EOCR: the Enforcement Arm of DEI

by James A. Bacon

How many Diversity, Equity & Inclusion employees work at the University of Virginia, and how much do they cost? Those are important questions, but they miss the big picture. Employees classified as “DEI” are only part of a large bureaucratic apparatus designed to transform the University in line with a social-justice vision that views the world through the prism of intersectional oppression. A critical piece of the DEI machinery is the office of Equal Opportunity and Civil Rights (EOCR).

From a fiscal perspective, whether UVA spends $7.5 million yearly on the university’s office of DEI, as Chief Operating Officer J.J. Davis averred at the recent Board of Visitors meeting, or $20 million university-wide, as argued by fiscal watchdog Open the Books, the sum represents a tiny fraction of the enterprise’s $5.8 billion budget. But the budget numbers don’t come close to describing the far-reaching impact of DEI on the campus culture.

For instance, UVA maintains an office of Equal Opportunity and Civil Rights (EOCR), which under federal law promotes “diversity and inclusion, provides equal opportunity and access, and eliminates unlawful discrimination.” By investigating complaints of discrimination and harassment, EOCR functions as the enforcement arm of the DEI bureaucracy.

UVA has sent mixed messages about whether the office should be included in the count of DEI employees. EOCR is federally mandated, and it has existed for years, so it really shouldn’t count, UVA has said in its critique of the Open the Books methodology. But then, as Davis noted at the Board meeting, the EOCR office is part of the University’s DEI division and reports to the Vice President for Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Community Partnerships.

When asked to compare UVA’s DEI spending in the 2024-25 budget compared to the current year, Davis said the “only material enhancements” to DEI occurred in the EOCR office in response to a surge in its case load.

That increase follows in the wake of guidance from the Biden administration watering down Title IX due-process protections. As summarized by Reason:

Accused students will lose their right to a guaranteed live hearing with the opportunity to have a representative cross-examine their accuser. This is accompanied by a return to the “single-investigator model,” which allows a single administrator to investigate and decide the outcome of a case. Further, under the new rules, most schools will be required to use the “preponderance of the evidence” standard, which directs administrators to find a student responsible if just 51 percent of the evidence points to their guilt.

Biden administration guidance is driving an increase in EOCR cases nationally, not just at UVA. In addition to increasing the base EOCR budget, Davis said UVA is setting aside a contingency reserve in the event that the case load increases beyond projections.

At present The EOCR staff at UVA lists on its website 17 positions (one of which is vacant) dedicated mainly to enforcing rules regarding harassment and discrimination. Many cases arise from unhappy sexual encounters between male and female students that get classified as harassment or rape; some are tied to alleged racial discrimination; and some arise from disability-related incidents. Only three EOCR staffers are male. White females predominate, occupying all but six of the 15 positions whose identities could be determined by names and photos. The No. 3 person on the EOCR staff (ranked by salary) is Rachel Spraker, whose rhetoric is replete with references to “white supremacy,” “white toxicity,” and other terms from the oppressor-oppression catechism, as previously documented by The Jefferson Council.

So, what do these people do? The EOCR office keeps detailed records of its activity, which it publishes in biennial reports. The most recent report covered the 2019-21 and 2021-22 academic years.

The Americans for Disabilities Act (ADA) team responded to 477 requests for assistance in 2021-22 in areas ranging from training events and programming (125 requests) to disability accommodations (79).

The Affirmative Action & Employment Equity group provided “online learning for employment equity” to 3,700 hiring officials and search-committee members and bias-mitigation training to 400+ students to guide the selection of residential housing advisors.

The Preventing and Addressing Discrimination, Harassment and Retaliation team provided 45 training sessions the same year reaching more than 1,500 students, faculty and staff about what to do if someone witnesses “harassment, discrimination, or other prohibited conduct.” This group fielded more than 300 “reports and contacts,” including complaints submitted through the anonymous Just Report It system. In 2021-22, it conducted seven formal investigations and administrative reviews.

In 2021-22, the Title IX team conducted over 70 training sessions. Over the two-years covered in the report, staff also responded to 337 reports of sexual misconduct and conducted 33 investigations. The table below summarizes the results for academic year 2020-21: 49 students were identified by name, five were found responsible for sexual misconduct, one was expelled, and one was suspended.

