The Hidden Costs Of Trump’s Anti-DEI Policies Hit Local Organizations Hard

President Trump issued more than 70 executive orders during his first 100 days back in office, including revoking birthright citizenship for children of undocumented workers which is being roundly challenged in courts as unconstitutional.

These orders have been met with a growing list of injunctions. But the threat they pose is real to the individuals, agencies and organizations they address. And the Trump administration has a particular agenda against diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs, issuing an executive order entitled "Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity" Jan. 21 to threaten the funding of private sector organizations and nonprofits that receive federal support, and whi specifically provide resources to underserved and marginalized communities. 

Although much of the executive order is poised as a rebuttal of Biden administration policies, it also takes the unusual step of revoking the 1965 executive order, signed by Pres. Lyndon Johnson, which guaranteed nondiscrimination in government employment.  

It appears unlikely Trump’s anti-DEI executive orders will withstand legal scrutiny for a number of reasons: for one, the orders are based on the assumption that DEI programs are illegal. But even as these proclamations are being challenged in court, they have had a chilling impact on educational and cultural institutions and culturally responsive programs throughout the country, many of which depend on federal funding to operate.  

Such organizations report receiving minimal and vague instructions on how to be in compliance with Trump’s executive orders. Many organizations say they have collaborated to compare notes about the kind of language and terms best avoided under the new anti-DEI crackdown. While they review their websites, printed materials and other communications, organizations are doing so on tight deadlines and at great expense. 

To understand the impact these executive orders are having on organizations that serve BIPOC and other marginalized populations, The Skanner spoke with a local nonprofit organization that supports small businesses and receives some federal funding. Due to the increased scrutiny of such groups, the organization and its representative asked not to be named. 

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

The Skanner: What instructions, if any, did you receive from the federal level about the phrases or language to avoid on your website and in printed materials?

Nonprofit: We didn’t receive any guidance from the federal level about language at all. We were just asked to certify that we were in compliance with the executive orders. So we had to do our own research about those executive orders, and what we think would be in compliance with them – we had to make a lot of assumptions. We didn’t even know what would be looked at – is that just the website? Is that every email we send?

We heard a little bit from other organizations who are also impacted, what they were making assumptions about as well. Collectively, talking with other people, and also understanding what industry we are in, and what language we use frequently, we could kind of – I think – identify the language that would be the most problematic for the compliance with the executive order. 

From all sorts of places, in a very short amount of time, we were just trying to look at any insight that anyone might have.

There really have been no answers from the government.

Most people aren’t going to receive communications whether or not they’re in compliance, and we don’t know if the reviews have taken place. But we another organization did say that they got in trouble for linking to another organization on their website, and that organization provided a service that was exclusive to an under-served audience. I don’t think they lost their funding, it was just flagged.

What is your understanding of how websites like your organization's are being monitored or reviewed?

We have no information on how they’re being reviewed. It took us so long to review our one website, I just can’t imagine that they have enough capacity for a human being to review everything, so I would imagine they’re using AI or other technology to do reviews of so much content, but I don’t know for sure.

We were just told to certify that we’re in compliance, and that if we’re found that we’re not, then there will be some problems. 

Can you estimate how much time has been spent on reviewing and editing your website and other materials to remove mentions of DEI? Similarly, do you have an estimate of how much it has cost your organization to do this review?

It has cost us a lot of time. These requests have had very short deadlines, very little time to go through the types of things they’re asking us to do. Our executive director, our leadership team, our staff – we’ve all spent lots of time, and time is money, and it should be spent helping people, instead of going through all of these administrative extra tasks. 

We’ve gone through every page of our website, we’re working through all our external communications. Even if no change is needed on that page or document, we still have to look at it. We have content in multiple languages, so that makes reviewing more challenging. 

We’ve had meetings with other organizations to help keep us informed about what’s going on, we’ve spent time as a team in extra meetings discussing pros and cons in making the changes, versus just being out of compliance and saying no, we’re not going to change, and so we want to make sure our whole team knows what’s going on as part of the decision-making process.

If our executive director has been in meetings all week because of this compliance, then they’re not out there bringing in new funding contracts or developing new relationships, and that opportunity cost is pretty great.

If we lost our contract that is federally funded, we’ve talked about, well, how would that impact us? We’ve definitely thought about that and where our line is. 

What would it mean to your organization if it lost federal funding?

It means we would serve fewer people. The people we serve need a support network to help their businesses succeed, like all businesses do. And as an organization, we would still be here. We wouldn’t disappear, because our funding is diversified and only a portion of our budget is through federal funding. But we do anticipate there will be a larger ripple effect across the funding landscape, and we are worried for other organizations who are in different funding situations, because they also serve as a critical resource.

Not everybody is going to make it. 

And it’s really frustrating because the work that we do helps create and retain jobs, it helps the economy, it helps strengthen families, it helps people understand and comply with regulations. It would hurt a lot of communities if we serve fewer people due to funding cuts.

How does removing these terms impact your organization’s ability to reach the people that you want to serve?

Ultimately, I don’t think it will have a huge impact. Our team is still the same, our values are still the same, word-of-mouth is still our most powerful marketing tool. We’re visible, we build trust in communities and people find us. So where we conduct our outreach is going to play a huge role. But it always has. I think being out there in the community with outreach efforts will be how we hope people find us.

What questions remain unanswered as you review your website and printed materials?

So many questions remain unanswered. A big concern is that we do have a lot of resources that we send people to if they’re seeking something that we don’t provide, and some of those other resources concern specific populations. So just like that organization that was flagged for having a link to another website on their website, my biggest question that’s unanswered is, how far will this go? Because there are lines we are not going to cross as an organization. There will be a point where we’re just not willing to do something, and hopefully we don’t get to that line.

We’re just trying to be mindful, because our current position is that we want to be here and serve the community. So we’re willing to make these adjustments for now, if that’s what it takes to continue doing the work that we do. And we just don’t want to take unnecessary risk in this moment in time. Of course, we hope this is a moment and we can just make it through, so we can still be here when this moment passes.