He told Inside Higher Ed that after UVA’s critique, he added more employees to his count, bringing the number to 262 with a total estimated cost of $23 million.
Andrzejewski also said that UVA’s response was “a response to public pressure” and that “they’ve backtracked.” He added, “I don’t think they’re being honest.”
Throughout the ongoing controversy, Andrzejewski has continued to criticize UVA, writing in an April 5 Substack post, “I think the University of Virginia should be transparent about their DEI spending. They’ve been incredibly opaque.”
Andrzejewski and OpenTheBooks are currently facing a lawsuit from UVA over their reporting. UVA filed a complaint in Charlottesville Circuit Court on April 30, seeking $5 million in damages and alleging defamation.
Andrzejewski told Inside Higher Ed that he believes the lawsuit is “a frivolous attack on our First Amendment rights.” He added, “UVA’s lawsuit is a blatant attempt to silence the watchdog.”
As the legal battle continues, it remains to be seen how the dispute between UVA and OpenTheBooks will ultimately be resolved. But for now, the controversy surrounding DEI spending at the University of Virginia continues to rage on.
These discrepancies in numbers highlight the lack of clear definitions and transparency when it comes to DEI initiatives at universities. Different organizations and institutions may have varying definitions of what constitutes a DEI position or expense, leading to confusion and potential misinformation.
As debates continue about the role of DEI in higher education, it is essential for stakeholders to have accurate and comprehensive information to make informed decisions. Transparency and clear definitions are key to ensuring that resources are allocated effectively and fairly in pursuit of diversity, equity, and inclusion on college campuses.
Ultimately, the controversy surrounding OpenTheBooks’ investigations at UVA and UNC underscores the need for greater clarity and accountability in how DEI initiatives are implemented and reported. Only with transparent and accurate data can universities and their stakeholders effectively evaluate the impact and effectiveness of their diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts.
UVA envió a Inside Higher Ed una presentación de PowerPoint de 2023 con un gráfico que indicaba que su cálculo excluía los salarios de los miembros de la facultad “en nombramientos administrativos que se pagan en función de su rol académico y su valor en el mercado”.
Bacon, con el Consejo Jefferson, dijo: “Todos llegan a un número ligeramente diferente porque al final todo se reduce a semántica”. Pero las diferencias numéricas han sido amplias, incluso entre organizaciones conservadoras, y han sido mucho más bajas que los cálculos de OpenTheBooks, o los titulares que generan.
Un informe de la Heritage Foundation de 2021, que excluyó al “personal principalmente encargado de garantizar el cumplimiento de las obligaciones legales”, concluyó que había 94 personas de DEI en UVA. Un informe de la conservadora Asociación de Académicos de Virginia, financiado en parte por el Consejo Jefferson, contó 77 administradores de DEI en 2021 que recibieron $6.9 millones en compensación. La Asociación de Académicos dijo que esto había aumentado significativamente desde 2020.
OpenTheBooks se ha insertado en el vacío dejado en lugar de números más detallados acordados entre defensores y opositores de DEI. Sus cifras plantean la pregunta de si los gastos y puestos DEI son incluso definibles.
“En última instancia, no hay forma de saberlo”, dijo Bacon. Calcular cualquier número, dijo, implica un “número ilimitado de juicios de valor”.