The contemporary world is motivated by data-driven decision-making. Small 501(c)3 nonprofit organizations are often limited in their reach due to their size, lack of funding, and a lack of data analysis expertise. In an effort to increase accessibility to data analysis for such organizations, a Founders Lab team designed a product to help them understand and utilize geographic information systems (GIS) software. This product – You Got GIS – strikes the balance between highly technical documentation and general overviews, benefiting 501(c)3 nonprofits in their pursuit of data-driven decision-making. Through the product’s use of case studies and methodologies, You Got GIS serves as a thought experiment platform to start answering questions regarding GIS. The product aims to continuously build partnerships in an effort to improve curriculum and user engagement.

Inspired by John Rawls and his life's work Justice as Fairness, I sought to measure how much political empathy a person has and then compare this to decision-making styles in search of any relation between the two. Political empathy is a term to refer to one's willingness to utilize governmental policy to help those who are the neediest because of the understanding that humans deserve equal treatment since no one is more human than anyone else. Because of current research I found that I can test political empathy because of empathy’s correlation with political ideology; specifically, that those who are more liberal have more empathy. I test participant’s ideology in a normal setting and then present them with the concept of Rawls’ Original Position to see if they shift more one way when presented with this idea which is supposed to make them think more empathetically.<br/>I have two hypothesis that I cover: first, that more people will shift in a more liberal direction between the two tests, and second, that those who have more political empathy make political decisions based more on emotion rather than facts and reason. I tested decision-making through a myriad of tests within a focus group so I could get multiple angles at the issue. My first hypothesis was proven incorrect and while I didn’t have enough participants in my focus groups to make a clear determination, it didn’t look like there was any correlation between political ideology and decision-making styles.

This project explorers the potential reasons for the discrepancies between state responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, with a particular focus on the possibility of a correlation between political ideology and a state’s nonpharmacological intervention policy timing. In addition to outlining the current literature on the preferences of conservative and liberal ideology, examples of both past and present scientific based pandemic responses are described as well. Given the current understanding of the social and economic dimension of conservative and liberal political ideology, it was hypothesized that there may be a positive correlation between conservative ideology and premature action by a state. Data was collected on the current ideological landscape and the daily COVID-19 cases numbers of each state in addition to tracking each state’s policy changes. Two correlation tests were performed to find that there was no significant positive or negative correlation between the two variables.