“In a space that is just completely flooded with bulls**t and with fakers and self-promoters, I think that has actually been a superpower.”
Crypto venture capital firm Dragonfly Capital has closed its fourth fund at $650 million.
The fund comes as the broader cryptocurrency market faces a severe downturn, with token prices declining and investor enthusiasm weakened.
$650 Million Fund
Dragonfly’s previous fund, its third, deployed $500 million into startups such as Polymarket, Rain, and Ethena. The new $650 million vehicle aims to continue that trajectory and will provide capital for the firm to pursue early-stage investments at a time when the crypto venture sector is experiencing a slowdown as deal activity declines and firms face challenges in raising additional capital from investors, according to Fortune.
Speaking about the latest development, co-founder Haseeb Qureshi commented,
“We talk out loud and we say what we think. In a space that is just completely flooded with bulls**t and with fakers and self-promoters, I think that has actually been a superpower.”
The firm’s investments have included Layer 1 blockchain projects such as Avalanche, financial services firms like Amber Group, and other crypto projects. Besides, Dragonfly’s operations have continued through multiple market disruptions, such as the collapse of the Terra Luna ecosystem, the FTX bankruptcy, and a move away from China amid a local crypto crackdown.
Scrutiny Linked to Tornado Cash Investment
It has also faced regulatory scrutiny from the Department of Justice (DOJ). In July 2025, prosecutors informed a federal judge that they were considering criminal charges against employees of the crypto venture firm, including general partner Tom Schmidt, in relation to the 2020 investment in Tornado Cash.
The statement was made by prosecutor Nathan Rehn to District Judge Katherine Polk Failla of the Southern District of New York during a break in the trial of Tornado Cash developer Roman Storm, who was later convicted of operating an unlicensed money transmission. Dragonfly co-founder Haseeb Qureshi clarified that the firm has fully cooperated with the government investigation, which began in 2023. He had then stated that if charges are filed, they intend to defend themselves.
You may also like:
The Justice Department later backtracked, and no charges were filed against Schmidt.
SPECIAL OFFER (Exclusive)
SECRET PARTNERSHIP BONUS for CryptoPotato readers: Use this link to register and unlock $1,500 in exclusive BingX Exchange rewards (limited time offer).
WASHINGTON (AP) — A shutdown for the Department of Homeland Security appeared certain Thursday as lawmakers in the House and Senate were set to leave Washington for a 10-day break and negotiations with the White House over Democrats’ demands for new restrictions had stalled.
Democrats and the White House have traded offers in recent days as the Democrats have said they want curbs on President Donald Trump’s broad campaign of immigration enforcement. They have demanded better identification for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other federal law enforcement officers, a new code of conduct for those agencies and more use of judicial warrants, among other requests.
The White House sent its latest proposal late Wednesday, but Trump told reporters on Thursday that some of the Democratic demands would be “very, very hard to approve.”
Democrats said the White House offer, which was not made public, did not include sufficient curbs on ICE after two protesters were fatally shot last month. The offer was “not serious,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Thursday, after the Senate rejected a bill to fund the department.
Americans want accountability and “an end to the chaos,” Schumer said. “The White House and congressional Republicans must listen and deliver.”
Lawmakers in both chambers were on notice to return to Washington if the two sides struck a deal to end the expected shutdown. Sen. Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, told reporters that Democrats would send the White House a counterproposal over the weekend.
Impact of a shutdown Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said after the vote that a shutdown appeared likely and “the people who are not going to be getting paychecks” will pay the price.
The impact of a DHS shutdown is likely to be minimal at first. It would not likely block any of the immigration enforcement operations, as Trump’s tax and spending cut bill passed last year gave ICE about $75 billion to expand detention capacity and bolster enforcement operations.
But the other agencies in the department — including the Transportation Security Administration, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Secret Service and the Coast Guard — could take a bigger hit over time.
Gregg Phillips, an associate administrator at FEMA, said at a hearing this week that its disaster relief fund has sufficient balances to continue emergency response activities during a shutdown, but would become seriously strained in the event of a catastrophic disaster.
Phillips said that while the agency continues to respond to threats like flooding and winter storms, long-term planning and coordination with state and local partners will be “irrevocably impacted.”
Trump defends officer masking Trump, who has remained largely silent during the bipartisan talks, noted Thursday that a recent court ruling rejected a ban on masks for federal law enforcement officers.
“We have to protect our law enforcement,” Trump told reporters.
Democrats made the demands for new restrictions on ICE and other federal law enforcement after ICU nurse Alex Pretti was shot and killed by a U.S. Border Patrol officer in Minneapolis on Jan. 24. Renee Good was shot by ICE agents on Jan. 7.
Trump agreed to a Democratic request that the Homeland Security bill be separated from a larger spending measure that became law last week. That package extended Homeland Security funding at current levels only through Friday.
Schumer and House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York have said they want immigration officers to remove their masks, to show identification and to better coordinate with local authorities. They have also demanded a stricter use-of-force policy for the federal officers, legal safeguards at detention centers and a prohibition on tracking protesters with body-worn cameras.
Democrats also say Congress should end indiscriminate arrests and require that before a person can be detained, authorities have verified that the person is not a U.S. citizen.
Thune suggested there were potential areas of compromise, including on masks. There could be contingencies “that these folks aren’t being doxed,” Thune said. “I think they could find a landing place.”
But Republicans have been largely opposed to most of the items on the Democrats’ list, including a prohibition on masks.
Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., said Republicans who have pushed for stronger immigration enforcement would benefit politically from the Democratic demands.
“So if they want to have that debate, we’ll have that debate all they want,” said Schmitt.
Judicial warrants a sticking point Thune, who has urged Democrats and the White House to work together, indicated that another sticking point is judicial warrants.
“The issue of warrants is going to be very hard for the White House or for Republicans,” Thune said of the White House’s most recent offer. “But I think there are a lot of other areas where there has been give, and progress.”
Schumer and Jeffries have said DHS officers should not be able to enter private property without a judicial warrant and that warrant procedures and standards should be improved. They have said they want an end to “roving patrols” of agents who are targeting people in the streets and in their homes.
Most immigration arrests are carried out under administrative warrants. Those are internal documents issued by immigration authorities that authorize the arrest of a specific person but do not permit officers to forcibly enter private homes or other nonpublic spaces without consent. Traditionally, only warrants signed by judges carry that authority.
But an internal ICE memo obtained by The Associated Press last month authorizes ICE officers to use force to enter a residence based solely on a more narrow administrative warrant to arrest someone with a final order of removal, a move that advocates say collides with Fourth Amendment protections.
Far from agreement Thune, R-S.D., said were “concessions” in the White House offer. He would not say what those concessions were, though, and he acknowledged the sides were “a long ways toward a solution.”
Schumer said it was not enough that the administration had announced an end to the immigration crackdown in Minnesota that led to thousands of arrests and the fatal shootings of two protesters.
“We need legislation to rein in ICE and end the violence,” Schumer said, or the actions of the administration “could be reversed tomorrow on a whim.”
Simmering partisan tensions played out on the Senate floor immediately after the vote, as Alabama Sen. Katie Britt, the chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee that oversees Homeland Security funding, tried to pass a two-week extension of Homeland Security funding and Democrats objected.
Britt said Democrats were “posturing” and that federal employees would suffer for it. “I’m over it!” she yelled.
Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy, the top Democrat on the Homeland spending subcommittee, responded that Democrats “want to fund the Department of Homeland Security, but only a department that is obeying the law.”
“This is an exceptional moment in this country’s history,” Murphy said.
Colorado filed a lawsuit Wednesday to prevent the Trump administration from canceling more than $20 million in grants for public health.
On Monday, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services notified Congress it wouldn’t pay $600 million worth of grants already awarded in Colorado, California, Illinois and Minnesota — all states led by Democratic governors.
Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser’s office said the existing grants totaled about $22 million, and the cuts would reduce Colorado’s public health funding in the future by an estimated $4 million.
The funding comes through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and goes toward developing the public health infrastructure and workforce, as well as finding and preventing sexually transmitted infections.
The grants go to all states, and the federal government hasn’t explained why it only cut them for four state. An HHS spokesperson said the grants targeted for cuts don’t align with the administration’s priorities.
The suing states argued that the cuts are illegal because they are “arbitrary and capricious,” and meant to punish states with leadership opposed to President Donald Trump.
“The president has repeatedly threatened to cut off federal funds to Colorado for purely political reasons,” Weiser said in a news release. “The abrupt termination of CDC funds would have immediate and irreversible impacts on Colorado’s public health system and critical services for communities across the state.”
US-headquartered companies captured 55% of Q4 crypto VC capital.
Crypto and blockchain venture capital witnessed a sharp rebound in Q4 2025, driven predominantly by large late-stage deals. Galaxy Digital’s report, authored by Alex Thorn, Head of Firmwide Research, found that venture capitalists deployed $8.5 billion across 425 deals in the quarter – an 84% increase in capital invested and a 2.6% rise in deal count compared to Q3 2025.
This represents the strongest quarterly investment in the sector since Q2 2022, although deal counts remain well below 2021-2022 levels.
