Recognizing Diversity and Inclusion in Research Hiring

Government agencies that fund science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM), such as the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH), are increasingly requiring diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) affirmations in grant proposals. These agencies expect applicants to present concrete plans for advancing DEI throughout their projects. Critics argue that prioritizing demographic factors over merit could undermine the quality of scientific research, drawing parallels to historical projects like the Manhattan Project, which relied on the nation’s top scientific talent to achieve its goals. The push for DEI in funding proposals has raised concerns about the potential dilution of scientific excellence. The NSF and NIH have been accused of imposing ideological requirements that detract from the primary focus of merit-based evaluation. The prevalence of DEI statements in grant applications has been described as “compelled speech,” with projects facing significant penalties for failing to meet these criteria. This trend has been further solidified by mandates from the Biden administration, which require federal agencies to adopt these practices, despite potential conflicts with civil rights laws. Moreover, the time-consuming nature of DEI compliance can consume up to half of the effort spent on grant writing, diverting attention from the scientific work itself. Critics argue that the only clear beneficiaries of this system are the DEI bureaucracies, while the actual advancement of science remains unproven in relation to DEI initiatives. Advocates for merit-based evaluation assert that STEMM fields must prioritize qualifications and expertise in admissions, hiring, and research funding to maintain the United States' leadership in technological innovation.