Those most likely to submit complaints to the EOCR are campus militants versed in the rhetoric of intersectional oppression. They represent a minority worldview but they are filled with a sense of righteous indignation. They believe there is a “rape culture” at UVA. They believe UVA has been guilty of systemic racism since its founding in 1819. Acutely sensitive to microaggressions, they easily take offense. Instead of resolving bruised feelings person-to-person, they enlist the authority and power of the University to punish those who offend them

Backed by the rhetoric of University leadership, a hefty DEI bureaucracy, and a zealous EOCR enforcement arm, militants dominate the UVA culture in a way that budget numbers can never capture.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

31 responses to “EOCR: the Enforcement Arm of DEI”

  1. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    I was curious about how long EEOC for Higher Ed has been around:

    "Higher Education Amendments of 1998
    An Act

    To extend the authorization of programs under the Higher Education Act of 1965, and for other purposes."

    That's dang near 60 yrs which is about as old as Jim Bacon !

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      but not much longer. The Bought&Paidfers on the SCOTUS will be defanging that agency soon.

      1. walter smith Avatar
        walter smith

        Are you insinuating that the Wise Latina, and the first black woman justice who is not a biologist and can't say what a woman is and Kagan, whatever stupid leftist box of ignoring the law to get the (Marxist, unConstitutional) result we want are corrupt and not the super great brilliant Constitutional jurists advertised?
        You're pitiful. At least when you were snark you were sometimes humorous. Now you have sunk to a certain commenter level, mindlessly repeating the Dem blather narrative du jour…

      2. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        defanging AND apparently deciding what the definition of "disadvantaged" is as well as who and what kind of accommodations or not. Essentially re-writing the law per SCOTUS ideas.

  2. Clarity77 Avatar
    Clarity77

    Welcome to the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution UVA-style. As in the PRC(whether People's Republic of China or C'ville) whether Mao Zedong or Ryan the ill effects are the same. UVA under Ryan is a disgrace!

  3. Lefty665 Avatar
    Lefty665

    Recently following a BR discussion of DIE I spent some time driving around the UVa web site. DIE was prominent but curiously there was little below the headlines on the Equity part, and that was frequently presented as Racial Equity. While I did not previously make screen shots to prove it that is a significant change.

    Diversity and Inclusion are both virtuous goals. Not much of anyone argues against having the institution draw from many sources, or that once there all should feel included in the UVa community.

    The problem has mostly been with the Equity piece that has advocated for, among other things like Kendi's prescription of racism, eliminating differing outcomes on the basis of ability. Those statements disappeared from the VDoE page on Equity shortly after the change in administrations and they now appear to be mostly gone from the UVa web site too.

    There has been a concurrent attempt, also adopted by some commenters here on BR, to redefine Equity as Equality of Opportunity. The office of DIE using the EOCR at UVa to push Equity under the guise of civil rights Equality is consistent with that approach. The goal has not changed, but the labeling has.

    When what we call things acquires a bad reputation language morphs to rehabilitate it. An example is Morticians evolving into Undertakers into Funeral Directors. Likewise UVa seems to have morphed from Equity to Racial Equity to Equality. The function has not changed, but the language identifying it has with the enforcement mechanism becoming the EOCR within the Office of DIE (death as opposed to DEI god – we tend to identify things with what we call them). That initiative has apparently come from the Biden administration.

    The Romans had it right, the more things change the more they stay the same.

    The trick will be adjusting to the switch from the framing as Equity that openly eliminates differences in outcomes based on ability through Racial Equity to now being cloaked in the language of Equality of Opportunity. The intent is the same, but the language has become more virtuous and harder to oppose without appearing old school racist.

    As someone noted the other day, Woody Guthrie had it right.

    As through this world you travel
    You'll meet lots of funny men
    Some will rob you with a 6 gun
    Some with a fountain pen

    This post at BR seems a good introduction to how that works at UVa.