Crypto VC Surge in Q4
Thorn reported that later-stage companies captured 56% of total capital invested, while earlier-stage startups accounted for the remaining 44%, a proportion unchanged from the previous quarter.
Eleven deals in Q4 raised over $100 million each, which collectively represented $7.3 billion, or roughly 85% of the quarterly total. The largest raises included Revolut at $3 billion, Touareg Group at $1 billion, and Kraken at $800 million.
Other prominent transactions included Ripple and Tempo at $500 million each, Erebor at $350 million, MegaHoot at $300 million, Rain at $250 million, EXUGlobal and TradeAlgo at $120 million each, and RedotPay at $107 million. Across 2025, venture capitalists invested a total of $20 billion into crypto and blockchain startups through 1,660 deals, making it the largest annual investment since 2022 and more than double 2023’s total.
The Trading/Exchange/Investing/Lending category remained the largest recipient of venture capital as it drew over $5 billion, led by Revolut and Kraken, while sectors including stablecoins, AI, and blockchain infrastructure also attracted notable investment.
Pre-seed deal counts remained healthy at 23% of total deals, which means continued entrepreneurial activity, while later-stage deal share has steadily increased as the sector matured. During this quarter, median pre-money valuations climbed to $70 million, and the median deal size reached $4 million. Valuation data existed for just 10% of deals, biased toward bigger, later-stage companies.
You may also like:
Global Crypto VC
Geographically, 55% of capital went to US-headquartered companies, followed by the United Kingdom at 33%, Singapore at 2%, and Hong Kong at 1.7%. A similar pattern was seen across deal counts as well, with 43% completed by US companies, 6% in the UK, and 4% in Hong Kong.
Fundraising for crypto-focused venture funds reached $1.98 billion across 11 funds in Q4, which contributed to $8.75 billion raised for the full year, the largest since 2022. Average fund size rose to $167 million, with a median of $46 million.
SPECIAL OFFER (Exclusive)
SECRET PARTNERSHIP BONUS for CryptoPotato readers: Use this link to register and unlock $1,500 in exclusive BingX Exchange rewards (limited time offer).
Lawhive, a British startup that wants to use AI to transform the business model of law firms that perform routine legal work for individuals and small businesses, has raised $60 million in new venture capital funding to accelerate its expansion in the U.S.
The Series B funding round was led by Mitch Rales, cofounder of Danaher Corporation, the $170 billion science and technology conglomerate. Other investors included TQ Ventures, GV (formerly Google Ventures), Balderton Capital, and Jigsaw. The funding comes less than a year after Lawhive raised a $40 million Series A round.
Lawhive is not a pure software company. Instead, it is a legal services firm that employs a network of human lawyers who are assisted by a technology platform Lawhive has built. The company says this enables it to provide legal services more efficiently and at lower cost than a traditional general practice law firm. The company is among a wave of startups employing this new business model. Others include Robin AI, General Legal, Third Chair, and LegalOS. The model is distinct from other AI law startups such as Harvey, which just sell AI systems for lawyers to use.
Founded in 2020, Lawhive has built what it calls an AI operating system for consumer law. The company handles routine legal matters including family law, landlord and tenant disputes, property transactions, and consumer rights cases. Its technology automates tasks such as document drafting, legal research, case management, and client intake. It says that about 500 lawyers now work through its platform across three regulated law firms—two in the U.K. and one in Arizona.
Democratizing access to legal help
“We’re the overnight success that took five years to build,” said Pierre Proner, Lawhive’s chief executive. The company’s annual revenue now exceeds $35 million and has grown seven-fold in the past year, according to Proner.
Lawhive is targeting what it says is a large and underserved segment of the legal market—the kind of general legal services that individuals and small businesses need. The company estimates that the consumer legal market in the U.S. generates about $200 billion in revenue annually, but that there is an even larger potential market.
“There’s a $200 billion existing market, but there’s a trillion dollars of unmet need, of people who have serious legal problems every year who can’t afford an attorney,” Proner said.
Rales, who built Danaher into one of the world’s most successful industrial companies over four decades, said in a statement that he was drawn to Lawhive’s mission of making legal services more accessible. “Lawhive is democratizing legal services,” he said.
A can’t beat ’em, join ’em pivot
Lawhive started out trying to sell automation software to traditional retail law firms, but Proner said many small firms were reluctant to buy. He said lawyers at these firms were skeptical about adopting the technology, partly out of concern that spending less time on cases would make it harder to justify their fees to clients, even though many of these firms already charged fixed fees rather than using a model based on billable hours.
So Lawhive pivoted and decided to become a law firm itself, Proner said. He said this allowed Lawhive to “reimagine” the design of the law firm from the ground up, with AI at the heart of how the firm operates both in terms of producing legal work but also doing back office tasks such as invoicing and client onboarding. He says that in many small law firms these tasks account for up to 70% of the firm’s costs. He contrasted Lawhive’s approach with other legal AI companies that “are effectively designing software around how lawyers in law firms work. We’re doing the opposite.”
Proner said lawyers working through Lawhive earn as much as 2.8 times what they would make at a traditional practice, because they can handle a far greater volume of cases. Consumer lawyers often juggle 80 to 200 clients at a time, and the AI tools allow them to move through that caseload more efficiently.
For routine legal work, such as filing an uncontested divorce application, Proner said Lawhive’s technology allows for “almost full autonomy,” with human lawyers simply reviewing the filings for quality control.
While there have been several high profile cases of lawyers been castigated by judges and issued hefty fines for submitting filings containing erroneous case citations due to errors made by AI software, he said that Lawhive has tried to design its AI software to minimize the chances of such mistakes. When the system is uncertain about something, it flags the issue for human review, Proner said. And for more complex disputes that require more judgment calls, the AI plays a more supportive role, he said.
After starting in the U.K., Lawhive launched in the U.S. last year and now operates in 35 states, with plans to expand nationwide. The company has offices in Austin, Texas, and is opening a new headquarters in New York.
The company plans to use the new funding primarily for U.S. expansion, Proner said. He said the company’s ambition is to grow another five- to sevenfold this year.
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump implored the House on Monday to end the partial government shutdown, but neither Republicans nor Democrats appeared ready to quickly approve the federal funding package he brokered with the Senate without first debating their own demands over immigration enforcement operations.
Democrats are refusing to provide the votes House Speaker Mike Johnson needs to push the package forward as they try to rein in the Trump administration’s deportation operations after the shooting deaths of two Americans in Minneapolis. That’s forcing Johnson to rely on his slim GOP majority, which has its own complaints about the package, to fall in line behind Trump’s deal with Senate Democrats.
Voting is expected to begin as soon as Tuesday, which would be day four of the partial shutdown. The Pentagon, Homeland Security and other agencies saw their funding lapse Saturday. And while many operations at those departments are deemed essential, and still functioning, some workers may go without pay or be furloughed.
“We need to get the Government open, and I hope all Republicans and Democrats will join me in supporting this Bill, and send it to my desk WITHOUT DELAY,” the president wrote on social media.
“There can be NO CHANGES at this time,” Trump insisted. “We will work together in good faith to address the issues that have been raised, but we cannot have another long, pointless, and destructive Shutdown.”
The stalemate points to difficult days ahead as Johnson relies on Trump to help muscle the package to passage.
The president struck a deal last week with Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer in which Homeland Security would only be funded temporarily, though Feb. 13, as Congress debates changes to immigration enforcement operations. The Senate overwhelmingly approved the package with the rest of the government funding ahead of Saturday’s deadline.
Democrats demand changes to ICE House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries made it clear Monday that his side sees no reason to help Johnson push the bill forward in a procedural step, something that the majority party typically handles on its own.
With Johnson facing unrest from his own Republican ranks, Jeffries is seizing the leverage it provides Democrats to demand changes to immigration operations.
“On rare occasions have we stepped in to deal with Republican dysfunction,” Jeffries said at the Capitol.
Democrats are demanding restraints on Immigration and Customs Enforcement that go beyond $20 million for body cameras that already is in the bill. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced Monday that officers on the ground in Minneapolis, including ICE, will be immediately issued body-worn cameras, and the program would be expanded nationwide as funding is available.
But Democrats are pressing for more. They want to require that federal immigration agents unmask — noting that few, if any, other law enforcement agencies routinely mask themselves in the U.S. — and they want officers to rely on judicial, rather than administrative, warrants in their operations.
They also want an end to roving patrols, amid other changes.
Jeffries said the administration needs to begin negotiations now, not over the next two weeks, on changes to immigration enforcement operations.
Certain Democrats, however, are splintering with the leader, and pushing for quicker passage of the funding package to avoid government disruptions.
Republicans launch their own demands At the same time, House Republicans, with some allies in the Senate, are making their own demands, as they work to support Trump’s clampdown on immigrants in the U.S.
The House Freedom Caucus has insisted on fuller funding for Homeland Security while certain Republicans pushed to include the SAVE Act, a longshot Trump priority that would require proof of citizenship before Americans are eligible to participate in elections and vote. Critics say it would disenfranchise millions of voters.
Late Monday, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., dropped her demand to attach the voting bill to the funding package after she and Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., met with Trump at the White House. She posted afterward that it would be better to try to advance that bill separately through the Senate, and keep the government open.
