Social scientific investigation into the religiospiritual characteristics of American Indians rarely includes analysis of quantitative data. After reviewing information from ethnographic and autobiographical sources, we present analyses of data from a large, population-based sample of two tribes (n = 3,084). We examine salience of belief in three traditions: aboriginal, Christian, and Native American Church. We then investigate patterns in sociodemographic subgroups, determining the significant correlates of salience with other variables controlled. Finally, we examine frequency with which respondents assign high salience to only one tradition (exclusivity) or multiple traditions (nonexclusivity), again investigating subgroup variations. This first detailed, statistical portrait of American Indian religious and spiritual lives links work on tribal ethnic identity to theoretical work on America’s “religious marketplace.” Results may also inform social/behavioral interventions that incorporate religiospiritual elements.

This article uses data from surveys of public housing applicants and tenants and from an ethnographic study of the procedures of a major British housing authority to explain the reasons for racially discriminatory housing allocations. It shows how central judgments of 'respectability' are to the allocation processes of housing departments, even when, officially, allocations are based on a system of 'housing need'. We trace how class and racial factors in the wider society become invested with official or semi-official status as they are absorbed into the housing authority's rationing processes, both of a formal and a more informal nature. We advance an explanation for discriminatory allocations which emphasises on the one hand, the integration of public housing bureaucracies into an inegalitarian social totality and, on the other, the conceptual connexion between racial, class and other forms of social discrimination.

ImportanceThe COVID-19 pandemic has caused millions of infections and deaths and resulted in unprecedented international public health social and economic crises. As SARS-CoV-2 spread across the globe and its impact became evident, the development of safe and effective vaccines became a priority. Outlining the processes used to establish and support the conduct of the phase 3 randomized clinical trials that led to the rapid emergency use authorization and approval of several COVID-19 vaccines is of major significance for current and future pandemic response efforts.ObservationsTo support the rapid development of vaccines for the US population and the rest of the world, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases established the COVID-19 Prevention Network (CoVPN) to assist in the coordination and implementation of phase 3 efficacy trials for COVID-19 vaccine candidates and monoclonal antibodies. By bringing together multiple networks, CoVPN was able to draw on existing clinical and laboratory infrastructure, community partnerships, and research expertise to quickly pivot clinical trial sites to conduct COVID-19 vaccine trials as soon as the investigational products were ready for phase 3 testing. The mission of CoVPN was to operationalize phase 3 vaccine trials using harmonized protocols, laboratory assays, and a single data and safety monitoring board to oversee the various studies. These trials, while staggered in time of initiation, overlapped in time and course of conduct and ultimately led to the successful completion of multiple studies and US Food and Drug Administration–licensed or –authorized vaccines, the first of which was available to the public less than 1 year from the discovery of the virus.Conclusions and RelevanceThis Special Communication describes the design, geographic distribution, and underlying principles of conduct of these efficacy trials and summarizes data from 136 382 prospectively followed-up participants, including more than 2500 with documented COVID-19. These successful efforts can be replicated for other important research initiatives and point to the importance of investments in clinical trial infrastructure integral to pandemic preparedness.

The possibility of using public sector housing to disperse black people across our cities in the interest of racial integration is again attracting attention. Based on an analysis of housing department records, this article examines the effects on Birmingham's black settlers of the operation of one particular policy of racial dispersal. Having described the events leading to the introduction and ultimately the termination of the policy, the article proceeds to investigate the locations in which Asian, West Indian and native white tenants were housed, their area preferences, and the housing categories from which their allocations were made, as well as their ‘points’ levels on allocation. The article concludes by arguing that, on these dimensions, the consequences of the policy for black people were almost entirely negative.