August 25, 2026 Volume 73 Issue 3

Hello, and welcome to a new academic year at Penn. As we begin the semester, I want to share a few thoughts.

First, Penn is better because you are here. I say this often while meeting new and returning students and their families, but it bears repeating because it is true. You, our students, faculty, staff, and alumni are what drive Penn's mission and leadership in the world. We are at our best when we learn together.

Second, our strategic initiative, Penn Forward, is gaining momentum as we focus on the future. Be on the lookout this fall for updates on how Penn is building trust, enabling discovery, and expanding our reach. In the meantime, I want to thank all of the teams that have been working hard to bring these priorities to life. Across the university and the health system, people are refreshing old models and testing new ideas. These efforts lie at the heart of our institution, persistently creating and applying new knowledge and ideas. That creative energy drives Penn and propels our reputation in the world. It's our greatest strength, and I celebrate you for it.

Third, this is the year for Penn anniversaries. 275 years of Pennsylvania Hospital, 150 years of women at Penn. The Palestra, Penn football, Career Services, Kelly Writers House, Platt Student Performing Art House, Perry World House, and Pennovation are all observing big milestones. I encourage you to join these celebrations as we honor our history and look to the future.

Our community has never been more vibrant or better positioned to do transformative things. In our learning and teaching, research, clinical care, and service, I'm inspired every day by what we achieve here for society and in the world. I believe we have another amazing year ahead, so thank you and welcome back.

—J. Larry Jameson, President

Watch the video: https://president.upenn.edu/welcome-back-message

Provost John L. Jackson, Jr. and Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education Russell Composto have announced the appointment of Sarah Gronningsater, an associate professor of history in the School of Arts & Sciences, to the Evan C Thompson Chair for Excellence in Teaching, effective July 1, 2026.

Dr. Gronningsater is a historian of eighteenth- and nineteenth-century America, focusing on slavery and abolition. Her first book, The Rising Generation: Gradual Abolition, Black Legal Culture, and the Making of National Freedom (Penn Press, 2024), explores the history of emancipation in the United States through the experiences of a generation of Black New Yorkers, born after the American Revolution and reaching adulthood in the lead-up to the Civil War, who played an outsized role in political and legal conflicts over slavery’s future, influencing the nation’s path to the Civil War and changes to the U.S. Constitution, including mid-nineteenth century campaigns for legal equality, political inclusion, and the expansion of freedom. 

In the past year, this book has received the James Broussard Best First Book Prize from the Society for Historians of the Early American Republic, the James A. Rawley Award from the Organization of American Historians for the best book on U.S. race relations, and the William Nelson Cromwell Foundation Book Prize from the American Society for Legal History for the best book in legal history by an early career scholar, as well as honorable mentions in Best First Book awards from the Organization of American Historians and the Berkshire Conference of Women Historians. 

Dr. Gronningsater, who has taught at Penn since 2017, received the Richard S. Dunn Award for Distinguished Teaching in both 2025 and 2020 (awarded by undergraduate history majors and minors for excellence in undergraduate teaching), as well as the Friars Senior Society Faculty Award and SAS Dean’s Award for Distinguished Teaching by an Assistant Professor in 2023. She teaches undergraduate courses like History of American Law to 1877 and History of U.S. Baseball, 1840-Present, and has been a leader for the past two years of the Penn Reading Project, which has educated entering undergraduate students on the American Revolution, its connections to Philadelphia, the experiences of young people (including but not limited to Penn students) during the contentious beginnings of the United States, and ongoing questions about democracy today.

Dr. Gronningsater also serves as Penn’s NCAA Faculty Athletics Representative, a role with joint appointments in the Office of the Provost and the Division of Recreation and Intercollegiate Athletics that supports the academic success of student-athletes, including strengthening collaborations between the academic community and Penn Athletics, furthering compliance with NCAA and Ivy League regulations, and partnering with the Pottruck Center for Student-Athlete Success. She received a PhD with distinction in history from the University of Chicago, an MSt with distinction in history from the University of Oxford, and an AB magna cum laude in history and literature from Harvard University. 

Evan C Thompson, W’64, endowed the Thompson Professorship in 2003 to recognize teaching excellence in the four undergraduate schools at Penn. The most recent Thompson Chairs–who serve for terms of three years and work closely with the Center for Excellence in Teaching, Learning, and Innovation–were Jie Deng in the School of Nursing, Daeyeon Lee in the School of Engineering and Applied Science, and Katherine Milkman in the Wharton School. 

Please find below the key themes that emerged from the feedback we received on the initial revisions to the Open Expression Guidelines, as promised in my July message. In addition to a summary of these themes, we have provided a brief overview of the process used to solicit feedback and a reminder of our plans for next steps. This summary was drafted with assistance from Professor Eric Feldman, senior advisor to the Provost on Open Expression, and members of the President’s and Provost’s offices, along with input from the Committee on Open Expression.

—John L. Jackson, Jr., Provost 

On March 31, 2026, the Office of the Provost published proposed revisions to the Guidelines on Open Expression in the University of Pennsylvania Almanac. Members of Penn’s community were invited to provide feedback on the draft Guidelines. The Provost’s Office received 193 Qualtrics and email submissions; held two community listening sessions; hosted meetings with constituency groups, including student leaders of the Undergraduate Assembly, the Graduate and Professional Student Assembly, and the Student Committee on Undergraduate Education; and discussed the draft with the Academic Planning and Budget Committee, University Council Steering Committee, and at least a dozen individual members of the Penn community. This collective feedback, along with several articles in The Daily Pennsylvanian, has been provided to the Committee on Open Expression (COE), the tri-chairs of the Faculty Senate, the Office of the President, and Penn Carey Law professor Eric Feldman, who chaired the listening sessions and is currently serving as senior advisor to the Provost on Open Expression. This communication aims to summarize the content and tone of the feedback so that it can help frame and inform a final version of the Guidelines.

A portion of the feedback addresses the process through which the proposed Guidelines were revised. The remainder focuses on important substantive issues, including governance and oversight, campus safety, online expression, permits, identification, and overall clarity. We are grateful for the time and thought that has gone into the feedback and will rely on it to help ensure that the final iteration of the Guidelines captures the commitment to open expression at the core of our shared values: engaging with ideas, seeking truth, producing knowledge, and expressing different viewpoints. The Penn community deserves guidelines that unambiguously embrace the foundational importance of open expression and effectively support it on our campus. With that goal as their guiding light, the COE has been working on an updated draft of the revised Guidelines. We want to thank everyone who has taken the time to provide input on the first revised draft, and we look forward to soliciting community responses to a newly revised draft of the Guidelines later this semester. 

Summary of Community Responses: 

Community members express a range of concerns regarding the process of revising the Guidelines. They are unclear about why the Guidelines are being revised and assert that the recommendations of the Task Force on Open Expression, convened by President Jameson in August 2024, should have been shared with the Penn community. Similarly, commenters address the transparency of the revision process over the past year and raise questions about who has been working on revising the Guidelines, what role the COE has played in that process, and why community input on the revisions was not invited until late in the 2025-26 academic year.

