When I registered for Sewa International’s Policy Cafe on ‘Disaster and the First 72 Hours’ , I assumed I already had a solid grasp of those chaotic early days. Having spent time in the field. I’ve witnessed the rush, the disarray, and the heavy emotional toll that disasters bring. I expected the session to mainly confirm what I already knew.

Instead, it prompted me to pause and reconsider many assumptions.

One phrase from the discussion has stayed with me: the first 72 hours feel like “everything happening at once”. In the field, there’s no tidy sequence - assessments, coordination, supply arrangements, and dealings with authorities all unfold simultaneously . What I hadn’t fully internalised before was the sheer pressure. Within a day or two, responders are already expected to show tangible results even when roads remain impassable, communications are disrupted, and reliable information trickles in slowly. The session reminded me that early response relies far less on flawless plans and far more on experience, strong teamwork, and real-time judgement.

Even after years on the ground, the Policy Cafe made me rethink the concept of stability in the aftermath of disaster. I used to focus on the speed of aid delivery; the discussion changed my view: the way aid is coordinated can matter more than the aid itself. For instance, enabling families to remain close to their homes, schools, and livelihoods even while receiving minimal relief profoundly impacts how safe and supported they feel. Early response is as much about preserving trust, familiarity, and human dignity as it is about material resources.

Logistics was another area of the discussion that really resonated with me. I’ve experienced firsthand how supply bottlenecks can stall an entire operation. The shared stories - of rerouting transport or relying on simple, low-tech tracking when digital systems collapse - highlighted the essential role of flexibility during emergencies. Effective logistics during emergencies isn’t about rigidly following a pre-established plan; it is about continuous course-correction when things don’t go the way they’re supposed to.

The insight that has remained at top of my mind is the critical part the local NGOs and community actors play during the first 72 hours. The discussion underscored that response is most effective when efforts are coordinated yet deeply rooted in local realities. Local NGOs and volunteers, already embedded in the community, understand who is most vulnerable and can act swiftly without navigating layers of external approval. Their speed, credibility, and contextual knowledge make assistance both timelier and more meaningful.

By the close of the Policy Cafe, the session no longer felt like another discussion. It became a space to reflect on experiences I had lived through, but never fully processed. Disasters test not only the immediate response systems but also the relationships, networks, and preparedness cultivated long before the crisis strikes. The first 72 hours lay those strengths and gaps bare. For me, conversations like this are valuable because they transform raw field experience into structured learning, and learning into a deeper, more nuanced understanding of what actually makes a response effective.

Policy Cafe video link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boyto9mTUy0&t=407s

The USA has enough food to feed all its citizens and residents every single day. However, hunger continues to be a societal challenge. Two things are clear from this: One, hunger is not the result of insufficient food supply. Two, there must be some failure in our systems that fail to ensure stable, reliable access to it.

To dig deeper into this, Sewa USA convened a Policy Cafe titled “Ending Hunger Together: From Episodic Relief to Systemic Resilience.” The objective was to understand how hunger functions within existing policy and institutional frameworks, and why it remains persistent despite the presence of food and programs. Beyond identifying problems, the discussion included potential solutions.

Bringing together experts from food banks, academia, healthcare, and public policy, the discussion centred on a simple but critical question: if food exists and programs exist, why does hunger persist?

The full conversation is worth watching and can be accessed here. However, four lessons emerged from this conversation.

Lesson One: Hunger Is Defined by Instability, Not Scarcity

The discussion challenged the assumption that food shortages drive hunger. Instead, panellists emphasised the instability of food supply as the defining feature of food insecurity.Dr. Steven Azima, an agricultural economist at the University of Vermont, described food insecurity as a condition shaped by irregular access, fluctuating quality, geographic barriers, and misaligned systems.

Federal programs such as SNAP, WIC, school meals, and TEFAP form a strong foundation for food assistance. Individually, they work. However, collectively they operate largely independent of healthcare, housing, transportation, and labor systems. Benefits are delivered on fixed schedules, while wages fluctuate, health needs arise unpredictably, and transportation access varies widely. As a result, households experience gaps, not because support is absent, but because it is fragmented.

Food bank leaders reinforced this point with lived experience. Bekah Clawson of Second Harvest Food Bank of East Central Indiana noted that many food-insecure households are employed, often holding multiple jobs.Jada Hoerr of Midwest Food Bank described hunger as both a cause and consequence of economic strain, one that food assistance alone cannot resolve. The conclusion was clear: food programs reduce hunger, but without alignment across income, health, and infrastructure systems, they cannot eliminate it.

