Strong Museum of Play faces $500K shortfall from funding cuts
In a newsletter sent out Tuesday, Vice President for Collections and Chief Curator Chris Bensch said the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) and Institute of Museum and Library Services, which provides nearly half a million dollars, were terminated suddenly.
'These sudden terminations have left the museum with an unprecedented half-million dollar shortfall for projects designed to serve children, families, researchers, and scholars — including a critical collections care initiative and a new, one-of-a-kind exhibit dedicated to exploring the history and cultural impact of game shows.'
The Strong credits the grants to have helped develop new exhibits and initiatives, and are asking for the public's help to 'sustain core museum programs in the face of losing future federal funding opportunities.'
On Tuesday, New York Attorney Letitia James won a court order stopping the Trump administration from dismantling three federal agencies — including IMLS.
News 8 asked The Strong if the court order would change funding impacts, to which a spokesperson said, 'We haven't received any communication about how this court order might affect our canceled grants, and we're just starting to research and try to understand its implications.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
21 hours ago
- New York Post
Letitia James Gaza letter failed to mention Hamas — until New York Post called
New York State Attorney General Letitia James quietly circulated a petition Saturday to other Democrats pushing an end to the 'humanitarian catastrophe' in Gaza that failed to mention Hamas — until The Post came calling. An early draft of the petition circulated to multiple elected officials and obtained by The Post did not condemn Hamas terrorists for the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. 'We are united in this moment by a truth we can no longer ignore: a famine is unfolding in Gaza before the eyes of the world,' according to the draft, which claimed to be on behalf of a 'coalition of multiracial, multiethnic, and multifaith elected officials.' New York State Attorney General Letitia James quietly circulated a petition Saturday to other Democrats pushing an end to the 'humanitarian catastrophe' in Gaza that failed to mention Hamas terrorist's role in the crisis — until The Post came calling. KEVIN C DOWNS 'There is no denying it—we are witnessing a humanitarian catastrophe …' the petition added. 'We urge our fellow Americans to speak out, to support relief efforts, and to demand that our leaders use every tool of diplomacy to end this crisis. History will remember what we did, or failed to do, in this moment.' James' office initially declined to comment on Saturday when The Post reached out about the original draft of the letter. Hours later, the AG's office sent out a news release with a new version of the letter calling for 'immediate' aid to Gaza — and condemning the terrorist group. 'We are united in this moment by both condemning the October 7th massacre perpetrated by Hamas and an unavoidable truth: a famine is unfolding in Gaza before the eyes of the world.' An early draft of the petition circulated to multiple elected officials and obtained by The Post did not condemn Hamas terrorists for the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. AP More than 60 Democratic federal, state and city elected officials signed onto the petition, including Rep. Jerold Nadler and NYC Comptroller Brad Lander. Anti-Israel Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani, a Queens socialist who James is endorsing in November's NYC mayoral election, was not among the letter's signatories but is vacationing in Uganda through the end of the month. Councilwoman Inna Vernikov (D-Brooklyn) ripped the original draft of the letter through a spokesperson. 'New York is being run by a cabal of leftist Hamas apologists who would rather shield terrorists than speak the truth,' Vernikov's rep said. 'Any acknowledgment of a humanitarian crisis without addressing its cause — a terrorist regime that uses civilians as human shields — is dishonest. Ignoring that reality isn't compassion; it's complicity,' the spokesperson added. State Assemblyman Charles Fall, a Democrat representing parts of Staten Island, and Brooklyn and Lower Manhattan, told The Post he signed on to the letter because the Gaza crisis is a 'humanitarian issue.' 'People are hurting, starving. Think about the kids,' said Fall, who has two daughters, ages 6 and 11. 'The letter is balanced. It talks about the hostages.'