Commenters are also critical of the process through which input on the proposed revisions has been solicited. They express dissatisfaction that the proposed revisions were published in Almanac, suggesting a lack of openness to feedback; dismay that neither the President nor the Provost had planned to attend the listening sessions; discontent that the full transcript of the listening sessions would not be made public; and disappointment that the sessions were held at the end of the spring semester, when students had exams and both faculty and staff were particularly busy. These process concerns are accompanied by a variety of suggestions, which include discarding the proposed revisions, extending the time for review of the proposed revisions, scheduling additional listening sessions, and creating opportunities for more consultation with faculty, staff, and students. The sharpest criticism labels the revised Guidelines as “unsalvageable” and advocates going back to the starting gate by charging the COE with drafting an entirely new set of guidelines.

In addition to the above comments on process, community feedback on the proposed revisions focuses on a variety of issues involving administration and oversight. A significant number of comments address the role of the Provost in overseeing the Guidelines and express concern that the Guidelines concentrate too much authority in the Office of the Provost. They note that, under the proposed Guidelines, the Provost must approve student, staff, and faculty nominees to the COE; in the past, those constituencies independently determined their committee representatives. Commenters also point out that, under the proposed Guidelines, both the COE and the new executive director of Open Expression report to the Provost. Overall, those who express concern about the concentration of authority in the Provost’s Office suggest distributing more authority to other actors/offices, along with the imposition of robust checks and balances on the authority of the Provost.

Commenters express similar concerns about the concentration of authority in the executive director of Open Expression and Open Expression Observers. They question whether the executive director should have sole authority for the referral of disciplinary matters related to open expression. Instead, they suggest that referral decisions should be made jointly by the chair of the COE and the executive director, or in consultation with the relevant school dean, and that the COE should hear and decide appeals. Concerns are also expressed about the role of the Open Expression Observers, with some maintaining that they could be seen as a surveillance and enforcement mechanism rather than as supporters of open expression.

A related set of comments address the role of the Committee on Open Expression. Some community members perceive a contrast between the COE’s advisory authority and membership as described in the revisions and the past independence of the Committee, which in their view represents a weakening of shared governance. Some commenters note the reduction in the number of faculty, student, and staff roles on the COE and suggest that the Committee should have equal representation of each constituency. Additional comments note that the proposed revisions appear to eliminate the COE’s mediating, interpretive, and investigatory role. To remedy these perceived deficiencies, some emphasize the importance of ensuring that members of the COE hold a spectrum of views about open expression, others emphasize the need for the Committee to be independent, and many suggest that appointments to the Committee should be made by representative campus constituencies without the need for provostial approval.

Community members also raise questions about some of the specific requirements of the proposed Guidelines, including provisions governing the scheduling and permitting of protests, the role of law enforcement and ID checks, online expression, and amplified sound, chalking, and projection. 

With regard to spontaneous protest and the scheduling of expressive events, community members emphasize that such activity is foundational to open expression. They criticize the required timeline in the proposed Guidelines (seven days) for scheduling events and demonstrations as disabling spontaneous protest, particularly when community members wish to respond to an event soon (or immediately) after it occurs. Some commenters suggest designating certain University spaces as open to spontaneous expressive activity without the need to reserve space in advance. Others suggest an administrative process that enables immediate, spontaneous protest without the need for a reservation or permit.

Some commenters express concern that the proposed revisions could substantially increase law enforcement’s discretionary authority on campus and eliminate its accountability, particularly because the revisions reference law enforcement generally rather than solely referencing Penn’s Division of Public Safety. A few comments assert that the proposed revisions might allow police violence. Those concerns are coupled with uneasiness about the requirement that members of the Penn community involved in expressive activities must present University identification upon request. Commenters note that refusal to present identification may constitute a violation of the Guidelines, that the names of those whose IDs are checked could be recorded, and that those records could potentially be used for criminal prosecution and deportation. Some commenters suggest clarifying that any request to present University identification is for the sole purpose of determining affiliation with the University, that names should not be recorded, and that ID requests should be limited to situations in which there is credible evidence of criminal activity. 

The impact of the proposed revisions on the use of social media is also a concern raised by members of the community. Commenters note a lack of clarity regarding the potential policing of personal social media posts and express concern about the potential of University policies to limit private speech. They encourage a limited application of the proposed revisions to personal social media and greater specificity regarding online expressive activity and University standards. Commenters also suggest that the University take action to counter “doxxing” of Penn community members.

Some Penn community members express concern that sound regulations in the proposed revisions are unreasonably restrictive of expressive activity. They specifically criticize the limited time window for amplified sound, as well as the removal of the decibel standards included in the previous Guidelines. As a remedy, they suggest restoration of a decibel standard and expansion of the time window for open expression. With respect to limitations on light projections, community members criticize them as overly restrictive and unjustifiable. Rejecting restrictions on chalking and postering, commenters note that temporary signage is an important method of communicating about events on campus, including protests. Overall, commenters demand a return to what they characterize as the greater permissiveness of the previous Guidelines, along with more clarity/specificity in this section. 

A few commenters suggest that the scope of the proposed revisions could impinge on academic freedom, noting that they do not require the relevant dean or the Provost to engage with school committees in cases involving academic freedom. Those concerned about this issue suggest that deans and/or the Provost be required to work with school committees on academic freedom in the event of a referral regarding a matter of open expression. 

More generally, some commenters find the proposed Guidelines vague. Community members point to various words and phrases in the proposed revisions—such as “unreasonably disrupt,” “interfere unreasonably,” “event,” “University location,” and “vandalizing”—and ask that they be clarified to ensure that those entrusted with enforcing the Guidelines do not have unbridled interpretive discretion that could lead to limitations on open expression and the unfair imposition of sanctions for violating the Guidelines. 

Finally, a number of commenters find the proposed revisions overly legalistic and prescriptive, failing to capture the fundamental importance of open expression on our campus. To allay this concern, commenters suggest that the Guidelines more clearly emphasize the value of expressive activity and focus less on the consequences of violating the Guidelines. They highlight the statement of principles on the first page of the proposed Guidelines, which they believe captures the essential importance of open expression on campus.

On August 18, the Weitzman School of Design formally welcomed former Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed and former Tulsa Mayor G.T. Bynum as its inaugural Impact Scholars.

“From its earliest days, Penn has been a place where civic leaders converge to share their experiences and deepen their knowledge for the betterment of society, and the Impact Scholars Program continues the tradition,” said Weitzman Dean and Paley Professor Fritz Steiner. “At a time when young Americans are expressing greater pessimism about civic life, it’s critical we connect them with public servants who are committed to transforming research into results.”