Lesson Two: Rise in Is an Early Indicator of System Stress

Panelists also framed hunger as an early warning signal of broader system failure.

Sakeenah Shabazz, drawing on policy experience in Washington, D.C., explained that rising demand at food pantries often appears before economic stress shows up in official data. Food insecurity surfaces first because food is the most flexible and most vulnerable line item in household budgets.

From a policy perspective, this represents a missed opportunity.

Community food systems function as real-time sensors of distress, yet this data is rarely integrated into monitoring or response frameworks. Hunger is treated as an outcome to manage rather than a signal to act upon. Recognizing rising food insecurity as an early warning metric could enable earlier, preventive interventions.

Lesson Three: Ending Hunger Is a Coordination Challenge

While federal nutrition programs remain indispensable, their impact is limited when disconnected from healthcare, housing, and employment systems.Cindy Baggett of Feeding the Gulf Coast highlighted how rural and under-resourced regions face compounded barriers such as distance to grocery stores, lack of transportation, and limited access to fresh food that food distribution alone cannot solve.

At the same time, emerging models demonstrate the power of alignment.Scott Brummel from Duke University’s Office of Community Health shared examples of healthcare-linked food interventions, including food-as-medicine programs and Medicaid pilots related to these. These initiatives have shown improvements in health outcomes and reductions in healthcare costs, illustrating that coordinated investment delivers cross-sector benefits.

Alignment, however, requires more than funding. It depends on data sharing, institutional trust, and administrative flexibility, conditions that many systems are not yet designed to support.

Lesson Four: Community Infrastructure Is Where Systems Meet Reality

Throughout the discussion, community-based organizations were recognized as essential infrastructure, not temporary stopgaps. Food banks, faith-based groups, and local nonprofits absorb shocks when formal systems falter, adapting quickly to local needs and maintaining trust with the communities they serve.

In this context, community-based efforts play a crucial role. At Sewa USA, the Sewa Pantry operates not simply as a food distribution point, but as part of a community-rooted support system. Grounded in local relationships, volunteer networks, and cultural understanding, the pantry helps stabilize access where federal programs fall short or fail to reach.

From Episodic Relief to Systemic Resilience

The Policy Cafe underscored that hunger is not a single-cause problem, nor can it be solved through isolated interventions. Food insecurity reflects how well or poorly systems work together under stress. Moving from episodic relief to systemic resilience requires designing policies that anticipate volatility, integrate across sectors, and center dignity as a measure of success.

Hunger is not inevitable. But ending it will require institutions to listen differently, collaborate deliberately, and design systems that reflect how food insecurity is actually experienced.

Learn more about the Sewa Pantry and its community-based approach to hunger response:https://www.sewausa.org/SewaPantry

Before attending Sewa USA’s Policy Cafe on Ending Hunger Together, I came with a fundamental question: How does hunger persist in a first-world country like the USA How does hunger persist in a first-world country like the USA

Like many, I assumed the conversation would centre on poverty. I understood hunger largely as an outcome of low income, a downstream problem that followed from economic hardship. When hunger appeared despite the presence of federal nutrition programs and charitable efforts, I attributed it to gaps in outreach or implementation. In my mind, hunger reflected either the absence of policy or its failure to reach the right people.

It was with these assumptions that I entered the Policy Cafe organised on 16th December, 2025, expecting a discussion focused on policy alignment and efficiency.

Instead, what emerged was a reframing of hunger not simply as evidence of policy absence, but as a signal of policy misalignment . Enrollment numbers, distribution targets, and compliance metrics may indicate that a program is functioning as designed, yet they often fail to capture whether those systems actually provide stability. Hunger, in this sense, reflects the gap between how policy is structured and how people experience it in their daily lives.

One of the most powerful shifts in the conversation came through the lens of dignity. Before this discussion, I had not considered dignity and choice as central components of hunger policy. The panelists challenged that omission directly.

The focus moved from whether food is distributed to how it is distributed. Are people rushed or respected? Are they offered choice or assigned aid? Do systems preserve autonomy, or do they quietly erode it?