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Unfrozen: White House releases remaining $5B for K-12 programs
This story was originally published on K-12 Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily K-12 Dive newsletter. The Trump administration will release the remaining fiscal year 2025 K-12 grant funds that it had frozen — nearly $5 billion — to states and districts, the Office of Management and Budget confirmed Friday. The funding for student academic supports, English learners, immigrant students and teacher training was supposed to be available July 1, but was not released pending a "programmatic review" by OMB, the White House's budget arm. That review was to ensure the grants align with Trump administration policies and priorities, OMB told K-12 Dive earlier this month. The office had said initial findings showed "many of these grant programs have been grossly misused to subsidize a radical leftwing agenda.' On Friday, a senior administration official told K-12 Dive in an email, "Guardrails are in place to ensure these funds will not be used in violation of Executive Orders or administration policy." Earlier this week, OMB began releasing $1.3 billion it had withheld for after-school and summer programming under the 21st Century Community Learning Centers grant, according to the Afterschool Alliance. The remaining funds to be released are: $2.2 billion for Title II-A for professional development. $1.4 billion for Title IV-A for student support and academic enrichment. $890 million for Title III-A for English-learner services. $375 million for Title I-C for migrant education. Education officials, Republican and Democratic lawmakers, education organizations, parents and nonprofits had all urged OMB to release the funds that were approved by Congress in an appropriations bill that President Donald Trump signed in March. They said the weekslong delay in accessing the money was already causing "budgetary chaos" for schools, which began cancelling contracts, laying off staff and eliminating programs when the funds didn't arrive as scheduled. The disruption also spurred two lawsuits. A survey by AASA, the School Superintendents Association, found that nearly 30% of districts said they needed access to the withheld funds by Aug. 1 to avoid cutting programs and services for students. By Aug. 15, survey respondents said they would have to notify parents and educators about the loss of programs and services. The survey was conducted earlier this month and drew responses from 628 superintendents in 43 states. On Friday, David Schuler, AASA's executive director, said in a statement that he was pleased the "critical" funds would now be available to schools. Sen Patty Murray, D-Wash., vice chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said in a statement Friday, "There is no good reason for the chaos and stress this president has inflicted on students, teachers, and parents across America for the last month, and it shouldn't take widespread blowback for this administration to do its job and simply get the funding out the door that Congress has delivered to help students." Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, addressed the news during a keynote speech Friday at the Together Educating America's Children conference in Washington, D.C., according to a press release. "Today, they backed down: our lobbying, our lawsuits, and our advocacy for why these funds matter to kids, it worked." Weingarten said. Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association, said in a Friday statement, "These reckless funding delays have undermined planning, staffing, and support services at a time when schools should be focused on preparing students for success.' Recommended Reading Lawsuit adds pressure on Trump administration to release K-12 funds Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Forbes
3 days ago
- Forbes
How President Trump's 'AI Action Plan' May Impact Corporate Boards
getty The July 23 release of President Trump's comprehensive 'Winning the AI Race: America's AI Action Plan' presents technology opportunities and challenges for corporate leadership. On the one hand, the Plan commits the Administration to the admirable goal of expediting American efforts to establish global leadership in artificial intelligence and its critical infrastructure. On the other hand, its plan to achieve this goal by limiting what it regards as burdensome government regulation may prompt corporate leaders to compensate by adding new, more comprehensive internal risk-related guardrails. The Plan encompasses over 90 Federal policy actions across three policy pillars – 'Accelerating Innovation', 'Building American AI Infrastructure', and 'Leading in International Diplomacy and Security' – that will be rolled out by the Trump Administration over time. The pillars focus on exporting American AI; promoting the rapid buildout of data centers; removing 'onerous' Federal regulations that hinder AI development and deployment and updating Federal procurement guidelines to ensure that artificial intelligence models procured by the Federal government prioritize truthfulness and ideological neutrality. The New York Times described the Action Plan as 'opening the door for companies to develop the technology unfettered from oversight and safeguards', while assuring that A.I. be free of 'partisan bias.' The perception of the Plan is that in order for America to achieve global pre-eminence in AI, its development must not be hindered by a broad regulatory scheme. This represents a change in approach by the United States and reflects a departure from the approach of other governments (e.g., the European Commission) to implement regulatory standards for AI. Simultaneously with the rollout of the Action Plan, President Trump signed three related Executive Orders: one prohibiting the federal government from purchasing AI tools it perceives as ideologically slanted; another accelerating certain AI infrastructure projects and a third relating to the exporting of American-developed AI products. Corporate boards are likely to follow two parallel paths in responding to the AI Action Plan. One path could involve thorough conversations between the board and management concerning the impact of the Plan on the company's AI strategy. These conversations will likely focus on establishing internal mechanisms to monitor the roll-out of the Plan, and on identifying opportunities under the Plan to enhance the company's approach to AI acquisition and deployment. The other, more challenging path could also involve board/management conversations, but on the opposite end of the spectrum ‒ whether the limited commitment to federal AI regulation could create increased liability and reputational exposure for the company. Any such conversation would be grounded in an honest self-evaluation of the current degree of board proficiency in artificial intelligence related matters. Is the board prepared to accelerate and monitor the company's use of AI? In such an exercise, the National Association of Corporate Directors' 2024 Blue Ribbon Commission Report, 'Technology Leadership in the Boardroom' might be an effective measuring stick. The more direct conversations about liability and risk would evaluate the need to enhance the board's AI oversight mechanisms and whether to add specific review standards in order to assure reliability, safety and trust. In addition, the board may consider whether additional oversight may be necessary in order to responsibly manage issues historically associated with 'irresponsible use' of AI (e.g. societal harms such as fraud, discrimination, bias, and disinformation; anti-competitive behavior, and the displacement and disempowerment of workers). The board will also likely consult with its advisors on whether to expand compliance programming to address possible government enforcement policies regarding the objectivity of AI systems in general, and their possible treatment of such controversial topics as diversity, equity and inclusion, climate change and misinformation. The board's pursuit of this parallel path will most certainly require an investment of time, review, evaluation, internal discussion and external consultation beyond that which it may already be contributing to AI. The ultimate governance question arising from the AI Action plan is whether boards will find it necessary to compensate for the absence of comprehensive AI regulation with increased internal oversight ‒ and whether it can do so without creating an expensive internal bureaucracy.
