP bars in waterline pile cap footings, develops material acceptance criteria and designs specifications for No. 11 glass FRP bars, and creates design examples to help implement these bars in practice. Researchers found that by enabling the use of larger corrosion-resistant FRP bars, this work supports improved durability and longer service life for coastal bridge foundations, potentially reducing future maintenance costs and providing economic value over the long term. In addition, researchers produced material acceptance criteria and clear design specifications for No. 11 glass FRP reinforcing bars in waterline pile cap footings to address a key gap in current practice and help bridge engineers and designers understand how to apply these new criteria in real project situations. Lastly, researchers offered recommendations for future research to expand FRP use beyond pile caps to other structural elements, including refining design and performance criteria for large-diameter FRP reinforcement.

Since 2020, city centers of many major U.S. metro areas have had sluggish population gains, with some places even declining. But where growth did occur, it was mostly on the outer edges of these metro areas — with some exceptions. The Census Bureau’s Vintage 2025 population estimates for cities and towns allow exploration where population losses and gains happened within metro areas. The authors selected a major metro area in each of the four regions — South, Northeast, Midwest and West — and analyzed how the populations have shifted during the first half of this decade. Within each metro area, the authors looked at the percent change in population between April 1, 2020, and July 1, 2025, in incorporated places (with at least 20,000 people in 2025). The four metro areas ranged in population from 3.8 million to 20 million and exemplify a variety of demographic and geographic characteristics: Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX; New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ; Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI; Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA. Analyzing population change in each confirmed growth farther from the center of metro areas was a dominant, but not universal, trend. All four metro areas had overall population gains ranging from as little as 0.1% in New York to as much as 11.0% in Dallas. But Seattle was the only one that experienced growth in its city center and inner suburbs; the others’ gains were fueled by exurban growth.

Insurance products such as standard homeowner’s insurance, flood insurance, fire insurance, and other specialized lines are a financial first line of defense, protecting homeowners and the financial institutions that lend to them from these mounting risks. But the rising cost of insurance is threatening the ability of would-be buyers to attain homeownership and, increasingly, the ability of existing homeowners to sustain it. This report explores measuring insurance cost burden, factors related to high insurance, and the demographics most impacted. Key findings include that insurance premiums rose from 1.87% in 2018 to 2.27% in 2024. In addition, the share of new mortgages where insurance premiums exceeded 3% increased from 10.5% in 2018 to 16.2% in 2024. Borrowers in high-hazard-risk areas face burdens nearly a full percentage point higher than borrowers in low-risk areas, and this gap widened between 2018 and 2024. Researchers also found that low-income borrowers pay higher insurance rates per dollar of home value—borrowers earning above 120% of the area median income pay approximately $2.10 less per $1,000 of home value than borrowers earning below 50%of the area median income. Lastly, borrowers with low credit scores, high debt-to-income ratios, and lower incomes, as well as black borrowers and Federal Housing Administration borrowers, are more likely than other borrowers to be insurance cost burdened.

The National Survey of Family Growth has measured women’s birth expectations since 1973, because this indicator is a key determinant of future family size and can be used to project U.S. birth rates. Birth expectations vary by age, number of prior live births, and other demographic characteristics. This report uses data from the 2022–2023 survey to present the most recent estimates of birth expectations by age and number of previous live births among U.S. women ages 20–49. Key findings include that during 2022−2023, nearly 60% of women ages 20–29 who had not had any live births or who had one live birth expected to have a child in the future compared with about 30% of those with two or more live births. About two in five women ages 20–29 with no prior live births did not expect to have any children in the future. As age increased, the percentage of women with one or more previous live births who expected to have another child in 2–5 years declined.

Serving as a middle option between independent living and institutional care, assisted living is playing an increasingly important role in long-term services and supports,with more older adults than ever living in assisted living communities. Today, residents in assisted living communities are older and are more likely to have dementia, amplifying the need for appropriate direct-care staffing. Many of assisted living’s challenges, such as affordability, mirror those of all long-term care settings. Others are more specific to assisted living, including limited federal government oversight and inconsistent state policy. This report examines who lives in assisted living communities, how these communities operate, and key operational and policy issues that stakeholders should understand. Now serving nearly 1 million people, assisted living is a critically important form of long-term services and supports, bridging the service gap between independent living and institutional care. The population of assisted living residents has changed over time. Almost half (44 %) of assisted living residents are diagnosed with Alzheimer’s or dementia, surpassing the rate (41%) among nursing home residents. Today, more people ages 85 and older live in assisted living than in nursing homes. Limited Medicaid coverage and high out-of-pocket costs for assisted living services make affordability an issue for most Americans. Lack of federal oversight has meant a nationwide patchwork of regulations, quality standards, and enforcement.