The development was seen as helping Johnson push ahead.
“Obviously the president really wants this,” Majority Leader Steve Scalise said at the Capitol.
“We always work ’til the midnight hour to get the votes,” Scalise said. “You never start the process with everybody on board. You work through it.”
Workers without pay if partial government shutdown drags on Meanwhile, a number of federal agencies are snared in the funding standoff after the government went into a partial shutdown over the weekend.
Defense, health, transportation and housing are among those that were given shutdown guidance by the administration, though many operations are deemed essential and services are not necessarily interrupted. Workers could go without pay if the impasse drags on. Some could be furloughed.
Lawmakers from both parties are increasingly concerned the closure will disrupt the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which they rely on to help constituents after deadly snowstorms and other disasters.
This is the second time in a matter of months that federal government operations have been disrupted as lawmakers use the annual funding process as leverage to extract policy changes. Last fall, Democrats sparked what became the longest federal shutdown in history, 43 days, as they protested the expiration of health insurance tax breaks.
That shutdown ended with a promise to vote on proposals to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits. But with GOP opposition, Democrats were unable to achieve their goal of keeping the subsidies in place. Insurance premiums spiked in the new year for millions of people.
Trump tries to prevent another long shutdown Trump is already working on an immigration deal to ensure the shutdown doesn’t drag on.
Johnson said he was in the Oval Office last week when Trump, along with border czar Tom Homan, spoke with Schumer of New York as they discussed the immigration changes.
Body cameras, which are already provided for in the package, and an end to the roving patrols by immigration agents are areas of potential agreement, Johnson said.
But Johnson drew a line at other Democratic demands. He said he does not think that requiring immigration officers to remove their masks would have support from Republicans because it could lead to problems if their personal images and private information is posted online by protesters.
And Senate Majority Leader John Thune tapped the brakes on the demand from Democrats to require judicial warrants for officers’ searches, saying it’s likely to be a part of the negotiations ahead.
“It’s going to be very difficult to reach agreement in two weeks,” Thune said at the Capitol.
Democrats, however, said the immigration operations are out of control, and must end in Minneapolis and other cities.
Growing numbers of lawmakers are also calling for Noem to be fired or impeached.
WASHINGTON — A budget impasse in Congress is poised to halt large swaths of federal operations early Saturday as lawmakers in Capitol Hill turn to the next flashpoint in negotiations to reopen the government: whether to impose new limits on federal immigration authorities carrying out President Trump’s deportation campaign.
Over the next two weeks, Democrats and Republicans will weigh competing demands on how the Department of Homeland Security should carry out arrests, detention and deportations after the fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens by federal immigration agents this month in Minnesota.
Seeking to rein in the federal agency, Senate Democrats late on Thursday were able to strike a deal with the White House that would temporarily fund the Department of Homeland Security but fund the Pentagon, the State Department, as well as the health, education, labor and transportation agencies through Sept. 30.
The agreement is intended to give lawmakers more time to address Democratic demands to curb ICE tactics while averting a partial government shutdown.
The Senate finalized the deal Friday evening on a 71-29 vote, hours before a midnight deadline to avert a government shutdown. Passage of the deal was delayed by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who objected to parts of the package.
The House expected to take up the legislation as early as Monday. The partial government shutdown will occur until the measure clears the House and Trump signs it into law.
The president supports the deal, which came after Senate Democrats said they would not vote to fund Homeland Security unless reforms for the agency were approved. Among the demands: banning federal agents from wearing masks, requiring use of body cameras and requiring use of judicial warrants prior to searching homes and making arrests.
Democrats have also demanded that local and state law enforcement officials be given the ability to conduct independent investigations in cases where federal agents are accused of wrongdoing.
The deal, however, does not include any of those reforms; it includes only the promise of more time to negotiate with no guarantee that the new restrictions will be agreed to.
Both of California’s Democratic senators, Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla, voted against the Senate deal. They both opposed giving more funding to Homeland Security without reforms in a vote Thursday.
Schiff voted no because he said he promised to not “give another dime for ICE until we saw real reforms — and not just promised reforms but statutory requirements.”
“I want to see those reforms before I am prepared to support any more funding for these agencies,” Schiff said in a video message posted on X, and added that he did not see the White House acting in “good faith. “I want it in writing and statute.”
After voting against the measure, Padilla said in a statement: “I’ve been clear from the beginning: No more money for ICE and CBP without real oversight and accountability.”
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) told reporters Friday morning that Democrats will find out whether two weeks is enough time to reach a compromise.
“We will evaluate whether that is sufficient time,” Jeffries said. “But there is urgency to dealing with this issue because ICE as we have seen is out of control.”
Meanwhile, the absence of reforms in the Senate deal has already drawn concerns from some progressives, who argue the deal falls short of what is needed to rein in federal immigration enforcement.
“First of all, I’m actually disappointed that Senate leadership is not right now demanding more,” Rep. Robert Garcia, a top-ranking House Democrat from Long Beach, told reporters Friday. “This idea that we’re somehow going to continue to fund this agency and somehow just extend the pain, I think is absolutely wrong.”
Garcia said it was “outrageous” that the Senate deal would extend funding for Homeland Security for two weeks without any new requirements.
“This idea that we’re somehow not demanding immediately the removal of masks and body cameras and all the other reforms while eliminating this agency that’s causing harm, I think, is outrageous,” Garcia said.
Democratic Rep. Judy Chu of Pasadena said in a statement that she had not yet decided whether to support the Senate deal once it reaches the House floor.
But, Chu added: “I cannot support legislation that increases funding to this agency while delivering no accountability measures.”
Rep. Kevin Calvert (R-Corona) said in a statement that it is “critical” for lawmakers to pass the bipartisan spending package, in part because it included funding for the U.S. military.
“As Chairman of the [House] Defense Appropriation Subcommittee, I’m especially concerned about the negative impacts of a shutdown at a time when we have a buildup of American military assets in the Middle East,” Calvert said.
Calvert added that Homeland Security operations will continue even in the shutdown because lawmakers provided an influx of funding for the agency in last year’s “One Big Beautiful Bill.” But he said he worried that any lapse in funding would affect other operations by the agency, including disaster funding and security assistance for major events, such as the upcoming World Cup.
“We need to get these priorities funded,” he said.
Other Republican lawmakers have already signaled the possible hurdles Democrats will face as they try to rein in ICE.
Graham held up consideration of the Senate deal, in part because he wanted the Senate to vote to criminalize local and state officials in sanctuary cities — a term that has no strict definition but that generally describes local jurisdictions that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
“You can convince me that ICE can be better, but I don’t think I will ever convince you to abandon sanctuary cities because you’re wedded to it on the Democratic side,” Graham said.
Graham also delayed passage of the deal because it included a repeal of a law that would have allowed senators — including himself — to sue the government if federal investigators gained access to their phones without notifying them. The law required senators to be notified if that were to happen and sue for up to $50,000 in damages per incident.
“We’ll fix the $500,000 — count me in — but you took the notification out,” Graham said. “I am demanding a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.”
Other Senate Republicans also expressed concern with Democrats’ demands, even as Trump seemed to try appease them.
Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) said the demand for federal agents to remove their masks during operations was a “clear and obvious attempt to intimidate and put our federal agents in harm’s way.”
“When enforcement becomes dangerous for enforcers, enforcement does not survive,” Schmitt said in a Senate floor speech. “What emerges is not reform, it is amnesty by default.”
Despite the GOP opposition, most Senate Republicans were poised to join Democrats on Friday and vote for the deal. But there is no certainty that they will join the minority party when negotiations resume in the coming weeks.
Recent history suggests that bipartisan support at the outset does not guarantee a lasting deal, particularly when unresolved policy disputes remain. The last government shutdown tied to a debate over healthcare exposed how quickly negotiations can collapse when no agreement is reached.
In November, a small group of Democrats voted with Republicans to end the longest government shutdown in U.S. history with the promise of negotiating an extension to healthcare tax credits that were set to expire in the new year.
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Franciso), a former House speaker, reminded the public on Friday that Democrats were unable to get Republican support for extending the tax credits, resulting in increasing healthcare costs for millions of Americans.
“House Democrats passed a bipartisan fix, yet Senate Republicans continue to block this critical relief for millions of Americans,” Pelosi wrote in a post on X.
Times staff writer Seema Mehta contributed to this report.
About two months after the last federal government shutdown ended, another funding lapse looms — this one caused by a battle between Republicans and Democrats over funding for immigration enforcement.
Lawmakers in both parties worked collaboratively in recent weeks to extend government funding, trying to avoid any snags that could cause a new impasse after the record 43-day shutdown in fall 2025.
Six of 12 funding bills passed both chambers and were signed by President Donald Trump in November and January. Agencies covered by these bills now have up-to-date funding streams and are not at risk of shutting down.
Agencies funded by the other six bills, however, are now at risk of a shutdown. The fight centers around the Department of Homeland Security, but other affected funding in the bill involves defense; financial services; labor, health and human services and education; state and foreign operations; and transportation and housing and urban development.
