\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
![\"\"\/](\"https:\/\/gamma.creativecirclecdn.com\/yourvalley\/original\/20231006-170124-azcir-logo.jpg\"){kind=logo}
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n
Arizona\u2019s three public universities have quietly dismantled diversity, equity and inclusion offerings over the past year, renaming programs, consolidating resource centers and scrubbing websites \u2014 all while failing to detail the changes to students, faculty or the public.<\/p>\n
The moves came after the U.S. Department of Education sent universities a letter<\/a> in February 2025 threatening to cut federal funding if they continued to promote what President Donald Trump has called \u201cradical\u201d DEI programs. It advised schools they could not consider race in decisions about administrative support, housing and \u201call other aspects of student, academic, and campus life.\u201d<\/p>\n In Arizona, university leadership has not publicly disclosed how or to what extent they\u2019ve complied, shielding the public from understanding the impact of their decisions or how the changes might affect three of the state\u2019s largest campus communities. It\u2019s also unclear what changes, if any, have been reversed since a federal judge deemed the Trump administration\u2019s guidance illegal last August.\u00a0<\/p>\n Officials at Arizona State University, Northern Arizona University and the University of Arizona, which serve over 241,000 students and receive hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars annually, declined repeated requests for interviews and did not answer detailed questions from the Arizona Center for Investigative Reporting<\/a> over several months. Public records requests were either denied on claims of attorney-client or work-product privilege, deemed too burdensome to fulfill or closed citing a lack of responsive records.<\/p>\n AZCIR identified a number of changes through a review of university websites, course listings, past media coverage and communication with state officials. All three schools have been accused of burying resources for minority groups, and UA and NAU have also removed or renamed multiple webpages and references to diversity and inclusion \u2014 despite still claiming inclusivity as a core value. The largest known shift occurred at UA, which consolidated its cultural resource centers into one central hub.<\/p>\n Higher education experts say the lack of transparency is likely tied to a \u201cchilling effect\u201d from the Trump administration\u2019s broader assault on higher education, prompting attempts by officials to avoid further scrutiny.\u00a0<\/p>\n Emelyn dela Pe\u00f1a, president and CEO of the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education, told AZCIR that transparency is crucial now \u201cbecause when institutions feel like they can’t talk openly about how they support students, it becomes harder for the public to understand the role that these efforts have.\u201d<\/p>\n DEI initiatives in higher education generally serve a range of groups beyond those more commonly considered vulnerable, including first-generation students and veterans, among others. Programming is often designed to emphasize things like belongingness, critical thinking and community engagement, according to the USC Race and Equity Center. The result, experts say, can be increased student retention and graduation rates.<\/p>\n Nolan Cabrera, an expert in racism and anti-racism in higher education and a professor at UA, said decisions made behind closed doors sends a negative signal to students and faculty.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThis isn’t your university anymore,\u201d he said. \u201cThis isn’t a community.\u201d<\/p>\n As those tied to universities and the public at large attempt to understand the impact of DEI changes to campus life, Arizona\u2019s Republican lawmakers are advancing a ballot initiative that would pose the question of DEI\u2019s place in schools to voters directly. The move would bypass Gov. Katie Hobbs\u2019 veto power and amend the state constitution to restrict DEI initiatives further.<\/p>\n The potential of losing federal dollars \u2014 the single largest funding source for university research and development nationwide \u2014 prompted a number of schools to proactively comply with the guidance over the past year. Even as legal challenges to the February Dear Colleague letter and executive orders seeking similar restrictions on DEI made their way through the courts, some universities opted to publicly disclose their changes.<\/p>\n The University of Cincinnati, for example, issued a statement<\/a> saying the institution had \u201clittle choice but to follow\u201d the guidance and admitted to \u201cremoving references to DEI principles\u201d and evaluating programming. The University of North Carolina Chapel Hill\u2019s leadership released a statement<\/a> detailing changes to offerings for students after its university system suspended<\/a> DEI course requirements. Similar statements were made by universities from Alaska<\/a> to Colorado<\/a>.<\/p>\n Megan Gilbertson, a spokesperson for the Arizona Board of Regents, which oversees Arizona\u2019s public universities, declined an interview and did not say whether it advised schools on federal compliance. ABOR shifted 10 of its own policies last summer, removing references to \u201caffirmative action,\u201d and replacing \u201cdiversity\u201d with \u201cdifferentiation,\u201d among other changes.\u00a0<\/p>\n Presidents at NAU and ASU did not address the federal guidance in public statements, and campus community members said they had not received internal communication, either.<\/p>\n At UA, President Suresh Garimella began shifting diversity efforts shortly after Trump\u2019s January 2025 executive order<\/a>, which alleged higher education institutions have adopted “dangerous, demeaning and immoral” DEI practices and called for their end.\u00a0<\/p>\n In a Feb. 17, 2025, email obtained by AZCIR from Garimella to Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen, who had called on the state\u2019s public universities to eliminate DEI a week earlier, the university president said \u201cwe intend to fully comply with the order.