SCOOP: The NIH is giving $250m to universities to hire medical scientists who show “an interest in DEI.”
The NIH says the program doesn't “discriminate against any group.” Public records tell a different story.
As one email put it, “I don’t want to hire white men for sure."
The NIH FIRST program funds “cluster hiring” at universities and med schools around the country.
The program follows a popular model, reasoning that universities would hire minorities as a byproduct of heavily weighing DEI statements. On paper it bars racial preferences.
But in grant proposals, for projects funded by the NIH, universities repeatedly and openly state they'll restrict who they hire on the basis of race.
Vanderbilt University Medical Center promises to hire 18-20 "Black, Latinx, American Indian, and Pacific Islander" scientists.
Emails show how this worked in practice.
At the University of New Mexico, the program gave each underrepresented minority a "second look" in the search process.
In one email, faculty ask whether a south Asian job finalist was a "second look" candidate.
He didn't count. So they eliminated him. Noting that the department was "really low on women."
Other emails show search committees closely scrutinizing the race and sex of job candidates.
At one point, an NIH program official stated that race candidates should have no bearing on hiring.
This confused the grant recipients, who speculated that maybe the official "has" to say it that way, noting that she’d hinted at this before over zoom.
The records raise serious questions about the NIH FIRST program. And about the use of diversity statements in faculty hiring. Lawmakers should investigate both.
I provide the full story in today's Wall Street Journal. Please give it a read.
NEW: For hiring new professors, Columbia University recommends valuing “contributions to DEI” on par with “research.”
The sample evaluation tool also weighs DEI more highly than teaching.
That’s an especially wild default given how Columbia defines “contributions to DEI"... 🧵
Columbia provides an in-depth rubric for assessing DEI credentials. Which, of course, is pretty important if DEI might carry the same weight as research.
Take a look. The rubric gives a low score to candidates who are skeptical of racially-segregated “affinity groups.”
Here’s the rest of the Columbia rubric.
It rewards things like speaking at workshops “aimed at increasing others’ understanding of diversity, equity, and inclusion.”
NEW: Yale University’s department of molecular biophysics and biochemistry requires all job applicants to submit a DEI statement.
Here's the evaluation rubric, which shows the exhaustive DEI criteria for assessing any scientist hoping to work in the Yale department.
It's a remarkable document, which puts a thumb on the scale for progressive sensibilities.
Scientists get points for understanding the “challenges faced by underrepresented minorities”—likely to favor those fluent in the language of "microaggressions" and "implicit bias."
This DEI litmus test—or as some might say, loyalty pledge—evidently carries serious weight.
A presentation on the department’s hiring protocols declares that hiring committees should put “DEI at the center of every decision.”
The Washington Post Editorial Board calls for the end of DEI statements in faculty hiring.
It argues that the policy has led in practice to "ideological policing." That's a big deal—focusing on how the policy plays out in real life, not in some imagined best-case scenario.
In practice the ideological policing is impossible to deny. Here are just a few examples of how "DEI contributions" are evaluated, as shown by public records.
Here’s a wild example: At Texas Tech, a DEI evaluation of biology job candidates show one being penalized for not properly describing the difference between equality and equity.
Another job candidate was rewarded in their DEI report for giving a “land acknowledgement” at the beginning of their job talk.
The NIH funds DEI-related hiring in the biomedical sciences through multi-million dollar grants to universities around the county.
I've acquired hundreds of records related to this program—which I discuss in-depth in today's WSJ. A thread to highlight a few of those records. /1
NIH FIRST funds DEI "cluster hiring" at universities and med schools. A core requirement of the program is that every scientist hired submit a “diversity statement,” an increasingly controversial policy.
What does this look like in practice? The records speak for themselves. /2
Cornell University’s grant proposal describing how it will evaluate its hard-science job candidates: “Note that the statement on contribution to diversity will receive significant weight in the evaluation.” /3
The Utah Senate just passed a bill that in effect ends DEI in state universities. Now's probably a good time to recall what DEI has actually looked like in the state, especially since outlets like the Salt Lake Tribune have tried their best to “debunk” the major criticism.
The most salient example comes from the University of Utah’s School of Medicine—and its response to a group called White Coats 4 Black Lives.
In 2020, the University of Utah School of Medicine effectively adopted a DEI plan called for and created by White Coats 4 Black Lives (WC4BL).
WC4BL is a radical student activist organization. I use the word "radical" sparingly but it’s undeniable here. The organization — which boasts chapters at about 70 medical schools — calls for defunding the police, abolishing prisons, and an identitarian form of socialism. But really, it’s best to hear the organization in its own words.
The fist page of its Vision and Values statement for example asserts that “dominant medical practice in the United States has been built on the dehumanization and exploitation of Black people.”
WC4BL asserts that anti-racism requires “dismantling fatphobia,” “Black queer feminist praxis,” “the redistribution of power and resources (including reparations.”
The group asserts that white supremacy is a global colonialist project and calls for resistance against “Israeli Apartheid." That “the destruction of racial hierarchy, created for the purpose of exploitation, whiteness, and white supremacy, requires dismantling racial capitalism altogether.”
It also argues that policing originated from slave patrols and for the removal of police from hospitals.
It instructs the readers that “Cisheteropatriachy” is a European invention “intimately connected to colonialism and white supremacy,” and decries requiring a therapist letter for trans surgeries.