The Impact Scholars Program is a unique U.S. fellowship designed specifically for former local public executives. Built as a two-way exchange, the program gives experienced civic leaders a platform to advance unfinished policy work; translate hard-won lessons into actionable guidance for other cities and future leaders; and connect directly with the next generation of changemakers.

The semester-long appointments for fall 2026 mark the launch of the Impact Scholars Program and the Public Service Pipeline, two new programs within Penn’s Public Service and Policy Initiative (PSPI), which was founded by former Philadelphia Mayor Michael A. Nutter. Both programs are hosted in partnership with the Penn Institute for Urban Research.

“Serving as Mayor of Atlanta taught me that the toughest challenges cities face—including expanding economic opportunity, job creation, building a city where everyone can afford to live, fiscal strength, and keeping people safe—are never solved in a single term or even two terms: They require effort and constant vigilance,” said Kasim Reed, former Mayor of Atlanta. “The Impact Scholars program offers something rare: the chance for us to take what we learned in the arena and put it to work alongside Penn’s researchers and students who will serve as the next generation of leaders. I am grateful to Mayor Nutter and Penn for building this bridge between experience and the future.” 

“I am honored to join Mayor Reed as an Impact Scholar at the University of Pennsylvania,” said G.T. Bynum, former Mayor of Tulsa. “My greatest hope for our country is in local government, where leaders are still expected to work with a broad range of people and beliefs to deliver practical results. I am excited to work with and educate Penn students who will be the future leaders of American communities. And I am very grateful to be invited to join this program by Mayor Michael Nutter, who has been a mentor and hero of mine for over a decade.”

In addition to cultivating the next generation of civic talent, Mayors Reed and Bynum will collaborate with Penn researchers to translate local data into actionable strategies for local governments. Their feedback will inform the Philadelphia Economic Equity Project (PEEP), PSPI’s research group studying economic mobility in Philadelphia, ensuring that PEEP’s work is grounded in the realities of governing. 

Together, these programs bridge academic research, community data, and public leadership—creating direct pathways for students and researchers to collaborate with former local governing executives on cities’ most persistent economic and social challenges.

“Cities face increasingly complex challenges that require leaders who bridge research and real-world practice,” said Michael A. Nutter, former Mayor of Philadelphia and managing director of the Public Service and Policy Initiative. “My work with institutions like Bloomberg Philanthropies, Harvard’s Institute of Politics, University of Chicago’s Institute of Politics, and Columbia University’s Institute of Global Politics at SIPA inspired me to launch the Impact Scholars Program—a dedicated space where experienced local public executives can reflect on what they’ve learned, advance ideas that deserve a second life, and work alongside researchers and students to develop next generation solutions. I am honored to welcome former Mayors Kasim Reed and G.T. Bynum as our inaugural scholars.”

Former Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed served two terms as the city’s 59th mayor from 2010 to 2018. During one of the nation’s most challenging economic periods, his administration restored Atlanta’s fiscal health through eight consecutive balanced budgets, increased city reserves from $7.4 million to $200 million, implemented pension reform, expanded public safety, and earned eight consecutive credit-rating upgrades. Mayor  Reed is widely recognized nationally for his leadership in urban governance and economic development.

Former Tulsa Mayor G.T. Bynum served from 2016 to 2024 after eight years on the Tulsa City Council. He guided Tulsa through the COVID-19 pandemic and major natural disasters while leading transformative public investments, including the Gathering Place, Gilcrease Museum, and Zink Lake projects. His administration also initiated the search for victims of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre, expanded civic innovation, and attracted significant private-sector investment to the city. Today, Mayor Bynum advises national organizations including Bloomberg Philanthropies, the Aspen Institute, and Johns Hopkins University on leadership and civic innovation.

Joan E. Lynaugh, former associate dean and director of graduate studies in Penn Nursing, as well as an emeritus professor in the school and the founding director of Penn Nursing’s Center for the Study of the History of Nursing, died on July 10. She was 90.

Dr. Lynaugh was born in Canandaigua, New York, and spent her childhood on her family’s nearby dairy farm. She began her nursing education at St. Mary’s Hospital School of Nursing and went on to earn her BS and MS, both in nursing, as well as a nurse practitioner certificate, all from the University of Rochester. She later earned her PhD from the University of Kansas. Alongside her physician collaborator and partner, Barbara Bates, she became a pioneer in interdisciplinary education and practice, helping shape what has evolved into the modern role of the nurse practitioner. Dr. Lynaugh’s innovative work led Penn Nursing dean Claire Fagin to recruit her to Penn in 1980 to lead the school’s new primary care nursing initiative.

Dr. Lynaugh held numerous leadership positions: She served as the director of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Primary Care Nurse Practitioner Program and as the associate director of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Teaching Nursing Home Project. Furthermore, she served as associate dean and director of graduate studies from 1993 to 1996, and she held a term chair in the history of nursing and health from 1994 to 2000.

Dr. Lynaugh’s greatest institutional impact was her work establishing the history of nursing as a formal field of study. Collaborating with colleagues Ellen Baer and Karen Buhler-Wilkerson, Dr. Lynaugh envisioned a specialized research center designed to preserve documents, conduct research, and teach future generations of scholars. She served as director of Penn Nursing’s Center for the Study of the History of Nursing from 1985 to 1995, laying the foundation for today’s Barbara Bates Center for the Study of the History of Nursing, which celebrates its 40^th anniversary this year. The Bates Center continues to honor Dr. Lynaugh’s legacy through the Joan E. Lynaugh Archives and Special Collections, formally named in her honor in 2018.

As a scholar, Dr. Lynaugh’s work was wide-ranging and deeply influential. Her research examined the social, economic, technological, professional, and demographic factors shaping twentieth-century American hospitals, the role of women in building institutions, healthcare workforce issues, and the relationships between medicine and nursing. She focused on the international dissemination of modern nursing, the development of nursing education, the delivery of nursing services, the post-World War II evolution of nursing specialization, and public policies affecting the profession. Dr. Lynaugh’s career earned numerous professional honors, including designation as a fellow of the American Academy of Nursing. She also was named a Living Legend by the American Academy of Nursing, received a Lifetime Achievement Award from the National Organization of Nurse Practitioner Faculties, and delivered the Kate Hurd Mead Lecture at the College of Physicians of Philadelphia. Dr. Lynaugh also served for many years on the board of the Visiting Nurse Association of Greater Philadelphia and on the board of retirement community Foulkeways at Gwynedd. 

Dr. Lynaugh was predeceased by her partner and longtime professional collaborator, Barbara Bates; her brothers, James Lynaugh (Dorothy Quick) and David Lynaugh; and her sister, Sister Barbara Joan Lynaugh, S.S.J. She is survived by her nieces, Seana Holtz (John) and Mary Clare Hamlin (Hugh); her nephews, Joel Lynaugh (Holly) and Matthew Lynaugh (Gloria); and many great-nieces, great-nephews, and six great-great-nieces and nephews.