The House on Jan. 22 approved measures to extend funding for these remaining six bills, sending them to the Senate. (Bills like this that consolidate several spending measures are nicknamed a “minibus” — a play on “omnibus,” which typically consolidates all or nearly all 12 regular spending bills.)
Most observers expected the Senate to quickly send the legislation to the president for his signature. That changed Jan. 24, when federal immigration enforcement agents fatally shot Alex Pretti in Minneapolis.
An altered political environment after Pretti’s shooting death
Pretti’s shooting happened on a weekend just before the Senate was to consider the spending bill. It inflamed existing political tensions, drawing widespread criticism of DHS’s tactics and imperiling the department’s funding, which totals $64.4 billion.
Senate Democrats, responding to voters’ concerns about immigration enforcement tactics in Minneapolis, said they would not approve DHS funding without an agreement to curb certain immigration enforcement policies.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., laid out several elements he said were needed to secure Democratic support: Ending “roving patrols”; improving coordination with state and local law enforcement; implementing a standard code of conduct and independent investigations to enforce adherence to it; requiring agents to wear body cameras; and requiring agents not to wear masks.
Negotiators from both parties in the Senate met this week to try to reach an agreement that would free up the spending bill for a vote. Late on Jan. 29, newsreports said lawmakers struck a deal that would give negotiators time to reach a more permanent agreement, following a relatively short shutdown.
A shutdown is likely, but its duration remains in question
A government shutdown seems likely, but it could be brief — and therefore have a more limited impact on the public.
The reason a shutdown is all but inevitable is the Senate cannot simply strip out the Homeland Security portions of the bill, approve the rest in a vote, and send the portions approved by both chambers to the president for his signature. Instead, the entire bill needs to be passed in both chambers before moving to the president.
The deal announced Jan. 29 would tee up a vote to approve new spending for agencies other than homeland security, along with a measure that would extend homeland security funding for two weeks. Lawmakers would continue to negotiate immigration enforcement policies.
Any measure that passes the Senate would have to be passed in the House next. The House is not in session until the week of Feb. 2.
The best-case scenario is that the portion of the government covered by the pending bill would shut down over the weekend and into early the following week. Weekend shutdowns are generally less problematic because most government employees aren’t working; areas unaffected by a spending lapse would include agriculture, commerce, justice, science, energy and water development, the interior, the legislative branch, military construction and veterans affairs.
Still, challenges could remain: House members from either party could be unhappy with what the Senate passed and could vote against a new Senate bill, preventing it from passing and effectively extending the shutdown.
WASHINGTON — The killing of a second U.S. citizen by federal agents in Minneapolis is deeply complicating efforts to avert another government shutdown in Washington as Democrats — and some Republicans — view the episode as a tipping point in the debate over the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement policies.
Senate Democrats pledged to block funding for the Department of Homeland Security unless changes are made to rein in the federal agency’s operations following the killing of Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old intensive care unit nurse.
The Democratic defections threaten to derail passage of a broad spending package that also includes funding for the State Department and the Pentagon, as well as education, health, labor and transportation agencies. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) released a statement Monday calling on Republican Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) to avert another shutdown by separating funding for DHS from the full appropriations package.
“Senate Democrats have made clear we are ready to quickly advance the five appropriations bills separately from the DHS funding bill before the January 30th deadline. The responsibility to prevent a partial government shutdown is on Leader Thune and Senate Republicans,” Schumer said.
The standoff also revealed fractures among GOP lawmakers, who called for a federal and state investigation into the shooting and congressional hearings for federal officials to explain their tactics — demands that have put unusual pressure on the Trump administration.
Senate Republicans must secure 60 votes to advance the spending measure in the chamber — a threshold they cannot reach on their own with their 53 seats. The job is further complicated by a time crunch: Lawmakers have until midnight Friday to reach a compromise or face a partial government shutdown.
Senate Democrats already expressed reservations about supporting the Homeland Security funding after Renee Good, a mother of three, was shot and killed this month by federal agents in Minneapolis. But Pretti’s killing led Democrats to be more forceful in their opposition.
Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said Sunday he would oppose funding for the agencies involved in the Minneapolis operations, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection.
“I’m not giving ICE or Border Patrol another dime given how these agencies are operating. Democrats are not going to fund that,” he said in an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “I think anyone who votes to give them more money to do this will share in the responsibility and see more Americans die in our cities as a result.”
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) said in a statement last week that he would not “give more money to CBP and ICE to continue terrorizing our communities and breaking the law.” He reiterated his stance hours after Pretti’s killing.
“I will vote against any additional funding for Trump’s ICE and CBP while they act with such reckless disregard for life, safety and the Constitution,” Padilla wrote on social media.
While Senate Republicans largely intend to support the funding measure, some are publicly raising concerns about the Trump administration’s training requirements for ICE agents and calling for congressional oversight hearings.
“A comprehensive, independent investigation of the shooting must be conducted in order to rebuild trust and Congressional committees need to hold hearings and do their oversight work,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) wrote on social media. “ICE agents do not have carte blanche in carrying out their duties.”
Similar demands are being made by House Republicans.
Rep. Andrew Garbarino (R-N.Y.), the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, formally sought testimony from leaders at ICE, Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, saying his “top priority remains keeping Americans safe.”
Homeland Security has not yet provided a public confirmation that it will attend the hearing, though Garbarino told reporters Saturday he has been “in touch with the department” and anticipates a full investigation.
Many Republican lawmakers expressed concern over federal officials saying Pretti’s killing was in part because of him having a loaded firearm. Pretti had a permit to carry, according to the Minneapolis police chief, and videos show him holding a cellphone, not brandishing a gun, before officers pushed him to the ground.
“Carrying a firearm is not a death sentence, it’s a constitutionally protected God-given right, and if you don’t understand this you have no business in law enforcement of government,” Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) wrote on social media.
Following pushback from the GOP, President Trump appears to be seeking ways to tone down the tensions. The president said Monday he had a “very good call” with Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat he clashed with in recent weeks, and that they “seemed to be on a similar wavelength” on next steps.
If Democrats are successful in striking down the Homeland Security spending package, some hinted at comprehensive immigration reforms to follow.
California Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) detailed the plan on social media over the weekend, calling on Congress to repeal the $75 billion in supplemental funding for ICE in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year. The allocation roughly tripled the budget for immigration enforcement.
The shooting came as a slate of progressives renewed demands to “abolish ICE” and replace it with an agency that has congressional oversight.
Congress must “tear down and replace ICE with an agency that has oversight,” Khanna said. “We owe that to nurse Pretti and the hundreds of thousands on the streets risking their lives to stand up for our freedoms.”
Democrats also are focusing on removing Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. This month Rep. Robin Kelly (D-Ill.) introduced a measure to impeach Noem, saying she brought a “reign of terror to Minneapolis.” At least 120 House Democrats supported the measure, according to Kelly’s office.
Party leaders recently called for an end to controversial “Kavanaugh stops,” which became central to ICE procedure following a September decision in Noem vs. Vasquez Perdomo by Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. It allows for agents to stop people based on perceived race or for engaging in activities “associated with undocumented people,” like speaking a foreign language.
Progressives also have endorsed the reversal of qualified immunity protections, which shield agents from misconduct lawsuits.
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) backed the agenda and called for ICE and Border Patrol agents to “leave Minnesota immediately.”
“Voting NO on the DHS funding bill is the bare minimum. Backing Kristi Noem’s impeachment is the bare minimum. Holding law-breaking ICE agents legally accountable is the bare minimum. ICE is beyond reform. Abolish it,” she wrote Sunday on social media.
BOSTON, Mass. — For months, Karian had tried to make it on her own in New York.
After the birth of her second daughter, she was diagnosed with postpartum depression, major depressive disorder and anxiety. A single mother who had moved from Boston to New York about 13 years ago, she often spent days at a time on the couch, unable to do more than handle the basics for her daughters.
“I wasn’t taking care of myself,” she said softly on a recent afternoon. “I was not really present.” The Hechinger Report is not publishing her last name to protect her privacy.
Karian’s mother urged her to move back home to the Boston area and offered to house her and her daughters temporarily. She started working the night shift at a fast food restaurant to save up for her own place while her mother and sister watched her children.
But in a city where fast food wages aren’t enough to pay the rent, her efforts felt futile. And then, a month after moving in with her family, her mother’s landlord told her the apartment was overcrowded and she had to leave. Karian and her girls, then 7 years old and 8 months old, moved into a homeless shelter, where her depression and anxiety worsened.
“I tried my best, but it’s not their home,” said Karian, now 31.
Karian’s children had joined the growing ranks of very young children experiencing homelessness. Between 2021 and 2023, the number of homeless infants and toddlers increased in 48 states and the District of Columbia. The most recent estimates found that in 2023 nearly 450,000 infants and toddlers in the United States were in families that lacked a stable place to live. That was a 23 percent increase compared to 2021, according to a report released last year by the nonprofit SchoolHouse Connection in partnership with Poverty Solutions at the University of Michigan.
The numbers could be even higher, experts worry, because “hidden homeless” children — those who are doubled up in homes with family or friends or living in a hotel — may not be captured in tallies until they start school.