Food bank leaders shared how they are redesigning distribution models to prioritise agency, creating spaces that resemble grocery stores rather than relief lines, allowing families to choose what they take, and accounting for cultural preferences and dietary needs. These models recognise people not as passive recipients of aid, but as participants in their own wellbeing.

What became clear is that efficiency alone is an incomplete policy goal. Programs that treat people as passive beneficiaries may meet short-term needs, but they often fall short of building long-term resilience. In contrast, dignity-centred approaches, those that pair immediate relief with nutrition education, workforce pathways, or community support, show stronger, more sustainable outcomes.

This emphasis challenged an assumption I hadn’t realised I was carrying: that speed and scale should outweigh experience. The discussion underscored that how help is delivered matters as much as whether it is delivered. Choice is not a luxury add-on; it is a policy design feature that shapes outcomes.

I left the Policy Cafe with a more layered understanding of hunger. It is not simply about food or income, but about how systems show up in everyday life: through timing, access, respect, and choice. Hunger reveals what happens when policies fail to align with lived realities, even when they are well-intentioned and well-funded.

By convening this conversation, Sewa International USA created space to examine hunger not as an isolated social issue, but as a reflection of how policy functions in practice. Ending hunger, as the discussion made clear, requires more than expanding programs. It requires designing systems that recognise people as active agents in their own stability and measuring success not only by coverage, but by dignity.

When disaster strikes, the first ‘72 Golden Hours’ often decide the fate of entire communities. At Sewa International USA, we believe that ‘sewa’ (selfless service) is most impactful when it is fast, focused, and collaborative.

To explore how we can respond better, we hosted a Policy Cafe on ‘Disaster and the First 72 Hours’, bringing together a global panel of experts from the U.S. and beyond. The goal was to capture the lessons from the field and strengthen collective readiness for future emergencies.

The discussion began with a simple question:
What really happens in the first 72 hours?

Experts described it as a time when “everything happens at once”. As Euan Crawshaw, emergency response specialist serving as the Director of International Programmes at ShelterBox, shared, responders face intense pressure, high expectations, and limited information, often while key systems, such as communication, transport, and administration, are disrupted. In these moments, waiting for perfect assessments isn’t an option. Action guided by experience, adaptability, and trust becomes critical.

In this chaotic environment, priorities shift rapidly from broad planning to immediate human needs. Early efforts focus on stabilising conditions and restoring coordination, but attention quickly turns to what allows families to regain a sense of security amid uncertainty. Relief is about more than food or medical aid; it starts with a safe and stable space where people can begin to process shock and trauma.

A key highlight of the conversation was the role of ‘shelter’ during the early hours of a disaster.

Mario Flores ,Director of International Field Operations, Housing Disaster Resilience and Recovery at Habitat for Humanity International, emphasised that shelter is far more than a physical structure; it is about dignity. Immediate shelter prevents mass displacement, reduces long-term risks, and especially protects women and children. Keeping families close to their homes and social networks in those first three days lays the psychological and physical foundation for a faster, safer recovery.

But shelter and dignity can only exist if essential resources reach affected communities. This is where logistics takes center stage. Valerio Carafa, an emergency management specialist at ISRA AID, called logistics the heartbeat of response. Supply chains support every lifesaving intervention from shelter to healthcare to food. When they work, communities get aid in hours; when they fail, recovery is delayed by weeks.

One insight that stood out was the central role NGOs play during the first 72 hours. The conversation emphasized that early response works best when efforts are coordinated and rooted in community realities. NGOs, with their close ties to local contexts, help ensure that support reaches people quickly and meaningfully, especially during those crucial early moments. As Stephen Klein, Chief Executive Officer at NECHAMA: Jewish Response to Disaster noted, these non-profit organizations don’t struggle with bureaucratic delays like a government, and can act with the speed and flexibility that emergencies demand. Their greatest strength, however, is in empowering local communities. By investing in training, preparedness, and coordination long before a crisis, nonprofits professionalize the first line of defense, enabling communities to lead their own recovery.

The Policy Cafe concluded with a shared insight: disaster response is not only about speed or supplies. It is about people, trust, and preparedness built long before a crisis. The first 72 hours expose the fragile gap between intention and impact, policy and practice. A thoughtful early response can protect dignity, reduce displacement, and lay the foundation for long-term resilience.

For Sewa International USA, this conversation was both an affirmation and a call to action: building resilient communities isn’t just a moment of response; it is a continuous commitment to readiness, collaboration, and service.