A memorial service for Dr. Lynaugh will be held on October 23, 2026, at 1 p.m. in Claire Fagin Hall. Registration and more information can be found here. 

Barbara L. Nichols, a trailblazing leader in nursing and a former member of the Penn Nursing Board of Advisors, died on July 22. 

Dr. Nichols broke barriers throughout her distinguished life. After serving as a head nurse in the U.S. Navy Nurse Corps, she made history as the first African American president of both the Wisconsin Nurses Association and the American Nurses Association (ANA). During her presidency of the ANA (which included two terms beginning in 1978), she championed baccalaureate education as the standard entry into practice and secured a pivotal seat for nurses in national health policy discussions alongside physician and hospital leadership.

Dr. Nichols later served as CEO of the Commission on Graduates of Foreign Nursing Schools, as a consultant to numerous federal agencies, and as a board member of the International Council of Nurses. There, she supported equitable migration of nurses, promoting equitable recruitment and ensuring that nurses had the requisite credentials to provide safe and effective care. Her lifelong commitment to equity and advocacy earned her the profession’s highest honors, including designation as an American Academy of Nursing Living Legend in 2010, induction into the ANA Hall of Fame in 2022, and recognition as an Inaugural Luminary Fellow of the Academy of Diversity Leaders in Nursing in 2024.

From 2011 to 2020, Dr. Nichols served on Penn Nursing’s Board of Advisors, where she collaborated closely with Dean Antonia Villarruel and Dean Emerita Afaf I. Meleis and with many others in the Penn Nursing community. “Beyond her institutional guidance, Dr. Nichols offered profound personal wisdom, often reminding colleagues and friends to live day to day while fully appreciating family, friends, and peers,” said Penn Nursing in an online tribute. “Above all, she will be remembered for her warmth, her wicked sense of humor, and an infectious laugh that engulfed every room.”

“Barbara Nichols was a visionary, a mentor, colleague, and a personal friend whose courage paved the way for generations of nurse leaders,” said Antonia M. Villarruel, the Margaret Bond Simon Dean of Penn Nursing. “Her deep belief in the honor, responsibility, and power of nursing elevated our entire profession. We are profoundly grateful for her service to Penn Nursing and will carry her legacy forward.” 

Douglas Lee Purvis, who most recently served as director of facilities management at Penn Vet, capping off a 40-year career in various schools and departments at Penn, died on June 19. He was 80.

Mr. Purvis came to Penn in 1966 as a laboratory research technician in the department of anatomy at Penn Vet, where he supervised the preparation and maintenance of specimens for gross anatomy courses. He advanced to the position of laboratory course preparator in 1976. His anatomical preparations, which often represented particularly challenging structures and were of outstanding quality, have helped to educate generations of Penn veterinary students. During his first decade at Penn, he earned his BA in anthropology from Penn in 1974 and subsequently completed graduate coursework in anthropology, management, and historic preservation at Penn.

In 1979, Mr. Purvis moved to the Wharton School’s administration, where he served as manager of the school’s physical plant. Three years later, he became the manager of building and engineering services for the Laboratory for Research on the Structure of Matter, and in 1986, he became assistant director of facilities at the School of Medicine. In the fall of 1988, he returned to Penn Vet, first as a construction project manager and then as director of facilities management, a position he held until his retirement in 2007. During his second tenure at Penn Vet, he initiated and oversaw hundreds of projects at Penn Vet’s urban campus in Philadelphia and at the rural large animal facility at New Bolton Center.

He is survived by his wife, Nancy Minugh-Purvis (Gr ’88); his sons, Christopher Cull Purvis and Alan Douglas Purvis; his daughter, Elizabeth (Beth) Jane Minugh Purvis; and a granddaughter, nephew, and nieces.

-

To Report A Death

Almanac appreciates being informed of the deaths of current and former faculty and staff members, students and other members of the University community. Call (215) 898-5274 or email almanac@upenn.edu.

However, notices of alumni deaths should be directed to the Alumni Records Office at Suite 300, 2929 Walnut St., (215) 898-8136 or email record@ben.dev.upenn.edu.

The following agenda is published in accordance with the Faculty Senate Rules. Any member of the standing faculty may attend SEC meetings and observe. Questions may be directed to Patrick Walsh, executive assistant to the Senate Office, either by telephone at (215) 898-6943 or by email at senate@pobox.upenn.edu.

Faculty Senate Executive Committee Agenda
Wednesday, September 2, 2026, 3-5 p.m. 

1. Welcome
2. Getting acquainted
3. Rules of the Road for 2026-2027: Order of meeting business; rules for discussion and voting
4. How do we communicate with our constituencies? Best practices and practical steps toward improvement; reports from constituency representatives; listserv usage
5. Finalize the Minutes of Regular and Special Meetings held on May 13, 2026, May 27, 2026, and June 23, 2026
6. Tri-Chairs’ report
7. Issues requiring a vote
   • Faculty Membership on the 2026-2027 Committee on Open Expression
   • Draft Charges for Senate Standing Committees, 2026-2027
   • Proposal from the 2026 Senate Nominating Committee
8. Topic-specific recommendations for the 2026-2027 SEC Agenda
9. New Business  
10. Letter from the U.S. Secretary of Education on “A National Call to Action to University Presidents and Governing Boards”
11. The Search for Penn’s 11th President

Dear Colleagues,

As a new academic year begins, I am delighted to extend my greetings to faculty across Penn and to reflect on the shared work that lies before us.

I would like to begin by expressing my deep gratitude. The Faculty Senate has benefited enormously from the thoughtful leadership of those who have served before me, and I am keenly aware that I inherit an institution strengthened by the wisdom, judgment, and values of my predecessors. I am equally grateful to the members of the Senate Executive Committee, the standing committees of the Faculty Senate, and the many faculty who devote their time and energy to University service. Although much of this work occurs outside the spotlight, it is indispensable to preserving Penn’s longstanding commitment to shared governance.

Over the past year, I have had the privilege of working closely with faculty from across Penn’s schools. Those interactions have reinforced the extraordinary nature of Penn. Few institutions in the world can bring together such a remarkable concentration of expertise, creativity, and curiosity. Equally striking is the diversity of experiences, backgrounds, perspectives, and talents represented within our faculty. These differences do not diminish our strength; they enhance it by broadening our understanding of the world, sharpening our thinking, and enriching our capacity to teach, discover, create, and serve.

At the same time, diversity of experience presents challenges in a university as large and complex as ours. Penn is not a single academic environment but a collection of academic microclimates, each shaped by its own priorities, pressures, and culture. The daily experience of a faculty member in a laboratory, classroom, studio, or clinic may differ substantially from that of colleagues elsewhere in the University. Yet when difficult questions arise, we are called upon to respond not only as members of our schools and departments, but as members of a shared institution united by common values and a common commitment to Penn’s academic mission. That requires us to understand one another’s perspectives and needs. For that reason, an overarching priority for Faculty Senate leadership this year is to deepen understanding across our faculty community by creating more opportunities for communication, dialogue, and perspective-sharing.

