UNK Internal Review Finds ‘No Evidence’ of DEI, Experts Say It Doesn’t Add Up

by Gabrielle Temaat

(Picture credit UNK)

This article first appeared in The College Fix.

The University of Nebraska Kearney recently released a report stating that its internal review found “no evidence” of diversity, equity, and inclusion practices at the school.

But experts are skeptical that DEI is really gone.

Responding to recent allegations, the report states that the school does not have a chief diversity officer, “is not hiring individuals focusing on ‘DEI,’” and “does not have a campus climate that is hostile to Christians or conservatives.”

It also addressed complaints about certain courses and training materials, stating that the “optional faculty training video on how to reduce barriers for transgender students was produced by a third party and financed by online course fees.”

The university acknowledged that it should have reviewed the content before it was distributed. Moving forward, “the dean will implement a committee review of online faculty training modules, give explicit approval for faculty training modules,” the report states.

Further, complaints alleged that “students are exposed to pornography in the Human Sexuality FAMS 151 course” and that the school is “moving away from teaching traditional family values” by eliminating two Family Science courses.

The school stated it will no longer use the textbook with graphic images, and the content of the two courses was not eliminated, but integrated into a new one.

The university also had an outside law firm independently review the findings.

UNK spokesperson Todd Gottula told The College Fix via email that “Every allegation was thoroughly examined, and the University of Nebraska engaged Baird Holm LLP to independently review both the investigative process and the conclusions. Baird Holm concluded the investigation was thorough, the work product was well reasoned, and the conclusions were sound.”

The review found that none of the DEI-related allegations were accurate, he said.

However, in an interview with The College Fix, Manhattan Institute Research Associate Forest Romm flagged the fact that neither the school nor the law firm provided the criteria they used to determine whether DEI was still present.

“If the public doesn’t know how the construct was operationalized, it can’t assess whether it was accurately measured,” she said.

She added that administrators at other universities, such as the University of Alabama, have acknowledged that DEI remains even after the schools have claimed to eliminate it.

Because of this, “it seems fair that the burden of proof should shift to the schools. In this case, I don’t believe that burden has been met,” Romm said.

The higher education expert also told The Fix there are a few ways to tell whether a school has removed DEI “in name only.”

“First and foremost, if a school eliminates its central DEI office but continues to employ all or most of its staff in roles that have either similar or ambiguous responsibilities, those employees are likely functioning as de facto DEI personnel at the school,” she said.

“This is especially true if they are kept on in positions that are quietly created around the same time, or shortly after, the DEI office is suspended,” she said.

She added that DEI positions or offices usually include phrases like “Inclusive Excellence” and “Community Belonging,” and she is working on a comprehensive list of these terms.

“UNK seems to fit that pattern,” as “its former Chief Diversity Officer is now the Associate Vice Chancellor for Institutional Engagement.”

She said it appears that the new position was established in 2025 and the administrator’s bio contains DEI-coded language while her responsibilities are vague.

Romm added that looking at public committee meeting minutes can also help determine whether DEI practices are ongoing.

“Many schools create some kind of steering committee or task force to resolve issues that arise from the closure of a DEI office, such as what to do with ongoing programming that no longer has an administrative home,” she said.

If the committee spends a lot of time rebranding DEI initiatives and little time reflecting on their issues in the first place, the school is likely “laying low and waiting out the current administration than in addressing the underlying problems.”

Similarly, Reagan Dugan, director of higher education initiatives at Defending Education, told The College Fix that the review dismisses complaints of DEI positions without detailing the new roles of those staff members.

Defending Education is a nonprofit organization that aims to combat indoctrination on campus.

“Renaming offices and positions does not eliminate their functions. Neither the process nor the conclusions hold up to scrutiny,” Dugan said.

Gabrielle Temaat is an assistant editor at The College Fix.