Some experiences make you pause and rethink what you thought you already understood. Attending the Policy Cafe on “Reimagining Nonprofits: Leadership, Community, and Volunteer Power” was one of those moments. As someone who has volunteered for several years, I believed I understood how leadership and service fit together. However, listening to experts and practitioners discuss the development of volunteer leaders and their retention in a volunteer-led nonprofit organisation opened my eyes to the immense potential and responsibility that each volunteer truly carries.

Here are the three lessons that stayed with me:

1. Volunteers Can Lead—If They’re Given the Space and Structure

I’ve often seen volunteers take on roles far beyond expectations, yet their potential is sometimes underutilized. At the Policy Cafe, Dr. S.P. Kothari (Professor of Accounting and Finance at MIT Sloan School of Management) shared an insight that resonated deeply: “Nonprofits must create and clearly spell out a ladder of growth for volunteers.” That ladder, he noted, can be built through deliberate succession planning. And this, as Geoff pointed out, “is often the biggest challenge for volunteer-led nonprofits.”

Listening to these perspectives made me reflect on my own experiences: the moments when I was trusted with leadership roles were the moments when I grew the most.

2. Building Volunteer Leadership Through Culture and Connection

Another key takeaway was the importance of intentionally harnessing volunteer power. Volunteers thrive when organizations create a supportive environment and, as Mike Young (Executive Director of California EnviroVoters) said, “when they see how their contributions fit into the bigger vision and culture of the organization.” Combined with the deep connections they build in the communities they serve, this approach, as Dr. Nair noted, can spark real social change.

Dr. David Renz (Director Emeritus of the Midwest Centre for Nonprofit Leadership at the University of Missouri–Kansas City) captured this beautifully: “Volunteer’ is a label for a relationship, and relationships only work when there’s reciprocity, authenticity, mutual appreciation, and value.” In my own journey, the times I felt most capable and empowered were always within organizations that prioratized culture, connection, and purpose.

3. Volunteers Thrive When Organizations Provide Structure and Support

I realized that even the most motivated volunteers need systems, structure, and resources to lead effectively. Luis (Partner and Head of Practice at La Piana Consulting) emphasized the importance of planning for capacity and complexity in nonprofits.

Monisha suggested that one way to achieve this is through a hybrid model where staff and volunteers are supported by training and clear processes. But even with the right structures, volunteers can only thrive if organizations, especially smaller ones, have the resources to sustain them. As Ade explained, “Foundations need to increase indirect costs to 25% and/or offer multi-year funding.” With the right support, volunteers can focus on leading and creating impact rather than getting weighed down by coordination challenges.

My Reflection

Seeing how individual leadership, a supportive culture, and thoughtful structures all interact made me appreciate that the impact of a volunteer depends on all three. I walked away with a renewed sense of both the responsibility and the potential inherent in volunteerism.

For me, the most powerful takeaway was recognizing how thoughtful relationships and resilient structures transform service into leadership and into meaningful, lasting impact.

At Sewa International USA, we believe the strength of a nonprofit lies not just in its programs, but in the people who power them: its volunteers. They are the bridge between community needs and collective action. But as demand for services continues to rise across the country, nonprofits are being asked to do more with fewer resources. As demand for services grows, staffing, infrastructure, and funding remain limited. In this context, volunteerism, once central to nonprofit identity, is too often reduced to operational support rather than leadership.

To explore how this trend might be reversed, we hosted a Policy Cafe on ‘Reimagining Nonprofits: Leadership, Community, and Volunteer Power'on September 9, 2025, beginning with one key question: How do we sustain volunteers?

Sustaining volunteers, as the discussion revealed, requires more than appreciation or incentives. It depends on culture, connection, and purpose. When volunteers see how their work contributes to a larger mission, when they feel trusted and part of a collective vision, their commitment deepens. And when their service connects them directly with the communities they support, it transforms both sides of the relationship.

But sustaining volunteers is only the first step. The next challenge is nurturing them into leaders. True leadership in a volunteer-led space must be built through intentional mentorship, clear pathways of responsibility, and recognition of effort. The conversation highlighted that nonprofits must create “ladders of growth” that allow volunteers to see tangible ways to lead. Without such pathways, organisations risk stagnation, over-reliant on a few individuals while missing the potential of many.

