By Taylor Johnson | OBSERVER Staff Writer

As California joins 18 other states suing the Trump administration over its efforts to cut Title I funding from schools that have “diversity, equity, and inclusion” policies, also known as DEI, many community members are confused about what constitutes that policy.

Christopher Nellum, executive director of EdTrust-West – an organization that advocates for policies that dismantle racial and economic barriers in California’s education system – said he believes it is important for schools not to jump the gun and endanger potential identity clubs such as Black student unions and other programs viewed as “DEI.”

Nellum added that he hopes the attorney general and other state officials provide additional guidance to local school districts on how to navigate their concerns and fears. He also said he hopes the state can provide legal assistance to districts if they are targeted over their DEI programs.

Q: Why are DEI programs so important for all students and families?

A: Right now, in the national narrative, it’s really hard to define what folks mean by [DEI]. I mean the way that’s being talked about. It could mean almost anything and everything these days, which is really confusing.

Our schools and our colleges have a mission to serve all students, and when you look at the data, we can see that they’re not currently serving all students as well as they should be or could be. Those students often are Black students, low-income students, multilingual learners, all sorts of folks.

So equity-minded programs are just trying to say, “Like, hey, our mission is to serve everyone. We’re not serving certain populations well. We’re going to do some good work, some intentional work to focus on Black students, multilingual learners or students in poverty to try to do better by them, given our mission.”

But there are offices also called DEI offices, and I would argue that those offices have a similar mission.”

Q: When it comes to “DEI programs,” what do you think is included in that?

A: Given what we’ve seen by the threats that have been made by the administration, I think at least what we’re starting to see is interpretations of what the federal government means.

We have seen universities and schools cancel identity-based graduations, for example. We have seen schools and colleges and other places [that] either completely removed or fired people with DEI or equity in their titles. We have seen schools and colleges stop offering things like ethnic studies or Black studies, Asian American, and LGBTQ studies.

I think folks are casting a wide net for what they mean [and] what they think is meant by “DEI programs.”

Q: How will federal cuts to DEI specifically affect Black students, families and teachers?

A: The administration is saying, if you don’t certify that you’re not doing these vaguely defined DEI practices, they will take your Title I dollars.

I’m not sure that people know the wide-ranging ways that Title I dollars support schools and colleges. In some districts in the state, it’s used to fund pre-K or [transitional kindergarten]. In some places, it’s used to hire teachers to reduce class sizes. It is used in some places to create academic interventions that many families students benefit from – things like tutoring or after-school and before-school programming. And all of those things would be impacted if Title I dollars are taken, given the threats around DEI … or this belief that schools need to stop doing these sorts of efforts.

There’s a big push in the state, including in Sacramento and elsewhere, to hire more educators of color, in particular Black teachers. Evidence is clear that when a student has a Black educator, they perform better, and that’s for Black kids and other kids who aren’t Black. I think there could be an impact on the hiring of Black teachers if schools start to believe that Title I dollars won’t be available. They’ll slow their hiring.

Q: What else should the state be doing to ensure protection for DEI programs?

A: The state has done a couple of things. They joined about a half dozen or a dozen other states and a lawsuit against this particular threat around DEI and Title I dollars. They’re also communicating to districts – and I think this is the important part about what they need to be doing potentially more of – is to communicate to districts that you’re already in compliance with this threat from the federal administration.

Q: What should local school districts be doing right now?

A: I think it’s pretty clear, at least from my read of it, that the state is saying school districts are in compliance. That suggests to me that they’re not asking any of our schools and districts to change anything just yet about what they do.

Schools and districts are also already in the midst, or already have planned their budgets for the next year. They should continue to do the things that they plan to do. And before they make decisions, school boards should make sure to consult the state, lawyers and also speak with their communities.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Shortly after the May 25, 2020, killing of George Floyd ignited a global reckoning on racial injustice, many institutions – from city halls to corporate boardrooms and university campuses – pledged a renewed commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).

This is the second installment in a three-part series where The OBSERVER explores how municipalities are navigating shifting priorities, how educational institutions are grappling with curtailed programs, and how corporations are reevaluating their commitments in the face of political and legal pressure. In this series, we investigate whether the pledges made in 2020 were a genuine movement toward equity or merely a fleeting moment, and what the erosion of DEI truly means for the future of racial progress in America.