Congratulations to Marieka Klawitter for receiving a 2023 UW Distinguished Teaching Award!
The winners will be honored from 3:30 to 5:30 p.m. on June 8 at the Katharyn Alvord Gerlich Theater in Meany Hall. The president and provost will host a one-hour ceremony, followed by a reception with hors d’oeuvres, desserts and a chance to connect and celebrate with the UW community.
This event is free and open to the public.
On May 3, 2023, the Evans School hosted our Spring Theory to Practice webinar on Artificial Intelligence and Implications for Public Policy. Evans School Professor Justin Bullock and Information School Professor Afra Mashhadi shared their insights into the rapidly developing field of AI and discussed possible policy implications related to the increased development and use of large language models.
Theory to Practice is an ongoing series of discussions hosted by the Evans School that brings together academics and researchers at UW with practitioners in the field to explore key policy, governance, and social sector topics.
Event Speakers:
The Evans School welcomes Professor Debra Hevenstone from the Bern University of Applied Sciences in Switzerland, as a Visiting Scholar for Spring Quarter 2023. Debra, who received her Ph.D. in the joint Sociology-Public Policy Program at the University of Michigan, sat down with the Evans School when she arrived in mid-April.
Evans School: Welcome to Seattle and the Evans School! Tell us a little about your research program and current projects.
Debra: Great to be here! This is an exciting time because I am at a critical juncture with respect to projects. In the past few years, I had several big projects which are mostly being wrapped up. One study funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) looked at how a reduction in Swiss unemployment insurance entitlement impacted divorce, health, employment, and poverty differentially depending on family circumstances. A second SNF project (not yet published!) looks at the Swiss child penalty, the reduction in earnings experienced by women upon having their first child, examining the extent to which it can be explained by part-time work, the standard working model for Swiss mothers. Another project funded by the Swiss Network for International Studies looked at Social Impact Bonds, a newish way to fund social services that involves investors. The project goal was to estimate the counterfactual impact of financing. The project brought up a lot of questions for me beyond the published results about how scientific paths of inquiry are set and about efficiency in social policy provision.
Looking forward, I am planning a project examining how Hackathons, multi-day volunteer events where digital or technical prototypes are developed, might be used as labor market integration tools for high-skill refugees to integrate at-level, an area where few interventions have been found to be effective. of the project will also use Hackathons as a sort of laboratory in market design, testing whether deferred acceptance algorithms can be used to create stable and inclusive teams.
Evans School: Your work has clear real-world policy application. How do you connect your research findings to policy and practice?
Debra: This is one of the things that is most important to me in my work. The interplay between empiricism and practice became a focus for me when I was a college student, and read a lot of Dewey and Rorty in a philosophy class on pragmatism. I try to integrate in my projects not just a one-way science communication, but an exchange. For example, within the SNF project on unemployment we hosted an end-event called “Dialogue between research and policy: An interactive workshop about work, family, and social policy,” where we brought together policy makers (from all levels of government), leaders of non-profits, and academics. For our project on the Swiss child penalty, we presented our results not only at academic conferences, but also at the Swiss Federal Social Insurance Office. To be totally honest, when it comes to the exchange between research and practice – I am constantly learning what works.
Evans School: That is an important observation that resonates across our research community. One of your new project ideas focuses on comparing social policy across European and North American federal systems. This project is in its earliest stages, but what core questions are guiding your inquiry?
Debra: As you say, this project is at the very beginning stages. When I was a young analyst at the Brookings Institution, I worked for a political scientist studying the devolution of U.S. welfare cash assistance. Back then I felt like devolution just introduced unnecessary inequities—I was not convinced by arguments about “laboratories of democracy.” But over the decades I have seen many cases where I think federalism has advantages – like in our study of social impact bonds (SIBs) we saw more fiscal constraint in our Swiss SIB, where policy choices were local, compared to our UK case where key choices were federal – with qualitative research suggesting it was about political accountability. I am hoping to take the case of childcare subsidies, where there is variability over time and space in state versus local control and look at the negative effects of devolution (inequality in support or access and discontinuous or downward sloping benefit reduction rates) versus the positives (fiscal constraint and adjustment to local conditions).
Evans School: While in residence at UW, you will be collaborating with Social Work and Evans adjunct faculty to connect social work students in Bern and Seattle. Please share how you and Jennie will facilitate learning across these two different social and political settings.