  4. Not Today Avatar
    Not Today

    Heaven forbid we actually enforce federal civil rights laws. No special parking, no curb cuts, no ASL interpreters, large print, braille… without them we’d all be better off. No? Shockingly, it looks like proactive efforts to help students and staff understand what discrimination is/isn’t worked and resulted in fewer complaints. 🤔

    “Those most likely to submit complaints to the EOCR are campus militants versed in the rhetoric of intersectional oppression. They represent a minority worldview but they are filled with a sense of righteous indignation. They believe there is a “rape culture” at UVA. They believe UVA has been guilty of systemic racism since its founding in 1819. Acutely sensitive to microaggressions, they easily taking offense. Instead of resolving bruised feelings person-to-person, they enlist the authority and power of the University to punish those who offend them.”

    Proof or I reserve the right to call this unsubstantiated hogwash, in my opinion, a lie.

  5. LesGabriel Avatar
    LesGabriel

    Something not reported by the MSM. Thanks BR. Good information to know. It would be interesting to learn what excuse they used to justify such an illiberal decision.

    That increase follows in the wake of guidance from the Biden administration watering down Title IX due-process protections. As summarized by Reason:

  6. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “…militants dominate the UVA culture…”

    So now employees in a federally mandated office are “militants”…. smh…

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      clearly deep state stuff!

      1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        Here is what really happened.

        “…or $20 million university-wide, as argued by fiscal watchdog Open the Books, the sum represents a tiny fraction of the enterprise’s $5.8 billion budget.”

        Not only did TJC attack launched by Open the Books fail when their numbers were shown to be… shall we say… flawed. But the figures were also shown to be a big nothing burger. Now the shadow board needs a new attack narrative to continue to lay the groundwork for the upheaval their representatives will be making beginning next month. Bureaucrats make a convenient target.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          Yep. It's obvious what is going on if they just take a look at it like you have. Minions?

  7. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    “The No. 3 person on the EOCR staff (ranked by salary) is Rachel Spraker, whose rhetoric is replete with references to “white supremacy,” “white toxicity” and other terms from the oppressor-oppression catechism, as previously documented by the Jefferson Council.”

    You mean here where a TJC board member attacks Rachel because he suspects she may be transgender?

    https://thejeffersoncouncil

    “The elephant in the room… Is Rachel a male?… And, if I am correct that this is a mental issue, and I am correct here, could not UVA find a better professor? Oh, that’s right, excuse me…the entire DEI ideology is crazy, so maybe Rachel belongs “teaching” the only thing Rachel is qualified to teach.

    We are living in a time of insanity, and no one will call it out.
    (And if Rachel is actually a female, I apologize. The facial features appear masculine and the “they” plural pronoun instead of “her” formed my conclusion.)”

    That documentation…?… and you all wonder why an office of Equal Opportunity and Civil Rights is necessary in this day and age… 🤷‍♂️

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      youch! That's impressive and not in a good way!

      1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        Sometimes they just go ahead and say the quiet part out loud…

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          yes, it’s getting that way… just coming right out and saying it …

        2. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          why do they care?

    2. walter smith Avatar
      walter smith

      I was asking a legitimate question. Why is it wrong to ask, based on physical appearances?
      I know in Leftist lunacy land when an applicant comes in for an interview with her entire leg in a cast, one is not supposed to be a human being and ask "What happened?", because the near body cast didn't pertain to the job and therefore, if denied the job, it was for the medical disability and your company would be sued (true training!). But, in the real world, we have eyes and ears and a brain and we are supposed to use them to make decisions. Rachel's features appear masculine to me (sorry, I seem to believe there are differing physical characteristics between people who have or do not have the opposite of the "front hole" in brilliant LeftyLoonieSpeak). And, since Rachel uses a "they" pronoun, it indicates to me that Rachel may be sexually confused. So, why is it wrong to ask? Or, if Rachel was "identified at birth" as "male," and Rachel now identifies as "female," am I required to pretend so?
      Grow up. I wonder if some commenters here were born with brains, but that could just be me…

    3. Bedfordboy Avatar
      Bedfordboy

      The issue, Mr. "half a troll" (for once you may have understated something), is DEI, its implementation by EOCR, and that confected doctrine's insidious effects at UVA. Once again, rather than intelligently addressing the issue with constructive dialog you waive a bloody shirt by an ad hominem attack because of some perceived "ism" violation by another commenter. Your practice is both tiresome and counterproductive to a rational debate.