High prices for diapers and formula, the exorbitant cost of child care, the rising cost of living, and rising maternal mental health challenges all contribute to the growing rate of homelessness among very young children, experts say. In 2024, one-third of infants and toddlers were in families that struggled to make ends meet, according to the nonprofit infant and toddler advocacy organization Zero to Three.
“We’re talking about families who have generationally been disadvantaged by circumstance,” said Kate Barrand, president and CEO of Horizons for Homeless Children, a nonprofit that supports homeless families with young children in Massachusetts. “The cost of housing has escalated dramatically. The cost of any kind of program to put a child in, should you have a job, is escalating,” she added. “There are a lot of things that make it really hard for families.”
Children work on an activity in a Horizons classroom. Teachers at Horizons are trained to work with children who have experienced trauma and instability. Credit: Jackie Mader/The Hechinger Report
Related: Young children have unique needs and providing the right care can be a challenge. Our free early childhood education newsletter tracks the issues.
Housing instability is dire for anyone, but particularly for young children, whose brains are rapidly growing and developing. Studies show that young children who are homeless often lag behind their peers in language development and literacy and struggle to learn self-regulation skills, like being able to calm themselves when feeling angry or sad or transition calmly to new activities. They also may experience long-term health and learning challenges.
Early childhood programs could provide a critical source of stability and developmental support for these children. But SchoolHouse Connection found only a fraction of homeless children are enrolled in early learning programs, and the percentage who are has decreased over the past few years.
“It’s not just incredibly tragic and sad that infants and toddlers are experiencing homelessness,” said Rahil Briggs, national director of the nonprofit Zero to Three’s HealthySteps program, which works with pediatricians to support the health of babies and toddlers. The first few years are also a “disproportionately important” time in a child’s life, she added, because of the brain development that’s happening.
Karian and her daughters faced new difficulties after they moved into a shelter.
They shared an apartment with another family. If the other family was using the shared common space, Karian tried to give them privacy, which meant keeping her children in the bedroom the three of them shared.
Her older daughter had to change schools, and left without getting to say goodbye to many of her friends. At her new school, her grades dropped. The baby developed a skin condition and there was a bedbug infestation at the shelter. Karian didn’t want to put her on the floor for tummy time. She was desperate to find a home.
“We were in a place where we couldn’t really make noise. I couldn’t really let them be kids,” she said.
The rise in housing insecurity among young children has created more demand for programs created specifically to meet the unique needs of children who are experiencing instability and trauma. Many of these programs offer support to parents as well, through what is called a “two-generation” approach to support and services.
In 2021, in response to ballooning child homelessness rates, Horizons opened the Edgerley Family Horizons Center, an early learning program that serves children from 2 months to 5 years old. While some families find Horizons on their own, many are referred by shelters around the Boston area. The need is great: Edgerley serves more than 250 children, with a waitlist of 200 more. Karian’s younger child was one of those who got a spot soon after the program opened.
Inside Horizons’ large, light-filled building on the corner of a busy street in Boston’s Roxbury neighborhood, every detail is tailored to the needs of children who have experienced instability. Walls are painted in soothing blues and greens. Each classroom has three teachers to maintain a low child-to-staff ratio. Many of the teachers are bilingual. All educators are trained in how to build relationships with families and gently support children who have experienced trauma.
In response to growing need, in 2021 the Horizons opened the Edgerley Family Horizons Center, an early learning program that serves homeless children from 2 months to 5 years old. Credit: Jackie Mader/The Hechinger Report
The starting salary for teachers is $54,200 a year, far more than the national median for childcare workers of $32,050 and the Massachusetts median of about $39,000. That has encouraged more teachers to stay on at the center and provide a sense of security to the children there, said Horizons CEO Barrand.
In the infant room, teacher Herb Hickey, who has worked at Horizons for 13 years, frequently sees infants who are hyperaware, struggle to fall asleep, can’t be soothed easily or cling desperately to whichever adult they attach to first. The goal for the infant teachers, he said, is to be a trusted, responsive adult who can be relied on.
Every day, the teachers in the infant room sing the same songs to the babies. “When they hear our voices constantly, they know they’re in a safe space,” Hickey said. “This is calm.”
Teachers also follow the same familiar routines. The rooms are decorated simply, organized and filled with natural light. Teachers constantly scan the infants for signs of distress.
“We have to be even more responsive,” Hickey said. “When the child starts crying, we don’t have the convenience to say, ‘I know you’re hungry, I’ll get to you.’” He said teachers want even the tiniest babies to learn that “we’re not going to leave you crying.’”
Small nooks throughout the early learning center allow children to retreat into a comfortable setting when they need time to calm big emotions. Credit: Jackie Mader/The Hechinger Report
Other needs arise with Horizons’ youngest children: Infants and toddlers living in homeless shelters often lag in gross motor skills. Many spend time on beds rather than on playmats on the floor, or they are kept in car seats or in strollers to keep them safe or from wandering off. That means they’re missing out on all the skills that come from active movement.
Even the arrangement of toys at the center has a purpose. Staff want children to know they can depend on toys being in the same location every day. For many children, those are some of the only items they can play with. Families entering a shelter environment can usually only bring a few bags, with no room for toys or books. A toddler who recently entered a shelter where Horizons runs a playroom came in holding a small empty chip bag, recalled Tara Spalding, Horizons’ chief of advancement and playspace. When a shelter staff member threw it away, the boy was inconsolable. “This is the only toy my child has,” staff recalled the mother saying.
“This just shows the sheer poverty,” said Spalding.
As infant and toddler homelessness has increased, other cities and states have tried to provide more support to affected families and get a better sense of their needs. In Oklahoma, experts say, low wages, a lack of housing and eviction laws that favor landlords have led to rising homelessness rates. State officials are trying to gather better data about homeless families to determine the best use of resources, said Susan Agel, chair of Oklahoma’s Homeless Children and Youth Steering Committee. Their efforts are hampered, however, by the fact that many homeless families fear that their children will be taken away by child protective services because they are homeless.
In 2024, to fill that gap in data, the state launched a residency questionnaire given to every K-12 student that includes new questions about homelessness, including if there are younger children in the home who are not students and may not otherwise be counted in homeless populations. Officials say it isn’t a perfect solution, but it’s a start to get a sense of the severity of family homelessness. “We can’t devise a system for dealing with a problem if we don’t know what the problem is,” said Agel.
In Sioux Falls, South Dakota, city officials have ramped up efforts to coordinate city agencies to respond to an increase in homelessness among infants and toddlers.
“In general, the families we see more often have younger children. The school offers so much support, and there’s limited daycare access” to get similar support for infants and toddlers, said Tommy Fuston, Community Services and Housing Navigator at Minnehaha County’s Department of Human Services. “If a family has younger children, they’re going to struggle more.”
Each week, officials from the city, the Sioux Falls School District, local early childhood programs and shelters hold a “care meeting” to make sure any homeless families, or families at risk of homelessness, are quickly connected to the right resources and receive follow-up. “We don’t have unlimited resources, but I think it maximizes the resources that we do have,” Fuston said. “We’ve tried to create a village of supportive services to wrap around these folks.” The city relies extensively on private and faith-based donations to help. All shelters in town are privately funded, for example.
A preschool child paints in a classroom at Horizons. Families enrolled in the program receive child care for their children as well as classes and support for parents. Credit: Jackie Mader/The Hechinger Report
Karian heard about the child care center run by Horizons from a social worker soon after she and her daughters moved into their Boston-area shelter. In the infant room, her youngest daughter quickly settled into a routine, something Karian said didn’t happen when the baby was watched at night by family members. When staff identified speech and developmental delays, they helped connect Karian to an early intervention program where her daughter could receive therapy. Now 4 years old and in pre-K at Horizons, “she’s thriving,” Karian said. “She’s getting that nourishment.”
Karian also received support. Each family at Horizons is assigned a coach to help parents set personal goals and connect with resources. The organization offers classes in computing, financial management and English, all within the early learning building.
Two months after setting goals with a family coach, Karian earned her GED, with the help of the child care assistance. A few months later, she graduated from a culinary training program. She now works a steady job as a cafeteria manager for a local school district, where she earns a salary with benefits.
After a year in the shelter, her family was approved for subsidized housing and moved into their own apartment. Horizons allows families to stay in its programs for at least two years after they secure housing to make sure they are stable.
Now, Karian has her sights set on eventually opening a restaurant. She also has big dreams for her daughters, something that once seemed out of reach. She wants them to have ambition to “work towards something big,” she said. “I want them to have a dream and be able to achieve it.”
Experts say there are larger policy changes that could help families like Karian’s: increasing the minimum wage, expanding child care options like Head Start, which saves a portion of seats for homeless children, and offering more affordable housing to low-income families, to start.
Providing more federal money to the programs that help poor families pay for child care could also help. Those programs require states to prioritize homeless children and give them the first opportunity to access that money.
While important, experts argue, these solutions shouldn’t need to exist in the first place.
“We should be able to come to an agreement as a society that we should prioritize keeping families with infants and toddlers in their homes,” said Melissa Boteach, chief policy officer at Zero to Three. “Babies shouldn’t be homeless.”
Contact staff writer Jackie Mader at 212-678-3562 or mader@hechingerreport.org.