Debra: My university is encouraging digital exchange classes in a particular format called COIL, where students first meet in a few sessions all together, then work in small mixed-nationality groups, and finally rejoin at the end of the semester presenting their work. The idea is that we can have an environmentally friendly academic and cultural exchange, with students only flying for longer semester or year-long exchanges. This is important as our shorter exchanges are being geographically limited: no more travels outside of Europe. Jennie and I are going to do a single session exchange to test how it works. The Swiss and American students will read the same or similar materials, and then we will meet for an online seminar. Depending on student feedback following the exchange, I am hoping we might develop a semester-long course. This is, however, not such a simple thing. Administratively there must be similar course needs in the two locations, and then there is the question of whether students can really exchange on a long-term joint international project on-line. And then I wonder if such a course could be a first step towards an exchange agreement. This is hard for us in Switzerland, as a few students would want to visit the US, but the US universities – even state schools – are just too expensive comparatively. Anyhow, the potential positive is big, so it’s worth a try, right? I also think the Swiss students would like the Pacific Northwest – related to the next question!
Evans School: Exciting work! Last question – what kind of adventures do you and your family hope to have while in the Pacific Northwest this spring and summer?
Debra: We are really thrilled to be in the Pacific Northwest!! We are planning camping in the San Juan Islands and Olympic Peninsula. Maybe an outing to Portland and Mount Rainier. I have fond memories of climbing around Leavenworth, but I think my daughter is still too young for that. Locally I am really excited to show my daughter the Ballard locks in June when the fish start to run, and we have already enjoyed the Burke Gillman trail. My husband is really excited about the biking around Seattle while I am working – and I am jealous! The nature here is just breathtaking and it is a privilege to be here.
Evans School: Sounds like you have a wonderful spring ahead! Welcome to our community!
Debra: Thanks!
We had the opportunity to connect with Nicolás Díaz Huarnez, MPA ‘20. As a student, Nicolás supported research for Zero Waste Washington, which led to the passage of the 2022 Organics Management Law in Washington state We chatted with Nicolás about his experience at the Evans School, the work his are currently doing in Chile, and his passion for waste management and its connections to climate change. His current role is with Global Methane Hub as a Project Manager for the Waste and Circular Economy Program. The hub is a global philanthropic effort to address methane emissions in alignment with the Global Methane Pledge which has been subscribed by more than 160 countries to reduce methane emissions globally by 30% by 2030, compared to 2020 emissions.
Conversation edited for length and clarity.
Before coming to the Evans School, I wanted to connect science and policy for addressing climate change. I was accepted into the Fulbright program and chose to go to Evans because of its strengths in the environmental policy courses – Seattle and Washington state are also very inspiring places to live and to work on environmental policy.
Climate change is one of the most pressing threats to governments and people’s livelihoods. I have been working to connect efforts from policy, science, and from everything that’s been done in practice to overcome climate change, and, with time, I have deepened my focus to address the challenges posed by the management of waste.
At Evans, I applied to The Cynthia L. and David S. Harrison Endowed Fellowship for Environmental Policy and was selected to take part as an intern with Zero Waste Washington. They do amazing work—it was a very good match for my interests, and they needed someone to focus on organizing a lot of data to assess the landscape of segregated waste collection and drop-off programs across the state and develop a report on this. In addition to the environmental policy concentration, I also took classes on quantitative analysis, and I ended up combining the work from those courses with the project at Zero Waste Washington.
It wasn’t easy to do an analysis of all jurisdictions across Washington state. I remember looking at more than 300 jurisdictions, so it was very detailed work. This project allowed me to understand the complexity of setting goals at the state level and the implementation at local jurisdictions. This process was a good learning experience of how challenging it can be to align efforts on a larger scale.
Because of the pandemic, I had to return to Chile with my wife and our two kids. I had just finished up my studies, but I reconnected with Zero Waste Washington before coming back to Chile and joined on to support a follow-up report that was much more focused on organics.
This second report was very detailed, too, and it contributed to the 2022 Organics Management Law that Washington passed (HB 1799). We worked with data from the State Department of Ecology and conducted more than 60 interviews with representatives of the public and private waste sector across the state. This was a great combination of what I learned at Evans in terms of understanding the policy process in the U.S. – it is very different from my background here in Chile. I think this work was needed to push decision makers across the state to rethink the way it was targeting and dealing with compost and to share the experience from all the advancements that the City of Seattle was leading by then. We were showing what was required to take this big step at the state level given its climate commitments.
