Nearly 200 diversity, equity, and inclusion staff positions were removed or reassigned at North Carolina’s public university system in response to a new systemwide policy aimed at reassessing diversity efforts. Reports released on Wednesday highlighted the varying approaches taken by the state’s 16 public universities in adhering to the revised policy, which eliminated mention of diversity roles and placed them at risk of being cut. The University of North Carolina Board of Governors reviewed the reports, noting actions such as diversity office closures and reallocations of funds towards student success initiatives like recruitment and scholarships.

The UNC Board of Governors replaced its 2019 diversity policy in late May with a new policy focusing on equality of viewpoints, freedom of speech, and institutional neutrality, leaving diversity positions in uncertainty. Critics of diversity efforts on college campuses, including conservatives, argue that these programs could lead to discrimination, while proponents believe they help promote equality for women and people of color. North Carolina’s Republican leaders, who have questioned diversity initiatives, considered legislation to limit such programs before the UNC Board of Governors intervened.

Amid concerns over diversity, UNC institutions were required to submit certification reports by September 1 detailing eliminated positions, reassignments, program changes, and financial savings resulting from the cuts. Reports revealed that 59 positions were cut, and 131 were reassigned, with UNC-Chapel Hill accounting for a substantial portion of the eliminated positions. Some universities, like NC State and UNC-Wilmington, opted to reassign rather than eliminate positions.

UNC institutions redirected over $17 million towards student success initiatives following the staff cuts. Despite concerns raised during the board meeting about the impact on diverse recruitment and retention, UNC System President Peter Hans assured that universities remain inclusive. Board members like Woody White expressed doubts about the pace and thoroughness of policy implementation, questioning whether all universities had made meaningful adjustments. Compliance with the policy will be reviewed annually, with the certification reports considered a crucial initial step in the process.