How Leaders Are Keeping DEI Work Alive

As attacks on diversity, equity and inclusion efforts escalate, higher education leaders across the country are facing a defining moment. Legislative mandates, ambiguous executive orders and politicized critiques have left institutions reeling. But perhaps most troubling is the speed with which some institutions have complied. In just a few months, we have witnessed leaders dismantling DEI offices, scrubbing language from strategic plans and websites, and quietly retreating from long-standing equity commitments. While disconcerting, this kind of anticipatory compliance raises deeper questions, especially since many court cases on these matters are yet to be decided.

Our recent research confirms that many institutions are bending the knee too quickly, forfeiting hard-won progress without meaningful resistance. At the same time, our research illustrates glimpses of hope. We feel compelled to share about our ongoing work because we believe this is a moment we cannot sleep through. It demands moral clarity and institutional courage.

We conducted 17 in-depth interviews and three focus groups with leaders from a diverse set of institutions across the country, including community colleges, bachelor’s degree–granting institutions and minority-serving institutions, exploring how these leaders understand racial equity and social justice in relationship to their leadership practices. Interviews happened in fall 2024 and were followed up in spring 2025 with focus groups, which centered on the question of how the current political climate, and specifically the anti-DEI movement, is impacting leaders’ work and perspectives. These conversations offered not only more insights but also opportunities for leaders to speak their minds and even name what they’re experiencing. They reflected on the tensions, uncertainties and quiet bravery of trying to hold the line on equity in a time of escalating political scrutiny.

For those of us who have spent years advancing equity-driven work, this is a sobering reckoning. But it is also a call and opportunity.

What the Data Reveals

Leaders spoke not only of their roles but of their journeys. They shared stories shaped by mentorship, resilience and a commitment to students. They described themselves as student-centered, adaptive and visionary. They reflected about their mentorship approaches and their desire to ensure that students see themselves represented at the highest levels of leadership. But alongside those aspirations, we heard something more fragile: fear.

Fear of job loss. Fear of public backlash. Fear of being caught between personal values and institutional survival. Several leaders confessed their institutions had rolled back DEI programs not in response to laws, but in anticipation of them. As one leader told us, “It felt like we were waiting for permission to stop doing the work. And once that letter came, even though it wasn’t law, we acted as if it was a mandate.”

“Ron,” an associate dean of student affairs at a midsize institution in the Midwest, knows that fear (we use a pseudonym for him and all other leaders cited here to protect their identities). Ron described rebranding DEI efforts under more palatable language to avoid political scrutiny. Yet even within these constraints, he continues pushing forward, championing student voices, calling for equity training and centering his work on empathy and self-awareness. His story is not of surrender but of navigating the storm without abandoning the ship.

Ricardo, a leader at a large community college district in the Southwest, works in one of the most politically charged states in the country. Serving large populations of first-generation, Black and brown students, he has seen how equity efforts must now be couched in the language of workforce development and student success. And yet he continues to build, securing partnerships and ensuring students remain at the heart of institutional strategies.

Others shared stories of exhaustion, adaptation and persistence. One director of an academic success center spoke about climbing the ranks while holding fast to a commitment to students on academic probation, her professional passion. Another assistant dean inherited a fractured DEI office and began stitching it back together with a 32-point diversity plan and a team of student DEI ambassadors, all while managing bias incidents and navigating remote work pushback.

Why This Matters

We’ve been here before. After the Civil Rights Act. After affirmative action rulings. After each surge in equity work comes a backlash, and with it, the temptation to pull back. But when institutions retreat from DEI, they do not become neutral. They become complicit.

However, strategic resistance is possible. Coalition building is happening behind the scenes. Even under fire, leaders are finding ways to keep the work alive. We heard about programs being rebranded but not dismantled. Collaborations with doctoral students to provide mental health services when budgets were slashed. Equity audits reframed as strategic planning. Leaders like Jose, a vice president of student affairs, who not only hosts cafecito with students but meets them where they are on campus. He then uses students’ feedback to advocate for them in meetings with the president. Or take Jeffrey, an associate vice provost who engages with alumni and students to identify ways to resist within the confines of institutional policies.

This is not cowardice. It is what one participant called “sophisticated advocacy,” the kind that adapts without abandoning. The kind that says, “We may shift our language, but we will not shift our purpose.”

One participant challenged us all with a simple idea: genuine care. When leaders truly care, they move beyond checklists. They invest in students. They set bold goals and align resources behind that goal. Because when care is real, support is intentionally designed.

A Wake-Up Call for Leadership

This is not a time for silence or soft-pedaling. It is a time for bold, reflective, values-based leadership. Presidents, provosts and trustees must start clarifying their commitments.

This is not just about saving programs. It is about safeguarding purpose. Higher education exists to develop critical thinkers, to foster democracy, to champion equity. We forget that at our peril.

Students—especially those from historically marginalized backgrounds— are watching. They notice when their spaces disappear. They notice when equity becomes a footnote. And they will remember who showed up—and who didn’t.