This law is great for Washington state, and we really need to address organics everywhere. I hope this work can permeate the rest of the country and beyond. We need this type of legislation now since we don’t have 100 years to address climate change but less than a decade to avoid its worst consequences.
It takes courage just to talk about climate change. Standing and speaking and doing something about it – and in the case of policy makers and everyone that works on public issues, it takes courage and commitment to work towards those types of targets and goals.
Equity is a cornerstone of what we are doing because you cannot think about waste or emissions without thinking about justice or development or human rights, especially in the waste landscape. It is important because you are talking about people that are exposed to the burden of society because of historical inequities. It is an integral part of whatever you are working on from a public policy lens.
When you come in against these challenges from a public standpoint, you have to believe in what you are doing and be consistent. Although it can be hard sometimes to stay consistent, it’s about being mindful of what you are trying to address through your work, and the way that this work relates to what you are doing as a citizen, as a person, and, in my case, as a father when considering the inter-generational implications of climate change.
I’m very happy to know that this is being highlighted as part of Evans’ alumni profiles, because it is critical. When you try to advance this type of agenda, you really need to commit to the values, too.
I follow the Freakonomics podcast. It’s very interesting because it’s not only economics, but it also covers how policy intersects with common problems that you find on a daily basis.
For everyone working on climate, please go and read the most recent IPCC report. Also try to connect with the people that are organizing around where you are. Get to know not only what’s being thought about and done on the global landscape, but also at the local level.
It’s always important to connect with different opinions – to challenge your potential biases and explore new approaches. It can give you a more complete idea of what the challenges and the problems are. And continue to grow as a person, because I think that’s a key part of understanding your place in the world. In Chile we have a saying “who looks for something finds it.” I use that advice all the time.
U.S. News & World Report’s 2024 Best Graduate Schools places the Evans School of Public Policy & Governance among the best schools in the nation and the world. We are proud that our perennially ranked, top-ten graduate program continues to demonstrate the relevance of our curriculum, the influence of our alumni and the impactful research of our faculty. Having held a top-ten ranking concurrently for more than 10 years is a powerful reminder that the impact we make is real.
Three of our specializations were also ranked in the top ten: Environmental Policy (2), Nonprofit Management (5), and Public Finance & Budgeting (9).
Evans School Dean Jodi Sandfort noted: “Our strong national reputation is an important resource we draw upon in setting the direction of public policy education in our country at this time. Our focus upon democratizing public policy and inspiring public service is being recognized as the next generation of strategies for public policy education. Our students benefit from our engagement with important questions and support for innovating new approaches to policy and management. Through these strategies, we are working to address the inequities built into our institutions and spark a shared belief in the sacred work of public service.”
These rankings are released annually and are based on reputation and respect among peer institutions.
We recently had the opportunity to sit down for an interview with current MPA student Absa Samba to learn more about her work leading the Washington Coalition to End Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting and their major legislative victory this session – the passage of Washington’s first bill to protect children from this practice, support those who have experienced FGM/C, and educate communities and service providers.
First, can you tell us a bit about yourself? What led you to pursue an MPA at the Evans School?
I’m an international student from The Gambia, pursuing a Master of Public Administration and a Master of Social Work. Over the years, I’ve engaged in work and advocacy at the community level, and I’ve seen how policies can be detached from local, everyday realities – I’ve been frustrated by this. I became interested in better understanding how policy formulation works and to be involved in the process. That is what brought me to the MPA program – the disconnect I’ve seen with how policies are shaped and how they impact individuals and communities. I want to see policies work better for the people and communities I serve.
You’ve been involved in an effort to bring forward legislation pertaining to female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) in Washington State. Can you share more background about your involvement in this cause and the work that led to introducing legislation this year?
I am a survivor of female genital cutting, and, for so long, I didn’t understand why anyone would be subjected to this harmful practice. In middle school, I had the opportunity to be trained on gender equity. For the first time, I had language for what was happening around me—the social and gender inequities in my society. I always felt it, but I now had a better understanding of the issue, and it changed my life. From then on, I started doing a lot of advocacies around education for girls and against harmful cultural practices like FGM/C.