Closely connected to that goal is a commitment to strengthen faculty engagement with the Senate and to ensure that faculty governance remains genuinely representative of the community it serves. While effective faculty governance depends in part on productive engagement with University leadership, its legitimacy ultimately rests on our ability to listen to faculty, understand their concerns, and represent them faithfully. Transparency, openness, and trust are essential to that work.

These commitments to understanding, engagement, and representation are not ends in themselves. They are foundational to meeting the challenges before us, and they come at an important moment. Penn, like higher education more broadly, faces significant pressures from many directions. Some are local. In the coming year, conversations about open expression will remain important, as will ongoing deliberations regarding the development of a teaching track and the broader questions it raises about faculty roles, responsibilities, and privileges within our academic community. Other challenges are national and global in scope. Universities across the country are grappling with the implications of artificial intelligence for teaching and learning, threats to academic freedom, uncertainty in research funding, concerns about the well-being and security of international students and scholars, and mounting financial pressures.

These issues, and many others, remind us that while Penn’s future remains full of promise, the road ahead may not always be easy. Difficult moments, however, provide an opportunity to think carefully about the principles that give purpose to our work and ought to guide our decisions. They challenge us to reflect on who we are as an institution and as a community: a place committed to rigorous inquiry, open exchange, mutual respect, and the pursuit of knowledge in service to society. As Penn confronts the major questions of our time, the Faculty Senate’s contribution is not to provide a single set of answers, but to pursue a constructive process of thoughtful deliberation and principled engagement conducted in good faith.

As chair, I hope to approach the coming year in that spirit. I will strive to be steady without being passive, grounded in process without becoming captive to it, and committed to consensus without demanding unanimity. We will continue to work constructively with University leadership, mindful of the distinction between collaboration and capitulation.

Although the year ahead will undoubtedly bring both challenges we can foresee and others we cannot, I remain optimistic. The strength of this University rests, as it always has, in its people. If we continue to seek understanding across our differences, engage one another thoughtfully, and represent the interests of our community with integrity, I am confident that Penn will meet this moment with wisdom and resolve.

I look forward to working with you in the year ahead.

—Roy Hamilton, Professor of Neurology

2026

Thursday, September 24, 2026
Executive Committee
Audit, Compliance, and Risk Committee Meeting
Budget and Finance Committee Meeting

Thursday-Friday, November 12-13, 2026
Fall Full Board Meeting

Thursday, December 10, 2026
Executive Committee
Budget and Finance Committee Meeting  (if needed)

2027

Thursday-Friday, March 4-5, 2027
Winter Full Board Meeting

Thursday, May 20, 2027
Executive Committee
Budget and Finance Committee Meeting

Thursday-Friday, June 10-11, 2027
Spring Full Board Meeting

Thursday, September 23, 2027
Executive Committee
Audit, Compliance, and Risk Committee Meeting
Budget and Finance Committee Meeting

Thursday-Friday, October 28-29, 2027
Fall Full Board Meeting

Thursday, December 9, 2027
Executive Committee
Budget and Finance Committee Meeting (if needed)

2028

Thursday-Friday, March 2-3, 2028
Winter Full Board Meeting

Thursday, May 11, 2028
Executive Committee
Budget and Finance Committee Meeting

Thursday-Friday, June 8-9, 2028
Spring Full Board Meeting

• September 9, 2026
• October 14, 2026
• November 18, 2026
• February 10, 2027
• February 24, 2027
• March 31, 2027
• April 28, 2027

All meetings are held at 4 p.m. in Hall of Flags, Houston Hall. For more information, visit https://secretary.upenn.edu/univ-council.

Ira Harkavy, founder and the Barbara and Edward Netter Director of Penn’s Netter Center for Community Partnerships, has been named a Montgomery Fellow at Dartmouth College for winter 2027. Enriching the Dartmouth community through connections with the world’s leading minds, the Montgomery Fellows Program invites distinguished luminaries whose contributions to the universe of ideas and the cultural and political fabric of society have been notable and widely recognized. For the winter 2027 season, the Montgomery Fellows program has invited three prominent scholars who are active in their communities and in their lives as researchers to help Dartmouth College assess how it is doing as a neighbor.

As director of the Netter Center since 1992, Dr. Harkavy has helped to develop academically based community service courses and community-engaged research projects that involve creating university-assisted community schools with Penn’s community of West Philadelphia.

At Penn, Dr. Harkavy teaches history, urban studies, and Africana studies, as well as in the Graduate School of Education. Dr. Harkavy has written and lectured widely on the history and current practice of urban university-community-school partnerships and the democratic and civic missions of higher education. He is the author or editor of fourteen books and has received numerous honors from Penn and from the surrounding community. 

No New Things: A Radically Simple 30-Day Guide to Saving Money, the Planet, and Your Sanity by Ashlee Piper (Celadon Books, 2025) has been named the winner of the 2026 Penn Libraries Book Prize in Sustainability. Ms. Piper will discuss her work at a ceremony on October 7, 2026 at the Van Pelt-Dietrich Library Center during Climate Week at Penn.

No New Things persuasively describes the rise of “conditioned consumerism” and the ways that continually buying things depletes our time, money, and mental bandwidth—and harms the planet. The book offers daily action items that guide readers through 30 days of buying nothing new and the unexpected freedom and fulfillment that comes with that shift.

“Penn Libraries provides people with essential tools and resources as they make sense of the issues at stake with environmental sustainability and the paths available for positive action,” said Alexa Pearce, the Gershwind & Bennett Family Associate Vice Provost for Collections and Scholarly Communications at the Penn Libraries. “With No New Things, Ashlee Piper gives us a clear and powerful guide to doing more for human and planetary well-being by consuming less. Piper’s recommendations are as powerful as they are simple.”

Ms. Piper is a sustainability expert whose work has been featured on more than 300 TV segments. She has spoken at the United Nations and SXSW and has a popular TED talk. No New Things is her second book.

Olivia Mitchell, the International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans Professor in the Wharton School, has received the 2026 Robert I. Mehr Award for her paper, “Framing and Claiming: How Information Framing Affects Expected Social Security Claiming Behavior,” coauthored with Jeffrey R. Brown and Arie Kapteyn. 

The Mehr Award is given annually to the paper published in the Journal of Risk and Insurance 10 years earlier that has best stood the test of time.

Dr. Mitchell is a professor of insurance/risk management and business economics/policy, executive director of the Pension Research Council, and director of the Boettner Center on Pensions and Retirement Research. Concurrently, Dr. Mitchell serves as a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research, independent director of the Allspring Mutual Fund Boards, and a research fellow at the Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE at Goethe University Frankfurt. 