But even the most motivated volunteers can only thrive if the organisations they serve provide the right systems, structures, and resources. This led to another critical question: What are the key challenges in governing a volunteer-led organisation while sustaining impact?

The dialogue emphasised that effective governance depends on capacity and complexity. As volunteer-driven organisations grow, they must continually revisit their models based on their capacity and complexity. Achieving this coherence requires clear systems and consistent training that align people and processes. Equally vital is sustainable funding, not merely for growth, but to preserve continuity, transparency, and fair investment in the people who make the mission possible.

Taken together, the discussions around sustaining, growing, and governing volunteer-led organisations made one insight clear: volunteer-driven nonprofits thrive when people, culture, and systems work in harmony. Volunteers are not just supporters; they are leaders, catalysts, and partners in creating impact.

For Sewa USA, the Policy Cafe was a reminder that reimagining volunteerism is an ongoing journey, one of listening, learning, and building organisations where volunteers can lead, grow, and create lasting change.

When I first joined the Policy Cafe hosted by Sewa International USA, I wasn’t sure what to expect. I’d heard of service learning before, but thought it simply meant volunteering. As the discussion unfolded, I realized it’s deeper — it’s about learning through doing good, connecting what we study with how we live and act. It reminded me of my days at Irvington High School in Fremont, where projects often took us beyond textbooks. I still recall the CHANGE Project, where my friends and I partnered with a local environmental group for a beach cleanup and later wrote a paper on community engagement. Listening to educators and policymakers that day rekindled why learning should never stop at the classroom door.

1. Service Learning is Learning by Doing, Not Just Doing

At first, I assumed service learning was about volunteering outside school hours. But as the panelists spoke, I realized it’s actually a pedagogy, a structured way to connect learning with purpose. It’s not just about completing activities, but about asking why those activities matter.

When one speaker described reflection as the “engine” of service learning, that image stayed with me. Reflection is what turns experience into insight. Asking questions like “What did this teach me?” or “Whose story did I not see?” transforms ordinary work into personal growth. I realized that when we take the time to pause, think, and question, learning becomes something we live, not something we memorize.

2. Service Learning Teaches Life Lessons that Textbooks Can’t

The Cafe also helped me see how service learning teaches lessons far beyond academics. Yes, we might be helping others, but in the process, we discover ourselves. Through projects and teamwork, we learn empathy, adaptability, and how to take responsibility for something larger than ourselves.

One speaker described service learning as “education for citizenship,” and that resonated deeply with me. It’s not just about community hours or credits; it’s about learning to collaborate, to listen, and to lead with compassion. These are the skills that help us navigate real life, the kind that no test can measure.

3. Youth are Not ‘Future’ Leaders, They are the Leaders Now

The most powerful message I carried home was this: young people aren’t just preparing to lead someday, we’re already leading today. Whether it’s organizing a food drive, helping younger students with homework, or identifying community challenges, students everywhere are stepping up.

Service learning gives us the space and the confidence to do that. It tells us that leadership isn’t about age or authority; it’s about initiative, empathy, and action. That realization was empowering. It made me see that change starts with us.

My Reflection

Walking away from the Policy Cafe, I understood that service learning reimagines what education can be. It blends knowledge with action, reflection with growth, and learning with leadership. For me, the biggest shift was realizing that education isn’t only about what we know, it’s about who we become through what we learn. 

Takeaways from the Policy Cafe on Education

At Sewa International, we have long believed that education should do more than transmit facts; it should nurture empathy, responsibility, and civic leadership. Yet, too often, service learning is treated as an optional add-on checkbox activity rather than a transformative core of education. On August 7, 2025, we convened a Policy Café to explore how Service Learning connects classrooms with communities and knowledge with action. The discussion began with a simple but profound question: How do students truly benefit from real-world, service-based learning? For Lori Heslewood, Director of Operations at the South Carolina After School Alliance, the answer begins with equity. She described service learning as a way to include historically underrepresented communities, transforming civic engagement from theory into a lived experience. The result, she explained, is a deeper sense of belonging and purpose.

That message resonated with Elizabeth Navarro, a Migration Policy Expert, who said, “It taught me that leadership isn’t about having a title’s about showing up.” For her, service learning rooted in reflection and relevance transforms empathy into leadership.

