116 3rd St SE
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52401
Home / News / Education / Higher Ed
Iowa lawmakers sought DEI update from universities in March
‘We've been given no feedback and had no updates’
Vanessa Miller
May. 5, 2024 5:00 am
IOWA CITY — Back in mid-March — more than a month before the Iowa Legislature passed a bill imposing on Iowa’s public universities sweeping diversity, equity, and inclusion restrictions that go beyond directives from their governing Board of Regents — Republican lawmakers sought a DEI update from the campuses.
Specifically, lawmakers wanted to know when the University of Iowa, Iowa State University, and the University of Northern Iowa would implement the first two of 10 regent directives — the ones requiring they restructure central DEI offices, review DEI positions, and cut any functions and jobs not necessary for compliance and accreditation.
A state relations officer for the regents responded to that lawmaker inquiry by committing to answer the questions later.
“The universities will provide the Board of Regents with a progress report, including implementation timelines, during the April 2024 meeting,” the state relations officer wrote, according to documents obtained by The Gazette.
To a second question seeking estimated savings for the DEI changes presumably underway across the universities, the regents again said, “The universities will provide the Board of Regents with a progress report during the April 2024 meeting.”
Fast forward a month to April 18 — just a week before the April 25 regents meeting at which the universities would provide DEI updates — the Iowa Legislature circumvented the board’s DEI directives with a bill baking into state law their own more restrictive mandates.
That law, which doesn’t take effect until July 2025, prohibits the campuses from having and staffing a DEI office and from spending any money on DEI training, programming, or activities — other than what is required for compliance and accreditation.
It defines DEI as, among other things, “any effort to promote, as the official position of the public institution of higher education, a particular, widely contested opinion referencing unconscious or implicit bias, cultural appropriation, allyship, transgender ideology, microaggressions, group marginalization, anti-racism, systemic oppression, social justice, intersectionality, neopronouns, heteronormativity, disparate impact, gender theory, racial privilege, sexual privilege, or any related formulation of these concepts.”
The law prohibits the universities from soliciting a DEI statement from anyone — which had been part of some job searches; requires annual reports; threatens appropriation reallocation; and sets up an enforcement mechanism through the Attorney General’s Office.
So when the university presidents in April gave their respective DEI updates, Regent David Barker said, essentially, their progress on the board directives are too little too late — pointing to the superseding legislation in arguing the universities should have been more transparent with their efforts.
“This is the first we've seen of any of this,” Barker said. “It was five months ago that we put out the directives. And we've been given no feedback and had no updates during that time. That meant that we were unable to update legislators as well, who had asked about progress. And I believe that is the reason why Senate file 2435 was passed.”
On the heels of a nearly hourlong presentation of what the campuses have and are doing to comply with the regent guidance, Barker said, SF2435 “makes a lot of our directives irrelevant. Because there's a much broader definition of DEI in there; much stronger enforcement that comes from the Attorney General's Office; prohibitions of money being spent from any source on these programs.”
And so he advised the presidents redirect their focus from the board’s mandates to the state’s.
“My suggestion is that we begin working on compliance with that right away,” he said. “I think it would be a good idea for if we could be in compliance with that before the next Legislative session opens. But that, again, is very different than our original directives.”
UI President Barbara Wilson said she believes much of what the campuses have and are doing “is in the spirit of the law, frankly.”
‘Nearly completed’
After the meeting — at which Barker requested more information, including costs and savings of the changes — the universities shared additional information with their campuses about DEI changes in the works.
“At Iowa State University, the Office of the Vice President for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion was established in 2015 to serve as a central resource, provide advice and collaborate across campus, the community and higher education organizations,” according to a campus update from ISU President Wendy Wintersteen’s Office. “In response to the board’s directive, we will be closing the office in July.”
UNI also announced it will close its Diversity, Inclusion, and Social Justice Office, “which has been and is an important part of the UNI experience for many of our students.” Both Iowa State and UNI announced those changes have eliminated five positions.
At UNI, three of the impacted employees have accepted other jobs on campus. At Iowa State, three of the five cut positions already were vacant, and the others were given notice and are working with human resources.
The University of Iowa said it isn’t cutting its DEI division but instead is restructuring and renaming it to the “Division of Access, Opportunity, and Diversity” — a better reflection of its focus on state and federal requirements and accreditation mandates.
Although the UI website still identifies the division under its old DEI name, the campus’ full 47-page DEI task force report indicates the university has “nearly completed” its response to the board’s first directive — to restructure and cut where possible central DEI offices.
“To ensure efficiency and reflect this realignment, the division will not rehire five positions vacated in the past year,” according to the UI report. “The funding from these salaries ($368,656) will be redeployed to initiatives focused on student success.”
That UI report spells out the task force’s guiding principles, priorities, and responses to each of the board directives — labeling three as “completed,” three as “nearly completed,” and one “in progress.” The Board of Regents is taking responsibility for three of the directives — including crafting a policy barring affirmative action in admissions and issuing employee guidance regarding separation of personal political advocacy from university business.
Among the task force’s guiding principles, according to the report, are staying in compliance with state and federal law; remaining fully accredited with the Higher Learning Commission and accrediting bodies for colleges and departments; and continuing to “provide opportunities for civic engagement in a diverse, multicultural society and globally connected world.”
Its top priority was to “expand diversity work at the University of Iowa to include a broader framework, concentrating on the teaching and practicing of the skills needed for our students, faculty, and staff to lead in a global society and workforce.”
Savings
Other changes the campuses are making include reviewing and updating job titles and descriptions, including 77 DEI jobs at the University of Iowa; adding policy language and promotional materials to clarify mission statements; and changing recruitment materials to strip from guidance suggestions that search committees seek a “commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion statement.”
The UI administration has “nearly completed” its review of 66 DEI-related courses and is renaming the “diversity and inclusion” general education category “understanding cultural perspectives” — to “better reflect the world readiness skills that students are taught in these courses.”
Regarding a charge to explore strategies to increase intellectual and philosophical perspectives in faculty and staff applicant pools, the UI task force reported that directive is “completed” — having updated its search guidance and expanded the sites on which it markets jobs to include Indeed, Zippia, and Oodle.
“So I would say that's fairly completed,” Wilson said. “And lots of details behind the work that the task force has done there.”
Despite the information provided in April — including Iowa State’s investigation of a new civic education initiative, a UI proposal for a new Civic Dialogue Initiative, and UNI announcing a new Center for Civic Education — Barker requested more of those details the presidents said existed.
“You mentioned that there were a lot of details,” he said. “If you could get those to us, that would be great.”
When asked in the days following the meeting whether UI has provided additional details to the regents — and more clarity about some of its specific actions — UI officials told The Gazette, “We do not have anything more to share at this time.”
When regents asked about potential savings from the changes, UI reported $360,000 from the cut positions; ISU estimated savings from its changes are $789,000; and UNI said they likely will be minimal.
“Savings are going to be very limited,” UNI President Mark Nook told the regents. “One of the things we recognize is that the services that are provided in Diversity, Inclusion and Social Justice are services that students are receiving now. And as those students are no longer served there, they're going to need services elsewhere.
“That's why we're putting those resources into a more holistic approach to all of our Student Life programs,” he said. “So the actual savings is rather limited, because we are going to need to continue to serve those students — but certainly different than we have been.”
Vanessa Miller covers higher education for The Gazette.
Comments: (319) 339-3158; vanessa.miller@thegazette.com