Hello, AEA365 community! Liz DiLuzio here, Lead Curator of the blog. This week is Individuals Week, which means we take a break from our themed weeks and spotlight the Hot Tips, Cool Tricks, Rad Resources and Lessons Learned from any evaluator interested in sharing. Would you like to contribute to future individuals weeks? Email me at AEA365@eval.org with an idea or a draft and we will make it happen.
We are Omar Brown, MBA and Quisha Brown, MSA, MPA, consultants and co-founders of Humanistic Care, LLC, an organization offering culturally responsive solutions to tough challenges faced by organizations. We’re also the creators of an inclusive evaluation framework called the Progressive Outcomes Scale Logic Model (POSLM). This blog post discusses how strategies used in approaches such as the POSLM can help “bulletproof” DEI Evaluation Plans in hopes of shielding organizations from discrimination allegations and lawsuits.
Conservative groups and state attorneys generals have increasingly turned their attention to DEI initiatives after the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action in college admissions in June. Consequently, fears of litigation are spreading and many organizations are beginning to downplay the “D” in DEI in order to avoid lawsuits. Changing language may help in the short term, but it’s not a good strategy for the long term if the overarching goal is to eliminate disparities.
The fear of being sued for unfair diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices can have a profound impact on how DEI programs are evaluated. This fear compels organizations to adopt a more comprehensive and cautious approach to evaluation. Legal compliance, transparency, and rigorous documentation become central in an effort to prevent costly lawsuits and maintain a reputation for fairness and equity.
As for legal compliance of DEI initiatives, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is clear in prohibiting discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin. Therefore, ensuring that diverse voices are included in the evaluation process becomes a priority. This can start with organizations forming a DEI committee, made up of a diverse set of stakeholders (i.e. employees, customers, community, etc). The POSLM supports committees in defining clear, specific, and non-discriminatory process indicators and measures the attainment of these indicators progressively in stages. As a quick demonstration, let’s say an organization’s DEI committee identified the following process indicators to “Promote Inclusivity” in the workplace:
- Review and provide input on recruitment, promotion, compensation, and other HR policies to eliminate bias and promote diversity.
- Establish channels for employees to provide feedback, share concerns, and suggest improvements related to DEI.
- Work with HR and management to develop and track DEI metrics, such as diversity in hiring, retention rates, and promotions.
- Conduct training on cultural competence and sensitivity to foster a more inclusive workplace culture.
- Research and share best practices from other organizations to help the company improve its DEI efforts.
First, the identification of targeted process indicators helps to establish transparent criteria for evaluating the DEI program. You’ll notice that the indicators above are based on legitimate business needs and do not unfairly disadvantage or target any particular group. Additionally, rigorous documentation templates are used and are an essential strategy in the POSLM approach. For example, a detailed “Action Plan” is required by the committee, outlining the steps taken to achieve each process indicator. Innovative methods such as the POSLM approach can help support the need for organizations to maintain comprehensive records of their DEI program efforts, implementation, and evaluation processes. Finally, having a diverse internal DEI committee helps to ensure that the individuals responsible for providing input to the evaluation of the DEI initiative are diverse and represent different perspectives to minimize bias in the evaluation process.
In conclusion, many evaluation professionals will agree that organizations will have to do much more than tweak a few terms to stave off potential litigation of their DEI initiatives. The bottomline is that organizations are going to have to find new methods of implementing and evaluating DEI programs and it could be less costly to do so sooner, rather than later!
Rad Resource:
For more best practices and things to consider to minimize liability and avoid DEI initiative related discrimination lawsuits, review this article from Bloomberg Law.
Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators. The views and opinions expressed on the AEA365 blog are solely those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of the American Evaluation Association, and/or any/all contributors to this site.