As protesters rally against data center construction in dozens of states and New York and Texas pause the issuance of permits for large data centers, a new nationally representative survey finds that Americans’ opposition to data centers in their communities has risen sharply since last spring.

The survey, conducted by the Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC) of the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, finds that about three in five U.S. adults (61%) oppose the construction of new data centers in their area, up 12 percentage points from a survey fielded in February and March.

Americans’ broader views of artificial intelligence (AI), however, have remained stable. The share who said that AI’s impact on the United States over the next 10 years will be somewhat or very negative was 39%, statistically unchanged from the spring. Two-thirds (68%) continued to say that government has done “too little” to regulate AI, unchanged from the spring.

The movement over these four months was concentrated in one area: what Americans think about the physical infrastructure of a data center being built near their home.

The survey, by the Annenberg Public Policy Center’s Institutions of Democracy division, was conducted among a nationally representative sample of 1,320 U.S. adult citizens from June 16 to July 19, 2026. The survey found that:

• Opposition to local data centers rose 12 points over four months: Three in five Americans (61%) now somewhat or strongly oppose the construction of new data centers in their area, up from 49% in the survey ending in March.
• Opposition crosses party lines and is highest among younger adults: Majorities of Democrats (69%), Republicans (54%) and independents (53%) oppose new local data centers. Opposition was highest among young adults under 30 (70%) and declined to 57% among those 65 and older, the inverse of what one might expect for a new technology.
• Views of AI overall, and demand for regulation, have held steady: 39% expect AI’s impact on the United States to be negative over the next decade, compared to 18% who expect it to be positive, unchanged from the spring. Two-thirds (68%) said the government had done “too little” to regulate AI.
• Medical research remains the one area where Americans expect AI to help: Across 13 areas, only medical research and discoveries draws a net-positive assessment (+41 points) in which the anticipated benefits of AI outweighed the expected negatives. The most negative areas are personal privacy and data security (-63 points), children’s safety online (-50 points), and employment and jobs (-46 points).

“What stands out is the contrast,” said Shawn Patterson Jr., an APPC research analyst. “Americans’ expectations for how AI will affect the country, and their views toward regulation, are essentially unchanged since March. Over the same period, however, opposition to a data center in their area rose 12 points. That’s a dramatic move over a relatively short period of time.”

Asked whether they would oppose or support the construction of new data centers in their area, 61% of Americans are opposed—44% strongly and 16% somewhat. Only 14% are supportive (down from 21% in the spring), and 25% said they neither support nor oppose it. That is a marked increase in opposition since the spring, when 49% were opposed. The 12-point increase is statistically significant and is the largest shift on any AI question measured in these surveys.

Opposition is not confined to a partisan subgroup. Majorities of Democrats (69%), Republicans (54%) and independents (53%) alike oppose new data centers in their area. Opposition is highest among adults under 30 (70%) and declines with age, to 57% among those 65 and older—a reversal of the usual pattern in which younger Americans are more receptive to new technology.

While opposition to data centers climbed, Americans’ broader assessment of AI remained unchanged. Asked about AI’s impact on the United States over the next 10 years, 39% said it would be somewhat or very negative, 18% said somewhat or very positive, and 35% said the impact would be equally positive and negative. In the spring, 42% expected a negative impact—a difference that is statistically unchanged.

Demand for regulation is similarly stable and similarly high. Over two-thirds of Americans (68%) said the government has done “too little” to regulate AI (statistically unchanged from the spring), compared with 8% who said it has done “too much” and 22% who said about the right amount. The demand for regulation remains bipartisan: 80% of Democrats, 61% of independents and 58% of Republicans said the government has done too little.

Awareness and use of AI remain widespread. About three-quarters of Americans (76%) said they have heard, read, or seen at least a moderate amount about AI, and 59% report using or interacting with AI at least a few times in the past month, including 34% who used it many times or almost every day. About one in five (21%) said they had not used AI in the past month.

Adapted from an Annenberg Public Policy Center press release, August 12, 2026. 

A disease surveillance strategy modeled on the body’s immune system detected more disease-carrying insects than the typical, top-down approach used conventionally, according to a study led by researchers from the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania and the Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia in Peru. Their work was published recently in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.

Conducted in the city of Arequipa, Peru, the work targeted Chagas disease, a deadly parasitic affliction that can cause heart failure among other problems and is a significant public health threat. It’s caused by a parasite that is transmitted to humans by blood-sucking triatomine insects, also called “kissing bugs,” or, in Peru, “chirimachas.” Public health efforts to reduce Chagas disease have focused on eliminating chirimacha infestations by treating houses with insecticides. Once the houses are treated, they must be monitored to make sure the insects do not return—a difficult task in a city of one million residents.

“The old way to surveil cities for disease vectors has its roots in the military: Personnel are treated as soldiers and sent to find the bugs—the enemy—following strict rules and quotas,” said primary author Michael Levy, a professor of epidemiology. “We changed the analogy and thought of surveillance more organically, as an immune system, made up of independent actors—like immune cells—who communicate with one another in a system that is flexible to expand and contract in response to the size of the problem.”

In a randomized trial, the new approach uncovered 23 infested households, compared with only five detected through the conventional strategy. 

“Since the current approaches are extremely top-down and rigid, we believe that we found a more effective way to tackle these problems by encouraging the initiative of households and local health workers,” said Dr. Levy. The conventional approach to chirimacha infestations features a central public health authority that directs personnel seeking to stop vectors (a term meaning living carriers of disease) to likely areas of infestation. These personnel must enter and inspect the households they are assigned, spraying insecticide wherever they find chirimachas.

People in households not already assigned to vector control efforts can request that their homes be sprayed, but only by capturing a chirimacha and bringing it to a local public health facility for identification. Detection of an infestation in one household is followed by inspection of immediately adjacent households.

Dr. Levy and his colleagues put forth a decentralized and flexible system of pathogen detection and response. This system allowed local public health staff to accept reports of infestations by phone call, social media, text message, and WhatsApp messages through a well-publicized “AlertaChirimacha” system. Vector control inspectors then received neighborhood-level infestation risk estimates, but they could also use their own judgment when deciding where to inspect. When they found an infestation, staff from nearby areas helped expand outreach—similar to immune cells swarming to the site of an infection—by distributing flyers, placing posters in local shops, and targeting AlertaChirimacha Facebook posts to nearby residents for 10 days. The response then “down-regulated” once the insects were eliminated.

The study ran from October 2021 to March 2023. Researchers divided chirimacha surveillance zones in Arequipa into 60 clusters of about 2,300 households each, randomly assigning 30 clusters to the conventional strategy and 30 to the immune-inspired strategy.

By the study’s end, the immune-inspired approach had uncovered 23 infested households: 10 through primary detections or reports and then 13 more when those original detections led to expanded coverage nearby. The conventional approach uncovered just one primary infestation and four additional infestations in surrounding households.

The findings suggest that more decentralized, immune-inspired surveillance strategies should be studied in other settings and at larger scales, Dr. Levy and colleagues said.