When I moved to the U.S. in 2016 to pursue my undergrad at Champlain College in Vermont, I was invited to classrooms to present on FGM/C, and I realized I needed to make the issue make sense to people here. Through research, I found out that FGM/C is an issue in the U.S. with at least 500,000 women and girls at risk. I made sure my presentations touched on FGM/C as a global issue by focusing on what it is in The Gambia, U.S. and globally. It was through those presentations that I was eventually introduced to a Senator in Vermont in 2019. At the time, Vermont, like Washington, did not have a law addressing FGM/C. I would later testify to the Vermont Senate Health and Welfare Committee on why the state should end the practice and why a preventative approach can help empower communities. In 2020, Vermont would pass a law prohibiting the practice of FGM/C. Later that year, I was invited to join the Connecticut Coalition to End FGM/C which aims to get the state to end this practice, and I continue to work with the coalition there to date.
During my spring quarter of the MPA program at Evans School, I took the policy analysis core class. We were put in small groups to work on a policy issue. Since I had knowledge of the issue of FGM/C and experience with it—my own personal and advocacy work experience—my team agreed to make this the focus of our project. We set out to research what the status of FGM/C is in Washington state. We found that Washington state is ranked the eighth highest risk state for FGM/C in the U.S., and that the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue metro area is ranked the fifth highest risk city in the U.S. with an estimated 25,000 girls and women at risk of or have undergone FGM/C. We also found that there were two bills introduced in the Washington legislature to address FGMC, but they hadn’t made it out of committee.
Stephen Kosack, our professor, gave us feedback to research why those bills had failed, and, through this research, I connected with Senator Karen Keiser. She introduced a bill in 2019 but couldn’t get it out of committee due to some opposition from affected communities. Through my conversations with the senator, I saw a desire from her to do something about this issue, and to do it right. I decided then to take my work from a class assignment to actually implementing the project. I seized the opportunity – I offered to do a presentation on the issue in Washington, and she took me up on it.
Senator Keiser invited other senators who chairs various committees to attend the presentation. I knew then that I needed to invite other people to join me in this space and present alongside me. I invited Bettina Shell-Duncan from the UW Department of Anthropology, who has 25 years of research on this subject, and Mariya Taher who runs an organization called SAHIYO. We did the presentation, and, afterwards, we decided we needed to keep the conversation going. We started to invite more and more folks, and it became apparent that there was a desire across the board to address this issue in Washington.
Personally, I wanted to make sure the voice and needs of individuals and communities impacted by this issue were informing the policy. This goes back to my desire to see policy, from design to implementation, support the best interest of those it’s intended to serve in the first place. We started a coalition of survivors, advocates, legislators, researchers, and national and local organizations to ensure we had an active say in how the bill was crafted. Sen. Kaiser was really generous in making sure the bill contained what we wanted – we had full say on what should and shouldn’t be included in the bill. The coalition itself became survivor-led, which was why it was successful.
With this approach, it became really exciting to see the support this bill has received. Communities that opposed previous bills joined our coalition to work on this one. Lawmakers have shown their support too—the bill had a unanimous vote in the Senate and a 95 to 1 vote in the House. We also did extensive advocacy during the legislative process, submitting oral and written testimonies to get legislators to see why they should support this bill.
What are you and your fellow advocates hoping to accomplish with this legislation?
We wanted a holistic approach to ending the practice of FGM/C in Washington state. We were particularly concerned about a potential law that would contribute to perpetuating the existing inequities in the criminal legal system—we wanted a bill that empowered our communities rather than disempowered them.
We were successful in getting an FGM/C bill passed that prohibits the cutting of a female minor and allows for civil remedies. It also included a statute of limitations allowing a person up to 10 years after to bring civil action against a cutter or 10 years after their 18th birthday.
The most crucial part of the bill is its education and outreach component which is intended to help communities across Washington State learn about the issue and support those that have been affected. This component will support education for medical practitioners, teachers, first responders, and service providers to help identify those at risk and to better provide care for survivors. The bill also mandates that the state Department of Health is responsible for the implementation of this provision. I believe this to be the most important part of the bill because there is a culture of silence across the board on FGM/C in Washington state. This bill presents an opportunity to have conversations in our communities and workspaces toward ending FGM/C and making sure survivors are accessing the support and care that they deserve.