Since you made it to the bottom of this article, we have a small favor to ask.
If you believe stories like the one you just finished matter, please consider pitching in what you can. This effort helps ensure our reporting and resources stay free and accessible to everyone—teachers, parents, policymakers—invested in the future of education.
Thank you. Liz Willen Editor in chief
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
With the end of federal COVID-19 emergency funding and the inherent volatility of state income tax revenues, California school districts are in an era of financial uncertainty. Fortunately, Jurupa Unified School District is already several years into the process of finding ways to track and control expenses while still supporting teachers and staff so they can provide the best possible educational experience for our students. Here’s how we’re making staffing and payroll processes more efficient, starting with the perennially challenging extra duty.
Getting a handle on extra duty
In addition to our salaried staff, we have a number of part-time, hourly, and what we call “extra duty” assignments. Because a significant amount of our funding comes from grants, many of our assignments are temporary or one-time. We fill those positions with extra duty requests so we’re not committed to ongoing payroll obligations.
For many years, those extra duty requests and time cards were on paper, which meant the payroll department was performing redundant work to enter the information in the payroll system. The request forms we used were also on paper, making it very difficult to track the actual time being used back to the request, so we could be sure that the hours being used were within the limitations of the request. We needed a better control mechanism that would help school sites stay within budget, as well as a more formal budget mechanism to encumber the department and site budgets to cover the extra duty requests.
Budgeting can get very complicated because it’s cross-functional. It includes a position-control component, a payroll component, and a financial budgeting component. We needed a solution that could make all of those universes work together. The mission was either to find a system or build one. Our county office started a pilot program with our district to build a system, but ultimately decided against continuing with this effort due to the resources required to sustain such a system for 23 county districts.
Our district engaged in a competitive process and chose Helios Ed. Within six months, our team developed and launched a new system to address extra duty. Since then, we have saved more than $100,000 in staffing costs, time expenses, and budget overruns because of the stronger internal controls we now have in place.
A more efficient (and satisfied) payroll department
Eliminating redundant data entry and working with data instead of paper has allowed us to reduce staffing by two full-time equivalents–not through layoffs, but through attrition. And because they have a system that is handling data entry for them, our payroll department has more time to give quality to their work, and feel they are working at a level more aligned to their skills.
Finding efficiencies in your district
While Jurupa Unified has found efficiencies and savings in these specific areas, every school district is different. As many California district leaders like to say, we have 1,139 school districts –and just as many ways of doing things. With that in mind, there are some steps to the process of moving from paper to online systems (or using online systems more efficiently) that apply universally.
Sit down and identify your objectives. What are the critical components that you must have?
Make the decision to make or buy. When COVID first hit, Jurupa Unified created its own invoice-routing system through SharePoint. We’ve also built an excursion request process in PowerApps that handles travel, conferences, and field trips. As our county office found out, though, when you’re bringing a number of functionalities together, it can make more sense to work with a vendor you trust.
If you choose to buy software, be certain that it can do precisely what you need it to. If a vendor says they can develop a functionality along the way, ask to see the new feature before you buy.
Be certain the vendor will be responsive. When it comes to a function such as payroll, you’re dealing with people’s livelihoods, and you need to know that if there’s something wrong with the system, or if you need help, that help is just a phone call away.
Putting in a new payroll management system has made an enormous difference for our district, but it’s not the end of our cost-cutting process. We’re always looking at our different programs to see where we can cut back in ways that don’t impact the classroom. Ultimately, these changes are about ensuring that resources stay focused where they matter most. While budgets fluctuate and funding streams remain unpredictable, my team and I come to work every day because we believe in public education. I’m a product of public education myself, and I love waking up every day knowing that I can come back and support today’s students and teachers.
Jacqueline Benson, Jurupa Unified School District
Jacqueline Benson is the director of fiscal services at Jurupa Unified School District. She can be reached at jacqueline_benson@jusd.k12.ca.us.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
Maryland’s State Superintendent Carey Wright supports Gov. Wes Moore’s $11 million proposal for statewide literacy coaches and calls for changes to the state’s school accountability system to better reflect growth in struggling schools.
Maryland’s State Superintendent of Schools Carey Wright is clear-eyed about the challenges ahead in the 90-day General Assembly session in Annapolis.
With lawmakers facing a $1.5 billion deficit, “I think everything is going to be on the table.”
Wright told WTOP she expects discussion on where the state is currently getting its results on education, and that “it takes a lot to balance a budget, I totally understand that.”
But Wright said even with the fiscal challenges ahead, she wants to see funding for the Academic Excellence program.
“That will provide statewide literacy coaches” to school systems, Wright said. “Right now, with our proficiency rate at around 50%, we’ve got a lot of children that need to have their reading improved. Research has shown very clearly that job-embedded coaching is the way to do that. So we’re hoping that that gets funded.”
The proposal would install 35 literacy coaches in school systems across Maryland.
“We’ll take a look at those schools that are struggling the most with literacy,” Wright said of how they will be determining where the coaches should be placed.
The coaches Wright wants to see would have expertise in teaching adults: “Because you can take a great teacher out of a classroom, but they don’t necessarily make a great coach, because working with adults is just a lot different than working with children.”
Maryland Gov. Wes Moore’s budget proposal includes funding for that program, with a cost of roughly $11 million. Overall, the governor is backing a $10.2 billion plan for Maryland’s K-12 education system.
Wright also wants to see legislation that would change the state’s education accountability system, often referred to as Maryland’s Report Card. It’s the program that awards stars to school systems across the state.
Wright wants a greater emphasis placed on evidence of growth in schools with historically lower performance rates.
“Right now, our model awards points, if you will, into the system for overall growth,” she said, but added that leaves out the growth rates among the bottom 30%.
It’s her contention that once that information on progress is included in the ratings, that puts the focus on exactly where the needs are most acute and “which of those kids need additional interventions.”
Maryland’s lawmakers have the next 90 days to come up with a balanced budget and push through their legislative agendas.
Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.
SALEM, Ore. — ODOT crews are busy this week on a section of I-5 South of Salem. Drivers should expect overnight closures of I-5 both directions through Wednesday night from 5:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
This Battle Creek Bridge Section of work is part of a much larger vision of turning I-5 into 3 lanes both directions long-term in that stretch between Delaney Road and Keubler Boulevard – exits 248 to 252.
Eventually, ODOT hopes to have roundabouts installed on the east side of I-5 for safety as well.
A widening gap between VC pricing and public market caps signals a reset after narrative-driven optimism cooled.
Crypto venture capital firms poured billions into early-stage tokens during 2025’s risk-on rebound, but many of those bets are now trading far below their headline fundraising values.
The growing gap between private funding numbers and public market caps highlights a market reset after narrative-driven optimism cooled.
Data recently shared by CryptoRank shows dozens of well-funded projects losing hundreds of millions, and in some cases nearly all, of their implied value once tokens reached open markets, raising fresh questions about pricing discipline during bull cycles.
VC Valuations Meet Public Market Reality
CryptoRank’s comparison of VC valuations versus current market capitalizations painted a stark picture. Humanity Protocol, once priced at a $1 billion valuation during private rounds, now sits at around $285 million. Plasma and ICNT show smaller gaps by comparison, with Plasma at roughly $224 million versus a $500 million valuation, and ICNT near $247 million against $470 million.
The steepest drops are harder to ignore. Fuel Network, Double Zero, and Bubblemaps, which recently mocked American rapper Soulja Boy over his past involvement in crypto and NFT promotions, each carried billion- or near-billion-dollar valuations yet are now trading around $11 million, $373,000, and $6 million, respectively.
Camp Network and TreeHouse followed a similar path, falling from $400 million valuations to around $15 million and $16 million. Privasea also stood out, dropping from $180 million to about $1 million.
However, other projects have shown more modest declines. For example, Sosovalue has held up relatively well at around $152 million compared to a $200 million valuation, while Yieldbasis is trading near $34 million against a $50 million initial valuation.
You may also like:
Meanwhile, Momentum and Bitlight sit closer to the middle, with market caps of around $43 million and $34 million after funding rounds that priced them at $100 million and $170 million.
Funding Rebounds, but Caution Replaces Euphoria
This valuation reset has come even with overall VC activity picking up again in 2025. Data from CryptoRank shows quarterly crypto venture investment climbing to about $10 billion in Q2 2025, the strongest level since early 2022. Additionally, funding remained elevated at nearly $8 billion in both Q3 and Q4.
By contrast, funding during the bear market years fell steadily, bottoming near $689 million in Q3 2023 before stabilizing between $1 billion and $2.5 billion through most of 2024. The 2025 recovery closely tracked Bitcoin’s price climb above $126,000 mid-year before easing toward the $80,000 to $100,000 range by year-end.
What stands out is not just the size of the rebound but also its timing. The largest capital deployment came during Q2 2025, when sentiment was strongest and token prices were rising quickly. Many of the projects now trading well below VC marks were funded during this window, according to CryptoRank data.
For many investors, the takeaway is not that venture capital has returned, but that public markets are less willing to accept private round narratives at face value. As several analysts on X noted, the gap between VC pricing and live trading data has become a risk signal rather than a badge of confidence, reinforcing the need for sober expectations as capital flows back into crypto.