“We suspect that the real power of this strategy will be revealed if it is expanded to address multiple competing disease threats, though it remains unclear whether abandoning old militaristic systems for the more adaptable immune approach will be palatable to public health agencies,” Dr. Levy said.

Adapted from a Penn Medicine press release, August 5, 2026. 

The 2026 September AT PENN calendar is now available. Click here to view the calendar, and click here to view a printable PDF.

Is your upcoming retirement on your mind? To help you prepare for the next phase of your life, Penn will host the next series of Thinking About Retirement webinars in October. 

Specially designed for Penn staff and faculty, Thinking About Retirement offers three different information sessions, each covering an important aspect of retirement benefits. 

Set Your Retirement Date (October 8, noon)
A TIAA retirement plan counselor will discuss such topics as budgeting in retirement, income options, and investments to help you get the most out of your 403(b) retirement savings plan.

Penn Retiree Benefits and Medicare (October 13, noon)
Representatives from the Centers for Medicare Medicaid Services (CMS), along with Benefits specialists from Human Resources, will explain the Rule of 75, retiree healthcare options, and how they integrate with Medicare.

What You Need to Know About Social Security (October 20, noon)
A representative from TIAA will share valuable details about how this program impacts your plans for retirement. You will also get an overview of Social Security benefits, eligibility rules, how to apply, benefits for your spouse, and more.

Benefits specialists from Human Resources will be available at each online session to answer your questions via chat about Penn’s retirement savings plans, healthcare benefits, and other aspects of retiree benefits for you and your dependents.

Exhibits

8/28     At Liberty: Life in the City of Brotherly Love During the Early Republic; will feature paintings, sculptures, and watercolor drawings of notable figures like Benjamin Franklin alongside depictions of daily life in Philadelphia by Gilbert Stuart, John Lewis Krimmel, members of the Peale family, and other artists active during the American Revolution; Arthur Ross Gallery, Fisher Fine Arts Library.

Fitness & Learning

8/26     Dance@Penn Meet & Greet; undergraduates who are looking to join a dance group at Penn are invited to meet members of 15 groups representing a variety of styles and learn about upcoming shows, workshops, and auditions; 7-10 p.m.; Harnwell College House (Platt Student Performing Arts House).

8/27     James Joo-Jin Kim Center for Korean Studies Show & Tell; Penn faculty, staff, postdoctoral fellows, graduate students, and undergraduate students interested in Korean Studies are invited to bring an item with a special story to share; noon; suite 310, 3600 Market Street (Korean Studies).

            Research Drop-in Hours; talk to fellow undergraduate students about their experiences conducting research at Penn and get some tips on how to find a mentor, where to find funding, and much more; 4-5 p.m.; room G08/09, College Hall (Center for Undergraduate Research & Fellowships).

            Greenfield Intercultural Center Open House; learn about one of Penn’s six cultural centers, whose goal is to build community, create a sense of belonging, and foster intercultural understanding; there will be free food, yard games, and fun swag; 4:30-6:30 p.m.; Greenfield Intercultural Center (Greenfield Intercultural Center).

8/28     Kelly Writers House Activity Fair; learn about student-led Writers House activities and initiatives, including magazines, writing groups, film production, and more; meet leaders and representatives from many creative groups on campus; noon-2 p.m.; Kelly Writers House and garden (Kelly Writers House).

Graduate School of Education

Online webinars. Info: https://www.gse.upenn.edu/news-and-events.

8/27     Executive Coaching Certificate Information Session; 10 a.m.

Penn Libraries

Various locations. Info: https://www.library.upenn.edu/events.

8/28     Digital Humanist's Helpdesk: Creating Your Scholarly Portfolio with Domains @ Penn; hands-on workshop that will introduce Penn students to the fundamentals of creating a polished, professional scholarly portfolio using accessible, beginner-friendly web hosting tools; 11 a.m.; Research Data & Digital Scholarship Exchange, 1^st floor, Van Pelt Library.

On Stage

8/27     Student Performing Arts Night (SPAN); brings together 50+ student performing arts groups and hundreds of new Penn performing artists for a whirlwind collage of short, get-to-know-you performances intended for new undergraduates; 7-10:30 p.m.; Zellerbach Theater, Annenberg Center (Platt Student Performing Arts House).

8/28     Mask & Wig and Bloomers Comedy Present "Free Show"; in a tradition that kicks off every school year, watch a performance by two of Penn’s premier music/comedy troupes in what’s sure to be a night of hilarious comedy and awesome music; 8 p.m.; Zellerbach Theater, Annenberg Center; tickets: free; register: https://maskandwig.com/tickets (Platt Student Performing Arts House).

8/29     TAC-e NSO Show (Songs for a New World) + Meet & Theat; join Penn’s Theater Arts Council for a performance of a short, contemporary concert musical featuring performances by members of various theater groups at Penn, followed by a “meet and treat”; 1-4:30 p.m.; lobby, Platt Student Performing Arts House (Platt Student Performing Arts House).

Readings & Signings

8/28     The Absent Stone: Mexican Patrimony and the Aftershocks of State Theft; Sandra Rozental, El Colegio de México; noon; room 403, McNeil Building; RSVP: https://upenn.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_24sjcruMZcJZJSS (Center for Latin American & Latinx Studies).

Talks

8/25     Robust Social Learning from Unordered Actions; Kevin He, economics; 4 p.m.; room 203, PCPSE (Economics).

8/26     Toward a Science of Auditing AI Systems: The Case of Election-Related Information; Chara Podimata, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; noon; room 414, Gutmann Hall, and Zoom webinar; join: https://upenn.zoom.us/j/96259675892 (AI-enabled Systems: Safe, Explainable, and Trustworthy [ASSET] Center).

8/27     The World Today; Marie Harf, Michael C. Horowitz, and Michael Weisberg, Perry World House; noon; Perry World House; register: https://perryworldhouse.upenn.edu/events/the-world-today-2/ (Perry World House).

            When Tariffs Raise Markups: Import Competition and Local Market Power; Diana Van Patten, Yale University; 3:30 p.m.; room 101, PCPSE (Economics).

            Report from an Undesirable: Soviet Art History in the Age of Putin’s War; Christina Hilleboe Kiaer, Northwestern University; 4:30 p.m.; room 602, Van Pelt Library (History of Art, Russian & East European Studies).

Physics & Astronomy

In-person events. Info: https://live-sas-physics.pantheon.sas.upenn.edu/events.

8/29     Influences of Confinement and Constraints on Soft Materials; Michio Tanaka, physics & astronomy; 2 p.m.; LRSM reading room.

Division of Public Safety
University of Pennsylvania Police Department Crime Report

About the Crime Report: Below are the Crimes Against Persons and/or Crimes Against Property from the campus report for August 10-16, 2026. The Crime Reports are available at: https://almanac.upenn.edu/sections/crimes. Prior weeks’ reports are also online. –Eds.