What have you learned from navigating the legislative process to date? In what ways has your Evans School experience informed this work?
During our class project, we had to identify the various stakeholders affected by FGM/C, what levels of engagement they should have in addressing the issue, and the powers they hold. That helped me to understand who needed to be involved in this process and what voices need to lead the work. I learned why coalitions are important and the power that they have to make meaningful change. Dean Jodi also gave me great advice to start thinking about what implementation looks like to make sure we protect the integrity and intent of the law once passed. This led our coalition to connect with the Department of Health – as the bill mandates, they are responsible for the education and outreach component.
The biggest lesson I’ve learned is the value and power in having individuals and communities, who a policy is intended to serve, lead the work in shaping the change. In this case, through this approach, we were able to get allies in spaces where it was least expected. We also were able to get a policy we can all be proud of because it will leave communities and individuals empowered.
Another lesson I have learned is the importance of consensus building in this work. I went into this process with view of how easy it would be to work with a coalition of people who all share a common belief that this practice should be prohibited. But as our coalition grew larger, we had a challenge – we all strongly believed that FGM/C should be banned but had disagreements on what approach we should take. As the facilitator, I also had the responsibility of making sure everyone felt like they were heard and that their opinions are valued, which made it even harder. So, as you can imagine, it took a long and necessary amount of time to talk through the various options and come to a consensus as a group to help us move forward in this work together. In the end, everyone was happy with the decisions that were made. It was challenging and frustrating, but I learned that this is a necessary part of the process.
I also learned the value of self-care. This work comes with a hidden cost which takes a mental and emotional toll on the people who do it. For many of us, it is our personal and lived experiences that we are using to make the change. The emotional and social implications are huge for many survivors who engage in this work. Which is why compassion is also a big part of the work. No one that did this work with our coalition was paid, and people gave their time, stories, expertise, and resources generously.
We were driven by the desire to see a Washington state where future generations of girls and women will be protected against FGM/C.
What’s ahead for you? What do you envision doing after you graduate from the Evans School?
I am not sure! I want to have a meaningful impact in the world, and I have a desire to see a world where people can be their whole selves. That is the type of work I want to do.
If you’d like to learn more about protecting children in Washington State from FFM/C, you can view this webinar produced by the Washington Coalition to End FGMC. You can also follow the WA Coalition to End FGM/C on Facebook.
The William D. Ruckelshaus Center – a public policy-minded collaboration between Washington State University and the University of Washington – has found its next director.
Julia Carboni, an associate professor with Syracuse University’s Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, was selected to lead the Seattle-based center following a nationwide search. Carboni’s first day in the role will be July 1.
“The work done by both the Ruckelshaus Center is tremendously important for the impact it has in Washington, as well as its ability to serve as a model for other states and regions. “I am thrilled for the opportunity to lead the Ruckelshaus Center jointly supported by WSU and UW and to partner with elected officials, public and private sector, and other key stakeholders to help expand its impact across the Pacific Northwest and beyond,” Carboni said.
The Ruckelshaus Center offers leaders of public, private, tribal, and non-profit organizations the ability to tap into the experience of WSU and UW researchers and experts to meet the needs of their communities and constituencies. Such projects include assessing the state’s K-12 governance structure, redesigning Washington’s intellectual and developmental disabilities policy, and working toward the preservation of the state’s coastline, among other efforts.
The Office of the Provost and Executive Vice President administers the program at Washington State University in collaboration with UW’s Daniel J. Evans School of Public Policy and Governance.
“It is vital that the next leader of the Ruckelshaus Center advances its core mission to help diverse groups find solutions to some of the most important challenges facing our state and region, and Dr. Carboni is the perfect person to be at the helm,” Elizabeth Chilton, WSU provost and executive vice president, said.
Carboni joined the faculty at Syracuse’s Maxwell school in 2016 as an assistant professor in the Department of Public Administration and International Affairs. In 2020, she was named research director of the school’s Program for the Advancement of Research on Conflict and Collaboration, and a year later was named chair of the school’s Citizenship and Civic Engagement Program.
Carboni holds a Masters of Public Administration as well as a Ph.D. in management from the University of Arizona. Carboni has served numerous non-profit and public service groups, including the Foodbank of Central New York, the Association for Research on Nonprofit Organizations and Voluntary Action, and the University Network for Collaborative Governance.