SPECIAL OFFER (Exclusive)
SECRET PARTNERSHIP BONUS for CryptoPotato readers: Use this link to register and unlock $1,500 in exclusive BingX Exchange rewards (limited time offer).
The Federal Emergency Management Agency headquarters is photographed in Washington, May 5, 2025. (AP Photo/Gene J. Puskar, File)
PROVIDENCE, R.I. (AP) — A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration’s attempt to reallocate federal Homeland Security funding away from states that refuse to cooperate with certain federal immigration enforcement.
U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy’s ruling on Monday solidified a win for the coalition of 12 attorneys general that sued the administration earlier this year after being alerted that their states would receive drastically reduced federal grants due to their “sanctuary” jurisdictions.
In total, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Emergency Management Agency reduced more than $233 million from Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. The money is part of a $1 billion program where allocations are supposed to be based on assessed risks, with states then largely passing most of the money on to police and fire departments.
The cuts were unveiled shortly after a separate federal judge in a different legal challenge ruled it was unconstitutional for the federal government to require states to cooperate on immigration enforcement actions to get FEMA disaster funding.
In her 48-page ruling, McElroy found that the federal government was weighing states’ police on federal immigration enforcement on whether to reduce federal funding for the Homeland Security Grant Program and others.
“What else could defendants’ decisions to cut funding to specific counterterrorism programming by conspicuous round numbered amounts — including by slashing off the millions-place digits of awarded sums — be if not arbitrary and capricious? Neither a law degree nor a degree in mathematics is required to deduce that no plausible, rational formula could produce this result,” McElroy wrote.
The Trump-appointed judge then ordered the Department of Homeland Security to restore the previously announced funding allocations to the plaintiff states.
“Defendants’ wanton abuse of their role in federal grant administration is particularly troublesome given the fact that they have been entrusted with a most solemn duty: safeguarding our nation and its citizens,” McElroy wrote. “While the intricacies of administrative law and the terms and conditions on federal grants may seem abstract to some, the funding at issue here supports vital counterterrorism and law enforcement programs.”
McElroy notably cited the recent Brown University attack, where a gunman killed two students and injured nine others, as an event where the $1 billion federal program would be vital in responding to such a tragedy.
“To hold hostage funding for programs like these based solely on what appear to be defendants’ political whims is unconscionable and, at least here, unlawful,” the Rhode Island-based judge wrote in her ruling, issued little more than a week after the Brown shooting.
Emails seeking comment were sent to the DHS and FEMA.
“This victory ensures that the Trump Administration cannot punish states that refuse to help carry out its cruel immigration agenda, particularly by denying them lifesaving funding that helps prepare for and respond to disasters and emergencies,” said Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell in a statement.
Thread Bank has raised $30.5 million in a funding round to support the digital bank’s growth. “This additional funding will enable Thread to continue to scale, grow new and existing partnerships, and continue to be a leader in the embedded banking market,” Thread Chief Executive Chris Black told FinAi News. “Underpinning each of these objectives is a requirement for innovation, efficiency and transparency.” “Thread’s usage of AI — and that of the […]
Peter Greene, a character actor best known for his role as the iconic villain Zed in “Pulp Fiction,” has died. He was 60.He died in his home in New York City, his manager, Gregg Edwards, confirmed on Friday. His cause of death was not immediately released.”He was just a terrific guy,” said Edwards. “Arguably one of the greatest character actors on the planet; Has worked with everybody.”Born in Montclair, New Jersey, Greene landed some of his first leading roles in “Laws of Gravity” in 1992 and “Clean, Shaven” in 1993, according to IMDb.In 1994, he played the memorable villain in Quentin Tarantino’s “Pulp Fiction.” That same year, he played another leading villain opposite Jim Carrey and Cameron Diaz in “The Mask.”Greene was working on two projects when he died, including a documentary about the federal government’s withdrawal of funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, according to Edwards.”We’ve been friends for over a decade,” said Edwards. “Just the nicest man.”
NEW YORK —
Peter Greene, a character actor best known for his role as the iconic villain Zed in “Pulp Fiction,” has died. He was 60.
He died in his home in New York City, his manager, Gregg Edwards, confirmed on Friday. His cause of death was not immediately released.
“He was just a terrific guy,” said Edwards. “Arguably one of the greatest character actors on the planet; Has worked with everybody.”
Born in Montclair, New Jersey, Greene landed some of his first leading roles in “Laws of Gravity” in 1992 and “Clean, Shaven” in 1993, according to IMDb.
In 1994, he played the memorable villain in Quentin Tarantino’s “Pulp Fiction.” That same year, he played another leading villain opposite Jim Carrey and Cameron Diaz in “The Mask.”
Greene was working on two projects when he died, including a documentary about the federal government’s withdrawal of funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, according to Edwards.
“We’ve been friends for over a decade,” said Edwards. “Just the nicest man.”
For those of us who invest deeply in our communities—whether as donors, board members, or philanthropic leaders—we are at a pivotal moment. The decisions we make now will shape the strength of our social infrastructure for decades to come.
I’ve worked in the social sector for many years, in nonprofits, philanthropy, and as the founder of a social enterprise focused on strategy and data to help nonprofits amplify their mission impact. Over that time, I’ve witnessed many cycles of change, shifts in trust, funding, voice, evidence, and empathy.
During the pandemic, we saw the nonprofit sector pushed to its limits as organizations stretched to support more individuals and families than ever before. Federal and philanthropic dollars surged in response, allowing many organizations to meet those unprecedented needs. It was a moment of both strain and collective commitment.
Today, however, we’re facing a new transformation, one that is far more consequential but significantly less resourced. Federal funding has dropped sharply. Philanthropic giving has not increased to fill the gap. And while economic instability challenges families with fewer means, demand for nonprofit services continues to rise.
An Inc.com Featured Presentation
These forces are reshaping the sector. About 30 percent of nonprofits have lost direct funding, and a higher percentage are indirectly affected as the competition for limited dollars intensifies. In my 30-plus years working in this space, I have not seen a shift of this magnitude.
A sector under pressure
Every industry evolves and those that fail to adapt lose ground. Change, contraction, and disruption can spur innovation, but for nonprofits, the stakes are far higher. These organizations provide the essential scaffolding that holds communities together. When they falter, the consequences ripple through families, neighborhoods, and local economies.
Two forces, in particular, are accelerating this disruption.
1. The dual customer problem
Nonprofits, like for-profit companies, create products and services. But unlike businesses, their customers are the people they serve but are not the people who pay them. Instead, nonprofits are funded by philanthropic donors, government grants, and foundations.
This creates a “dual customer” dynamic: Nonprofits must serve both their program participants and their funders. These two groups have vastly different needs and expectations. Managing both well requires more resources, not fewer.
It’s a nuance many outside the sector overlook. In my own company, when we drift from our ideal client, our focus fragments, quality declines, and efficiency suffers. Nonprofits live this challenge daily, and it is multiplied by the fact that they are accountable to two audiences whose interests are not always aligned.
2. The myth of low overhead
For decades, donors judged nonprofit worthiness by how “efficiently” they operated—specifically, how little they spent on overhead. The ideal became a 10 percent cap on administrative costs.
This cap is unsustainable. No business could deliver quality products, attract strong leadership, and grow customer trust with only 10 percent of its budget covering essential operations. Layer in the dual-customer challenge, and it’s a recipe for burnout and underperformance.
Although attention to this issue has increased, the damage lingers. Funding structures, grant requirements, and even leaders’ own mindsets have baked in the assumption that operating costs should be minimal.
The result?Systems for tracking data and measuring impact are considered as too much overhead, investments in fundraising capacity are capped, and leadership salaries are scrutinized. With this, organizations are left to do more with less—often at the expense of quality and long-term sustainability.
Changing this requires not just new funding. It requires a mindset shift.
A call for change
These constraints keep many nonprofits small, fragile, and reactive at a time when communities need them to be strong, strategic, and resilient. As public dollars recede, philanthropic leaders—particularly high-capacity individual donors—have a pivotal role to play. We are reaching a critical inflection point.
If we want thriving communities and a resilient economy, we must stop treating the nonprofit sector as charity and start recognizing it as infrastructure.
Independent Sector reports that nonprofits represent 5 percent of GDP, contribute more than $1.5 trillion to the economy, and employ nine percent of the workforce. This is infrastructure—human, social, economic. And infrastructure must be intentionally built, invested in, and strengthened.
As business leaders, we understand that strategy, data, and talent fuel performance. Bringing rigor and an investment mindset to philanthropy strengthens this infrastructure.Let’s fund in a way that truly drives results—not just what feels good in the moment. And when we fund for success, we should expect clear demonstration of results.
A vision for what comes next
Imagine a sector where nonprofits have the strategic capacity, data systems, leadership pipelines, and financial flexibility that any high-performing business requires. Imagine funders investing in long-term outcomes rather than short-term activity. Imagine communities benefiting from organizations that are not merely surviving but proactively shaping solutions.
Funding nonprofits as infrastructure means:
Investing in strong leaders, not scrutinizing their salaries.
Funding data and evaluation, not labeling them unnecessary overhead.