This summary is prepared by the Division of Public Safety (DPS) and contains all criminal incidents reported and made known to the Penn Police, including those reported to the Philadelphia Police Department (PPD) that occurred within our patrol zone, for the dates of August 10-16, 2026. The Penn Police actively patrol from Market Street to Baltimore Avenue and from 30^th Street to 43^rd Street in conjunction with the Philadelphia Police.

In this effort to provide you with a thorough and accurate report on public safety concerns, we hope that your increased awareness will lessen the opportunity for crime. For any concerns or suggestions regarding this report, please call DPS at (215) 898-7297. You may view the daily crime log on the DPS website.

Penn Police Patrol Zone
Market Street to Baltimore Avenue and from 30^th Street to 43^rd Street

Philadelphia Police 18th District
Schuylkill River to 49th Street & Market Street to Woodland Avenue

Below are the Crimes Against Persons from the 18th District: 7 incidents were reported for August 10-16, 2026 by the 18^th District, covering the Schuylkill River to 49th Street & Market Street to Woodland Avenue.

The Division of Public Safety offers resources and support to the Penn community. DPS developed a few helpful risk reduction strategies outlined below. Know that it is never the fault of the person impacted (victim/survivor) by crime.

• See something concerning? Connect with Penn Public Safety 24/7 at (215) -573-3333.
• Worried about a friend’s or colleague’s mental or physical health? Get 24/7 connection to appropriate resources at (215) 898-HELP (4357).
• Seeking support after experiencing a crime? Call Special Services - Support and Advocacy resources at (215) 898-4481 or email an advocate at specialservices@publicsafety.upenn.edu
• Use the Walking Escort and Riding services available to you free of charge.
• Take a moment to update your cellphone information for the UPennAlert Emergency Notification System
• Download the Penn Guardian App which can help Police better find your location when you call in an emergency.
• Access free self-empowerment and defense courses through Penn DPS.
• Stay alert and reduce distractions; using cellphones, ear buds, etc. may limit your awareness.
• Orient yourself to your surroundings. (Identify your location, nearby exits, etc.)
• Keep your valuables out of sight and only carry necessary documents.

The Provost/Netter Center Faculty-Community Partnership Award is an annual award that recognizes local, productive, and sustained faculty-community partnership projects. The amount of the award is $10,000 ($5,000 to the faculty member and $5,000 to the community partner) in order to further develop the work. Junior and senior faculty and senior lecturers and associated faculty from any of Penn’s schools are eligible for nomination, along with their community partners. Please see below for the complete description and process of nomination. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this award, please direct them to communityengagedscholarship@sas.upenn.edu.

Award Nomination Process

The nomination packet deadline is Friday, October 9, 2026. The award recognizes faculty-community partnership projects. One $5,000 award will be given annually to a faculty member and another $5,000 given to the community partner to recognize, develop, and advance an existing partnership.

Criteria for Selection

1. The community partnership project must be affiliated with the Netter Center for Community Partnerships i.e., engaged with Academically-Based Community Service (ABCS), Problem Solving Learning (PSL), or Participatory Action Research (PAR) style pedagogy and/or research.
2. The partnership project must demonstrate a record of sustainable engagement.
3. The faculty member can be an assistant, associate, or full professor, senior lecturer, or associated faculty.

Process of Nomination

1. Nominations may come from members of the University and the wider community, though the strongest nominations will be those that represent both the University and the community. Self-nominations are welcomed.
2. Nominators should upload a completed packet (as outlined below) to Box using this link. Please upload proposal materials as a single PDF using file name format: LastName_FirstName_fac-comm2026.pdf
3. The review committee will submit their recommendations to the Netter Center director and the Provost, who will jointly make the final selection. The award decision will be announced in November.

Nomination Packet

1. Cover sheet including: name, title, department, school, and email address of faculty member, and title of organization, physical address, website (if available), and email address of the community partner.
2. A biographical sketch/organizational description that highlights community engagement work of the faculty member and community partner.
3. 500-1,000 word document detailing the following items:
   • Description of the project: Include how the project was formulated, who participated, the target audience at Penn, methods of engagement/pedagogy, and what products were created.
   • Impact of the Project: Outline the community and academic expectations, successes, failures, and impacts of the project, both for the community and for the University.
   • Sustainability of the project: Describe how long the project has been in place, the adjustments that have been made to increase sustainability, and any future plans for further engagement with this project or for new related projects.

Letters of Support 

In addition to the nomination packet, please submit two letters of support (at least one must be from the community). The letter of support may be one that is co-signed by both University and community representatives.

Award Winners

1. For this award to remain tax-exempt, the award for the faculty member will be deposited in a University of Pennsylvania account to support teaching- and research-related activity.
2. As long as the community partner is a non-profit organization, the award remains tax-exempt.

Another tip in a series provided by the Offices of Information Security, Information Systems & Computing and Audit, Compliance & Privacy

Welcome Back, Penn Faculty and Staff
Start the 2026-2027 Academic Year Securely

As we begin the new academic year, take a few minutes to protect your Penn data, devices, and accounts. Small actions can prevent major security incidents.

Strengthen Your Passwords

Use unique passwords that are at least 20 characters long and include a mix of letters, numbers, and symbols. Avoid password reuse. Penn provides the Dashlane password manager service to securely generate and store passwords.

Enroll in Self-Service Password Reset to change your PennKey password if you forget it or just want to change it.

Protect Penn Data

Review the data you access and store. Remove unnecessary access and save Penn data only in approved locations based on Penn Data Risk Classification requirements. If unsure, contact your IT support staff about the best method to store different data types.

Secure Your Devices

Keep operating systems, browsers, and applications updated. Use antivirus protection and lock your screen whenever you step away. Penn provides Sophos Endpoint Protection at no cost.

Combat Phishing Attempts by Waiting Three Seconds Before You Act: Follow the Rule of View • Validate • Voice

• View: Watch for urgent requests, suspicious links, unexpected attachments, QR codes, and Duo prompts you did not initiate. 
• Validate: Verify requests through trusted channels before responding. Never share passwords or multi-factor authentication codes. 
• Voice: Report suspicious emails, texts, calls, QR codes, or authentication requests to your IT support team or security@isc.upenn.edu.

For additional information, visit:

• Penn Data Risk Classification: https://isc.upenn.edu/security/penn-data-risk-classification
• Antivirus for Desktops and Laptops:  https://isc.upenn.edu/resources/antivirus-desktops-and-laptops
• Self-Service Password Reset Service: https://isc.upenn.edu
• Dashlane at Penn: https://isc.upenn.edu/resources/dashlane

A few minutes of preparation today can help prevent tomorrow’s security incident. Penn Office of Information Security wishes you a safe and successful academic year!

---

For additional tips, see the One Step Ahead link on the Information Security website: https://isc.upenn.edu/security/news-alerts%23One-Step-Ahead.