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n The next day, Garimella announced the creation of a federal updates page<\/a> that now states UA was \u201cmandated to discontinue certain activities and programming,\u201d but provides no details. He also said they would take \u201ca proactive approach\u201d to compliance, including creating an inventory of DEI-related activities.\u00a0<\/p>\n AZCIR requested that inventory in September 2025, but was told the document was \u201cprotected under the attorney-client\/work-product privilege.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n On Feb. 19, 2025, a spokesperson confirmed to the Arizona Daily Star<\/a> that the school removed websites for its Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion and Cultural and Resource Centers, but did not answer questions about what other changes were coming.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n Vanessa Perry, a former professor at UA, said she only got more information after Petersen posted another letter<\/a> from Garimella to social media updating him on actions the school had taken as of April 1, 2025.\u00a0<\/p>\n The letter described a sweeping compliance effort \u2014 discontinued programming, internal \u201cDEIA reviews,\u201d instructions to college deans, changes to job postings \u2014 that the university has yet to detail publicly.<\/p>\n \u201cIt really told me that no matter what we could do as organizers, that Garimella would not be moved,\u201d said Perry, who was also part of UA Resist, a collective against DEI changes on campus. \u201cThat he had that little valor in doing the right thing and standing up for us.\u201d<\/p>\n AZCIR requested the information detailed in the letter, including communications sent to deans, the internal reviews and the action plans for change. The university withheld the records, again citing attorney-client or work-product privilege, and has not responded to repeated attempts to clarify the denial or provided further comment about changes made throughout its system.<\/p>\n \n UA also announced last May it was consolidating six of its seven cultural resource centers, which served LGBTQ+ students, disabled and gender-based groups, along with several racial and ethnic minorities. The Native American student center was moved into the Office of Native American Initiatives.\u00a0<\/p>\n UA officials did not say at the time whether the decision was tied to the federal directives and did not answer AZCIR\u2019s questions about the consolidation. UA spokesperson Mitch Zak shared two messages sent to campus about the consolidation, one of which clarified that \u201cactivities, physical spaces, and embedded counselors\u201d would also make the transfer, and student workers would remain in place \u201cto ensure continuity of support.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Zak said in the emailed statement that the school is focused on ensuring all students can access the same opportunities and resources for success, does not \u201cengage in preferential treatment in employment or programming\u201d and is compliant with federal and state nondiscrimination requirements.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThese (centers) were not just benevolently bequeathed from the institution. They were years of struggle, community activism, fundraising to create these spaces \u2026 that can just be eliminated by the whim of a president who has no idea what he’s doing,\u201d Cabrera, the current UA professor, said.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThat is devastating to the community, because we’ve been struggling for these minor amounts of inclusivity.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n NAU\u2019s spokesperson Kim Ott told AZCIR she was \u201cnot able to find anyone\u201d who could speak to campus changes despite repeated outreach. She responded only that the school is focused on \u201censuring that all students have the support and resources they need.\u201d<\/p>\n The university denied AZCIR\u2019s public records request for documentation of changes to DEI programs, positions or offerings, calling it \u201cunduly burdensome\u201d with more than 300,000 potentially responsive records.<\/p>\n An AZCIR review of NAU course plans showed that, as of last school year, some were described as meeting a \u201cdiversity\u201d requirement. Plans for the current year show some of the same requirements now described as \u201cinclusive perspectives.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Websites for NAU\u2019s \u201cdiversity strategic plan<\/a>,\u201d which was announced in 2020 and sought to make the school a \u201ctrue diversity university,\u201d as well as its Center For University Access And Inclusion<\/a>, are no longer active. Some program specific pages, such as the Institute for Public and Professional Ethics in Leadership<\/a> and the clinical psychology department<\/a>, however, still note a commitment to diversity.\u00a0<\/p>\n Sarina Cutuli, a third-year student at NAU and member of the Arizona Students\u2019 Association, said that while the changes are subtle, they perpetuate fear among students and \u201cit feels like this slow chipping away until there’s nothing left.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Cutuli said she believes administrators are acting in good faith, but that not communicating changes to the campus community is eroding trust.<\/p>\n \u201cSaying nothing feels like (leadership saying) \u2018I don’t care, I come first. I’m protecting myself first. I’m protecting my funding first. Your security as a student does not matter as much as money does,\u2019\u201d Cutuli said.<\/p>\n The largest known change on NAU\u2019s campus was the sunsetting of five diversity commissions<\/a> covering Indigenous communities, disability, ethnic diversity, women and LGBTQIA issues, some dating back to at least 2006. The commissions previously hosted speakers and discussions for students, faculty and staff, and gave awards for diversity work.