Supporting multi-year, unrestricted capital, not short-term, narrow grants.
Partnering as thought partners, not just check writers.
Expecting results, and resourcing organizations to achieve them.
This is the reset the sector needs—and the reset we have the opportunity to create.The health of the nonprofit sector is the health of our communities. And our economy, our cities, and our future depend on both thriving together.
Let’s lead the next era of social impact by funding nonprofits like the essential infrastructure they are. Our communities cannot afford anything less.
SIGNATURES TO PUSH LAWMAKERS TO DO SOMETHING TO GET THAT MONEY BACK. DOCTOR PETER BRIDGMAN IS SPENDING HIS HOLIDAYS GOING DOOR-TO- DOOR CHATTING WITH HIS NEIGHBORS. HE’S THANKFUL FOR THE CANCER TREATMENTS THAT ARE KEEPING HIM ALIVE. THE 72-YEAR-OLD FORMER NEUROLOGIST WAS DIAGNOSED IN 2013 WITH MULTIPLE MYELOMA – A BONE MARROW CANCER – TREATABLE WITH INFUSION THERAPIES. HE’S DOING WELL…BUT WORRIES ABOUT THE DAY HE MIGHT NEED MORE ADVANCED TREATMENT OPTIONS CURRENTLY UNDER DEVELOPMENT AT THE “NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH” – AND THE “NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE.” THE AGENCIES ARE FORCED TO CUT BILLIONS OF DOLLARS NOW THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP’S BUDGET HAS PASSED. “NIH AND THE NCI EXPECTED SMALL CUTS LIKE FIVE OR TEN PERCENT, BUT THEY WERE COMPLETELY FLOORED BY THE 37-PERCENT CUT TO THE NCI.” “ACTIVE RESEARCH IS GOING ON AND THAT MIGHT BE CURTAILED. SO, BY THE TIME I NEED IT, IT MAY NOT BE THERE FOR ME.” SO, HE’S ASKING HIS NEIGHBORS TO SIGN AN ON-LINE PETITION CALLING FOR FUNDS TO BE RESTORED TO PREVIOUS LEVELS. “IN ORDER TO SAVE LIVES, WE HAVE TO RESTORE FUNDING TO CLOSE TO WHAT IT WAS BEFORE. IF WE LET THE FUNDING BOUNCE UP AND DOWN, RESEARCHERS WILL GO TO OTHER COUNTRIES. THEY’LL GO TO THE EUROPEAN UNION. THEY’LL GO TO CHINA. AND WE’LL LOSE ALL OF THAT. IT WOULD TAKE DECADES TO BUILD IT BACK. SO, THAT’S THE RISK. THAT’S THE SERIOUS RISK.” HIS NEIGHBOR, JOHN AUBLE WAS HAPPY TO SIGN. WAS HAPPY TO SIGN. “OVERALL, I THINK CANCER IN UNDER FUNDED SO EVERY TIME WE HAVE SOMEBODY WHO IS WILLING TO PUT IN THE TIME THAT HE DOES – IT’S REALLY TOUCHING. WE NEED MORE PETERS.” IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN LEARNING MORE ABOUT THE PETITION – YOU CAN VISIT WWW.FIGHTCANCER.ORG “NEXT TUESDAY AFTERNOON DR. BRIDGMAN AND OTHERS FROM THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY WILL HAND DELIVER THOSE PETITION SIGNATURES TO SENATOR SUSAN COLLINS HERE AT HER PORTLAND OFFICE. AND THEY WAIT FOR CONGRESS TO RECONVENE AND HOPE THAT RESEARCH FUNDI
Man living with cancer goes door-to-door in effort to keep federal research going
Dr. Peter Bridgman, a retired neurologist who has cancer, is a man on a mission to get funding restored for federal agencies that are conducting cancer research.Bridgman, 72, was diagnosed with multiple myeloma in 2013. Multiple myeloma is a bone marrow cancer that is treatable with infusion therapies.The Yarmouth resident said he is doing well and is thankful for the treatments that are keeping him alive, but he is concerned about the future of cancer research.Advanced cancer treatment options are under development at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and National Cancer Institute (NCI), but the federal agencies face funding cuts in the billions.”NIH and the NCI expected small cuts like five or 10 percent, but they were completely floored by the 37 percent cut to the NCI,” Bridgman said. “Active research is going on and that might be curtailed. So by the time I need it, it may not be there for me.”Bridgman is now going door-to-door and asking his neighbors to sign an online petition calling for NIH and NCI funds to be restored to previous levels.”In order to save lives, we have to restore funding to close to what it was before. If we let the funding bounce up and down, researchers will go to other countries. They’ll go to the European Union. They’ll go to China, and we’ll lose all of that,” Bridgman said. “It would take decades to build it back, so that’s the risk. That’s the serious risk.”John Auble, one of Bridgman’s neighbors, said he was happy to sign the petition.”Overall, I think cancer is underfunded. So every time we have somebody who is willing to put in the time that he does, it’s really touching,” Auble said. “We need more Peters.”People who are interested in learning more about the petition can visit fightcancer.org.On Tuesday, Dec. 2, Bridgman and others from the American Cancer Society will hand deliver the petition signatures they have collected to U.S. Sen. Susan Collins’ office in Portland. They will then wait for Congress to reconvene and hope that research funding will be restored.
Dr. Peter Bridgman, a retired neurologist who has cancer, is a man on a mission to get funding restored for federal agencies that are conducting cancer research.
Bridgman, 72, was diagnosed with multiple myeloma in 2013. Multiple myeloma is a bone marrow cancer that is treatable with infusion therapies.
The Yarmouth resident said he is doing well and is thankful for the treatments that are keeping him alive, but he is concerned about the future of cancer research.
Advanced cancer treatment options are under development at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and National Cancer Institute (NCI), but the federal agencies face funding cuts in the billions.
“NIH and the NCI expected small cuts like five or 10 percent, but they were completely floored by the 37 percent cut to the NCI,” Bridgman said. “Active research is going on and that might be curtailed. So by the time I need it, it may not be there for me.”
Bridgman is now going door-to-door and asking his neighbors to sign an online petition calling for NIH and NCI funds to be restored to previous levels.
“In order to save lives, we have to restore funding to close to what it was before. If we let the funding bounce up and down, researchers will go to other countries. They’ll go to the European Union. They’ll go to China, and we’ll lose all of that,” Bridgman said. “It would take decades to build it back, so that’s the risk. That’s the serious risk.”
John Auble, one of Bridgman’s neighbors, said he was happy to sign the petition.
“Overall, I think cancer is underfunded. So every time we have somebody who is willing to put in the time that he does, it’s really touching,” Auble said. “We need more Peters.”
People who are interested in learning more about the petition can visit fightcancer.org.
On Tuesday, Dec. 2, Bridgman and others from the American Cancer Society will hand deliver the petition signatures they have collected to U.S. Sen. Susan Collins’ office in Portland. They will then wait for Congress to reconvene and hope that research funding will be restored.
The UK government has taken a decisive step toward addressing gambling harm, announcing a new GBP 30 million ($39.71 million) fund for voluntary and community groups. The initiative, spearheaded by the Department of Health and Social Care, marks the first phase of a two-year program that aims to bridge the gap between the existing funding framework and the upcoming statutory levy system.
The Measure Seeks to Address Short-Term Deficiencies
According to a recent Next.io report, officials outlined the plan during an information session on October 26, announcing that the expression of interest period is now open and will run until January 9. Applications will be accepted from January 12, with grant decisions expected in early spring. The first installments should be available starting in April.
The fund will have three components. The first focuses on direct prevention work, primarily programs that reach out to people and communities before harm escalates. Another portion of the funds will go toward innovation, experimenting with new approaches, or adapting successful models from other sectors. The third will help bolster organizations with staffing, training, and systems, allowing them to scale up. Groups can apply for amounts ranging from GBP 5,000 ($6,600) to GBP 2 million ($2.65 million).
The announcement seeks to address growing concerns in the sector. Numerous non-profit organizations have warned of rising financial distress as they await clarity on when the statutory levy money will begin flowing. Distribution also remains a contentious topic. Some charities claim that the competition for limited funds has led to friction and accusations within the field.
New Tax Increases Could Lead to a Spike in Harm
According to government officials, applicants must commit to achieving an “industry-free funding status” by 2030. Although the expectation has raised questions for organizations that still depend on industry donations to survive, officials noted they would adopt a pragmatic view for the next two years. Funds from the National Lottery will not count as industry money during this period, though that position may be reevaluated.
Starting in April 2026, however, the rules will become stricter. Any organization that receives money from the fund must not accept contributions from gambling operators. The Government Grants Management Service will help facilitate the transition with the Find a Grant portal, introducing a new digital system to streamline monitoring and reporting after 2026.
This development coincides with significant upheaval in the gambling sector due to the recently unveiled gambling tax rise from 21% to 40%. Experts are concerned that this tax increase may push more players to unlicensed sites, increasing the risk of harm and putting even more pressure on the already hard-pressed organizations. The new fund will thus be invaluable in bolstering the country’s harm prevention infrastructure before the statutory levy takes full effect.