If empathy gives service learning its heart, agency gives it its strength. Isabel Luciano illustrated this through the example of participatory budgeting, a model that lets students help decide which community projects to fund or pursue. “When students have a say in what gets done, they stop seeing service as an assignment and start seeing it as their own contribution,” she said. Her insight revealed a subtle truth: participation without decision-making is not empowerment. True service learning invites students to co-create solutions, not just carry them out.

Even when such experiences are powerful, they risk fading if their stories aren’t told. Ramona Schindelheim, journalist and editor of The Future of Work(ers) newsletter, reminded everyone that storytelling gives service its permanence. “If we don’t share what these experiences mean,” she said, “we lose the bridge that connects classrooms to the wider community.” Reflection and communication, she emphasised, are not afterthoughts; they are how learning takes root. As the conversation deepened, the focus shifted from classrooms to systems. Efrain Mercado, Director of California Policy at the Learning Policy Institute, noted that “policymakers need to see classrooms firsthand so that service learning isn’t just a line item, but a lived experience that informs policy.” Ankur Patel, a school teacher and Director at the Hindu University of America, added that parents also hold quiet power: “Just by showing up at school board meetings, they can advocate for meaningful projects and signal that service matters.”

Closing the loop, Pam Siebert, Vice President of Community Impact at the National Youth Leadership Council (NYLC), emphasised that service learning becomes sustainable only when it is integrated into existing structures, such as career pathways, workforce development programs, and civic engagement curricula. “When service connects to the skills and goals students already value,” she said, “it stops being extrinsic and becomes essential.”

By the end of the Policy Cafe, one shared realisation emerged: service learning isn’t just an activity’s a way of rethinking education as a bridge between knowing and doing, self and society. When done thoughtfully, it nurtures empathy, leadership, and active citizenship. For Sewa International USA, this conversation was both an affirmation and a call to action: shaping education for service is not a destination’s a continuous journey.

In elementary schools across the country, educators often meet face-to-face with underperforming students, unequipped with the resources to help them succeed. From language barriers to a lack of classroom supplies, students in certain areas struggle a bit more than others, suffering under the weight of an imbalanced funding system.

For the past two weeks, I attended Sewa AmeriCorps’ ASPIRE Summer Program, organized in the Newark school district. While volunteering with ASPIRE, I met a student who refused to write because he didn’t know how, falling behind in his grade level. As one of the many districts across the country dealing with lower test performance and attendance, the Newark school district has been struggling to keep up with its bright students, compromising students’ will to learn and their futures.

Oftentimes, unequal school funding stems from inconsistencies in local property taxes, leaving poorer areas, often predominantly immigrant districts, with less funding towards education. In turn, poorer districts maintain poorer schools, resulting in declining graduation rates and worse test scores. Moreover, these kids are significantly shaped by the distinctive influences in their lives, whether at home, on the playground, or in the classroom, all playing a role in their academic needs. Thousands of brilliant students, many from poorer neighborhoods, have unique educational struggles and face social injustice because they are denied access to the help that they need. This isn’t an easy fix, however, but acknowledgement is the first step. “Class size is, first of all, a concern, and more than that, the range of the [knowledge] level in the class is what is the bigger concern. It's really unfair for very high-performing kids and also extremely far behind kids,” says Sudha Prabhunandan, a program director at ASPIRE. “We bridge the gap by pulling one sector out, so that the teacher can focus on a smaller range, as opposed to a huge spectrum of performance levels in one class.”

It is our responsibility, as journalists, educators, politicians, and leaders, to provide these children with the tools to empower their own lives. These kids aren’t just our future; they are the present, and they possess the ability to shape the world into a place where they see themselves succeeding in an opportunity they very much deserve. Effective funding reforms are emerging across the country in hopes of supporting these underprivileged students, with programs investing in more qualified teachers and distributing more funds to areas of high poverty. “Participatory budgeting is such an impactful backdrop for service learning [and it involves] having focused populations present at the table because you recognize that they're often excluded from our decision-making spaces,” Isabel Luciano, a community leader in participatory budgeting, said at a Policy Cafe on policy changes in education and service-based learning hosted by Sewa back in August.

To combat this learning epidemic, ASPIRE has supported over 3500 students this past year and is building a strong foundation for youth success. “Underserved and underprivileged subconsciously translates to dumb. But, a lot of these students, especially in these schools [in the Newark area], have really bright minds, and I think what’s happening outside of their control is really affecting them and holding them back,” says Varun Damojipurapu, a high school volunteer at ASPIRE.