<\/p>\n According to minutes<\/a> from a November 2025 faculty senate meeting, University President Jos\u00e9 Luis Cruz Rivera said the commissions were \u201cnot sustainable\u201d in their current form but that he wanted to reorganize them. Documents indicate the university sought to create an \u201cInclusive Excellence Advisory Board,\u201d but officials did not say how it has progressed or how offerings have changed.<\/p>\n ASU officials also declined to make anyone available for an interview and claimed \u201cno responsive records\u201d to an AZCIR records request from February seeking documentation for changes made over the past year. Spokesperson Nikki Ripley instead emailed a statement saying ASU fully complies with federal and state laws, noting that the school\u2019s charter \u201ccommits to an inclusive approach welcoming every learner who is qualified.\u201d<\/p>\n Ripley also pointed to a March 2025 interview in which President Michael Crow said the university never had \u201cethnic diversity goals\u201d to begin with.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cOther people built that three word phrase, \u2018diversity, equity and inclusion,\u2019 and then built a rhetoric around that, and that’s what’s being attacked. We were past that,\u201d Crow said at the time.<\/p>\n Hypatia Meraviglia, an ASU graduate student and member of United Campus Workers of Arizona, which represents staff at the three universities, said Crow\u2019s response was left wanting.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cWe’re stuck in a situation where the workers at ASU, the students and the faculty and the staff are getting the worst end of the deal, which is, there are no university resources, or very few university resources for minoritized workers of any kind. And the resources we have are pulled,\u201d Meraviglia said.\u00a0<\/p>\n ASU previously said it had not removed student support, though there were allegations<\/a> last<\/a> spring that online resources for LGBTQIA students were removed from public-facing websites. The university also renamed graduation events for minority students in May and was one of 31 schools spotlighted<\/a> by the Education Department for ending participation with the PhD Project, an organization that supports underrepresented doctoral students and was being investigated by the administration for discriminating based on race.<\/p>\n Education Secretary Linda McMahon celebrated the program closures, saying it was \u201cthe Trump effect in action.\u201d Ripley told AZCIR the university had already decided to end its partnership with the PhD Project before the federal government began investigating.<\/p>\n When the Education Department dropped its appeal in January of a federal ruling that found its guidance was largely illegal, some saw it as a \u201cmajor victory\u201d for diversity efforts in public education.<\/p>\n Shortly after, however, the Trump administration introduced a new plan requiring federal funding recipients, including universities, to certify that they do not have diversity programs before they\u2019re eligible for federal dollars.\u00a0<\/p>\n Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes was one of 23 attorneys general who signed a letter<\/a> urging the federal government to abandon its proposal, noting it was unlawful, would \u201cundoubtedly\u201d create confusion and may \u201cchill legitimate activities of funding recipients who fear punitive actions.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Trump issued another executive order<\/a> on March 26 saying federal contractors must agree to not engage in \u201cracially discriminatory DEI activities,\u201d and that their contracts may be terminated if compliance documentation isn\u2019t provided.<\/p>\n In Arizona, Republican lawmakers are again trying to ban DEI from schools. Last year, Hobbs vetoed Senate Bill 1694, which would have cut public funds from universities offering DEI courses.\u00a0<\/p>\n Speaker of the House Steve Montenegro, R-Goodyear, introduced House Concurrent Resolution 2044 this year, which would send the issue directly to voters \u2014 bypassing the governor’s veto. The measure would ask Arizonans to determine whether the state\u2019s Constitution should prohibit public entities from \u201cpreferential treatment\u201d based on race or ethnicity, and would bar public funding for diversity offices or training. As of April 8, the resolution passed the House and was progressing through the Senate.\u00a0<\/p>\n At its most recent regular meeting in February, ABOR\u2019s legislative update did not include the potential ballot measure, and it wasn\u2019t discussed by members. When asked why it wasn\u2019t introduced, Gilbertson said the board doesn\u2019t take an official stance on every bill, but is working with the governor\u2019s office and lawmakers on related legislation.<\/p>\n She did not specify how.\u00a0<\/p>\n This article<\/a> first appeared on Arizona Center for Investigative Reporting<\/a> and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"By Molly Bohannon | Arizona Center for Investigative Reporting Arizona\u2019s three public universities have quietly dismantled diversity, equity…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":723980,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5131],"tags":[5229,5643,1587,1589,67,586,132,5230,68,2969],"class_list":{"0":"post-723979","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-phoenix","8":"tag-america","9":"tag-arizona","10":"tag-az","11":"tag-phoenix","12":"tag-united-states","13":"tag-united-states-of-america","14":"tag-unitedstates","15":"tag-unitedstatesofamerica","16":"tag-us","17":"tag-usa"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/116394960713169178","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/723979","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=723979"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/723979\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/723980"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=723979"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=723979"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=723979"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}