      Under the proposed Biden Title IX rewrite to accommodate transgender issues an accused is deprived of multiple Constitutional guarantees of due process. Among them is permitting a single person to be both an "Investigator" of facts and an "Adjudicator" of both violation and appropriate remedy. Both the Biden administration 2021 "Guidance" to unilaterally amend Title IX to include transgender discrimination, and the April Final Rule purportedly implementing that Guidance have been preliminarily enjoined. (The Rule is 423 pages of heavy handed and costly enforcement guidelines of a policy that Congress has yet to address.) Even if the Final Rule is left standing by the courts, most rational parents would not want their straight, white child accused of a Title IX violation for his or her refusal to use a transgender's preferred pronouns to be investigated and judged by a transgender advocate who has called premature white deaths from opioids in Appalachia payback for the "toxicity of whiteness." Indeed, most rational parents of UVA students would object to this doctrinaire, woke racist being paid a quarter million dollars a year from their child's tuition payments. Unless, of course, tuition was paid by student loans unilaterally forgiven by the Biden Administration in a squalid pander for the youth vote.

      1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        I am not the one who invoked The Jefferson Council article, JAB did. My comment was on point and clearly demonstrates the need for the very office TJC is attacking. The fact that my argument may also reveal flaws in the position of another commenter is purely coincidental.

        1. Bedfordboy Avatar
          Bedfordboy

          I can see why you didn’t select “Jack be nimble, Jack be quick” as your screen name

    4. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      Nice deflection. JAB's statement dealt with the obvious slant toward oppression / victimhood coming from Rachael Spraker.

      Instead of refuting that statement (which you can't) you change the topic to be whether somebody on The Jefferson Council questioned Sparker's implied gender.

      So, let's get back to the issue at hand. Does Sparker's love of terms like “white supremacy,” and “white toxicity” make she/he/it an appropriate executive in UVa's Office of Civil Rights?

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        re: " The No. 3 person on the EOCR staff (ranked by salary) is Rachel Spraker, whose rhetoric is replete with references to “white supremacy,” “white toxicity,” and other terms from the oppressor-oppression catechism, as previously documented by The Jefferson Council."

        is there a quote and context?

      2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        The argument made by TJC board member in his comment was that Spraker’s masculine appearance is enough in itself to disqualify them for any position as a professor at UVa. It also demonstrated a clear bias on the part of TJC itself… actually an obsession. I think it was on point and we also see in this comment where the new BOV will be heading in July, don’t we…. To answer your question, I think how Spraker is actually doing their job should be how they are judged when it comes to job performance.

  8. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
    f/k/a_tmtfairfax

    Anyone in the federal government who is involved in adopting a rule that would take away a person's right to cross examine a witness against him or her; allow a school employee to be both prosecutor and judge; or be t0 punished because of a finding of guilt supported by a mere preponderance of the evidence should be fired and that person's pension eligibility be removed. It's beyond shameful. High-level DoEd leaders should have resigned in protest.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      are they charged with a crime?

    2. Not Today Avatar
      Not Today

      These are administrative proceedings, not criminal ones and preponderance is typically the standard in civil proceedings. Take your grievance up with the founders. I think there was too much veneration of traitors in old timer civics ed, not enough mastery of facts.

  9. Rafaelo Avatar

    Office of Equal Opportunity and Civil Rights ["EOCR"] after investigating, ruled Zyhana Bryant by calling Morgan Bettinger a 'Karen' at least seven times was using a racist perjorative.

    But EOCR concluded Bettinger suffered no harm from this. So Bryant got off free.

    No harm? It took a lawsuit against U Va to get Bettinger at least some sort of recovery. And she will never recover her lost senior year.

    Meanwhile Bryant monetizing her social media posts bought a house in Charlottesville while still a U Va student. Also a TV, and a make-over including designer clothing, and a car (though the new car may have been funded in whole or in part by some unspecified insurance recovery).

    All while enjoying U Va's full-boat scholarship. EOCR did not trouble to investigate Bryant's sudden riches, the proceeds of racism, nor whether accepting scholarship funds with that kind of money coming in was fraud.

    EOCR seems somewhat selective in deciding what kind of racists they will prosecute; what kind of racism matters.

    Defund them.

Leave a Reply