As part of the nationwide search for the center’s next director, WSU laid out what it envisions as key opportunities and challenges ahead.
“Enhancing Ruckelshaus Center’s visibility and impact, leveraging the full combined capacity of WSU and UW, facilitating cooperation across sectors, and diversifying the financial support the center receives are among the priorities Dr. Carboni will be advancing as she assumes this role,” Chilton said. “It’s also important that the center continues to foster meaningful connections across the state and foster our shared principals of diversity, equity, inclusion and access.”
The center is named in honor of William D. Ruckelshaus, an American politician whose legacy centers on his ability to bring disparate groups together to craft policy. Ruckelshaus was the first to serve as the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency in 1970. His expertise in navigating disagreements between political parties resonates to this day, with these principals serving as the guides for the center that now bears his name.
WSU and UW opened the center in October 2006 with commitments from the leaders of both universities, Ruckelshaus, and then-Washington state Governor Christine Gregoire. More information on the center is available on its website.
Joaquin Mayorga recently joined the Evans School of Public Policy & Governance as a postdoctoral scholar with the Evans School Policy Analysis and Research Group (EPAR). He received his Ph.D. in Business Administration with a concentration in Agribusiness from the WP Carey School of Business at Arizona State University and an MA in Economics from the Center for Economic Research and Teaching (Mexico City). Before his graduate studies, he worked as a Junior Researcher at the Center for Environmental-Economic Modeling and Analysis at INESAD in La Paz, Bolivia.
The Evans School spent time with Joaquin to learn more about his research program and interests.
Evans: Welcome to the Evans School! You have extensive expertise around the effects of climate hazards on agricultural productivity and small-scale producers’ livelihoods. How did you first become interested in this area of policy research?
JM: Thank you for the welcome! My interest in this area comes from my experience growing up in Bolivia, where about a third of the labor force works in agriculture. I saw firsthand the impact of droughts and receding mountain glaciers on the water supply for cities and small-scale producers in my region. After my undergraduate studies, I worked on data-driven and policy-oriented projects related to forest conservation and agricultural productivity. This experience further motivated me to pursue graduate studies in agricultural economics.
Evans: If you reflect on your research portfolio to date, what are a couple findings that stand out to you as particularly important for policymakers to understand?
JM: I think two findings stand out in my research portfolio. One result shows that small-scale producers in Nigeria tend to increase the area planted in adaptation to high-temperature shocks. This adaptation may mitigate income shocks in the short term but may not be sustainable in the long run if it reduces soil quality. The other finding indicates that supply chain contracts between small-scale producers and intermediary firms with a fixed output price and training provision raise farm productivity, particularly for more risk-averse farmers. These findings show the need for policymakers to consider the long-term implications of climate adaptation practices and the advantages of promoting supply chain contracts between small-scale producers and intermediary firms.
Evans: Your work leads you to studying agricultural production across the globe. How does working in many different social and cultural settings strengthen your approach to understanding the relationship between climate change and agricultural policy?
JM: In my experience, small-scale producers worldwide face some common climate-related challenges, but the responses and adaptations can vary across countries. Understanding the drivers of these variations is critical in identifying effective policy solutions for climate change challenges. Working across different regions has deepened my appreciation for the importance of context-specific policies to support agricultural producers.
Evans: You draw upon many different sources of data in your work. What are the common challenges you encounter around data quality in this area of research? Where are data quality investments most needed?
JM: I sometimes encounter challenges with measurement error, especially when variables like plot size are self-reported by farmers. Also, data availability varies by location, as some low- and middle-income countries have high-quality small-scale producer surveys while others have little to no farm-level data. Given the need to address climate change, I believe it would be helpful to include questions about farmers’ perceptions of climate change in farmer surveys. This addition could provide policymakers with valuable insights.
Evans: What excites you most about this post-doctoral research position with EPAR?
JM: What excites me the most about this position is the chance to work on policy-oriented analysis and research in collaboration with stakeholders in the policy-making process. I’m also thrilled to work with a great team of researchers and be part of the broader community at the Evans School and UW. I am looking forward to producing research with real-world impact.
Evans: Thanks for chatting – welcome again to the Evans School!
JM: Thank you!