The maximum number of organizations, including colleges with endowments over $1 billion, that President Donald Trump asked each federal agency to identify as potential targets for “civil compliance investigations.” The directive — which targets diversity, equity and inclusion programs — came in an executive order on Tuesday, the first full day of the new Trump administration.
Tag: Trump
-
Rutgers cancels HBCU event to align with Trump DEI orders
The virtual mini-conference sponsored by Jobs for the Future was scheduled for Jan. 30.
The Rutgers University Center for Minority Serving Institutions announced Thursday that it has canceled an upcoming virtual conference about registered apprenticeship programs as a result of President Trump’s executive orders targeting diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.
“We were very excited to bring the HBCUs and Registered Apprenticeship Mini-Conference to you next week,” said the email sent to registered attendees. “Unfortunately, due to President Trump’s Executive Orders … we have been asked to cease all work under the auspices of the Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility HUB at Jobs for the Future, which the U.S. Department of Labor funds.”
Jobs for the Future, an organization focused on helping college and workforce leaders create equitable economic outcomes for students, runs a national innovation hub focused on improving access to registered apprenticeships for women, people of color and other underrepresented groups.
Located in New Jersey, a blue state for more the 30 years, Rutgers has not faced pressure from state legislators to dismantle DEI. But the cancellation demonstrates the leverage and power the federal government can hold over colleges and universities by threatening to pull funding from programs that don’t comply with the president’s demands.
It’s just the kind of reaction higher ed policy experts and DEI advocates predicted as a result of the Republican agenda.
“That wariness and sort of pre-emptive compliance, even absent direct threats from the federal or state government, might be somewhat universal,” Brendan Cantwell, a professor of education at Michigan State University, told Inside Higher Ed.
“These leaders will be worried about losing their federal funding, which is exactly what DEI opponents want,” added Shaun Harper, a professor of education, business and public policy; the founder of the University of Southern California’s Race and Equity Center; and an Inside Higher Ed opinion contributor.
More cancellations are anticipated in the weeks and months to come as the Trump administration continues to issue executive orders. For instance, Trump’s growing team at the Department of Education announced a series of actions Thursday related to eliminating DEI.
“The Department removed or archived hundreds of guidance documents, reports, and training materials that include mentions of DEI from its outward facing communication channels [and] put employees charged with leading DEI initiatives on paid administrative leave,” agency officials said in a news release. “These actions are in line with President Trump’s ongoing commitment to end illegal discrimination and wasteful spending across the federal government. They are the first step in reorienting the agency toward prioritizing meaningful learning ahead of divisive ideology in our schools.”
Other actions the department has taken include:
- Dissolving the department’s Diversity and Inclusion Council.
- Terminating the Employee Engagement Diversity Equity Inclusion Accessibility Council within the Office for Civil Rights.
- Canceling ongoing DEI training and service contracts that total over $2.6 million.
- Withdrawing the department’s Equity Action Plan, which was released in 2023 to align with former president Joe Biden’s executive order to advance racial equity and support for underserved communities.
-
Scientists worried after Trump halts NIH grant reviews
Orders to freeze travel, meetings, communications and hiring at the National Institutes of Health—and all other agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services—has some federally funded researchers on edge just days into President Donald Trump’s second term.
Scholars say they’ve received emails canceling key meetings that determine which research projects to fund and they’re worried about how those and other disruptions could stall the billions of dollars in NIH-funded projects universities oversee.
“I suspect that folks outside the sciences don’t understand just how disruptive even a short delay in funding decisions can be,” Adam Forte, an associate professor of geology at Louisiana State University who runs his own lab, posted on BlueSky Thursday alongside numerous other concerned scholars. “This is how we lose huge amounts of scientific capacity, scientific capacity we as a collective have already invested huge amounts of time and money in, just lighting it on fire to watch the flames.”
Some research policy experts say a pause is typical for the initial days of a new administration and that it’s too soon to tell whether this week’s order is a cause for concern. Others, however, are interpreting it as part of a larger message from Trump, who has repeatedly undermined scientific findings about COVID-19 and climate change and nominated Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who falsely claims there are no safe or effective vaccines, to lead the HHS.
While Kennedy, who previously vowed to enact mass layoffs at the NIH, and Trump’s other cabinet nominees await Senate confirmation, Trump has already issued a blitz of executive orders—including some that roll back diversity and environmental justice initiatives, as well as protections for federal workers and immigrants—since retaking the White House Monday. (In addition to those in HHS, all federal agencies are also under a hiring freeze.)
“It’s not unheard-of to see some things paused when a new administration takes over, but when we look at the whole package of language and executive orders that have come out this week, they’re all tied up together,” said Jennifer Jones, director of the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists. “The goal is to intimidate, chill and create this exact sort of fear.”
A Communications Freeze
That fear for NIH-affiliated researchers came after Dorothy Fink, acting secretary of HHS, sent a memo Tuesday to all HHS division heads, including the directors of the NIH, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Food and Drug Administration.
“As the new administration considers its plan for managing the federal policy and public communications processes, it is important that the President’s appointees and designees have the opportunity to review and approve any regulations, guidance, documents, and other public documents and communications (including social media),” explained the memo, which instructed agency employees to refrain from numerous forms of communications, including issuing grant award announcements and public speaking, until a presidential appointee can review them. The memo is in effect until Feb. 1.
An NIH spokesperson clarified to Inside Higher Ed via email that the restrictions apply to communication “not directly related to emergencies or critical to preserving health,” and that any “exceptions for announcements that HHS divisions believe are mission critical” will be made “on a case-by-case basis.”
On Wednesday, Glenda Conroy, a senior travel official for NIH, emailed NIH employees notifying them that all sponsored travel for HHS employees is also suspended until further notice.
Disruptions to Research
As of right now, all these restrictions mean that scheduled meetings have been canceled or postponed, including NIH study sections, which convene scientific experts to decide which projects to fund.
And university-affiliated researchers make up a sizable portion of the grant application pool. The $44 billion NIH is the largest federal research funding source for colleges and universities, which receive billions in NIH grants each year to support medical and other scientific research projects, including those that have advanced treatments for common diseases such as cancer and Alzheimer’s.
Chrystal Starbird, an assistant professor of biology and a cancer researcher at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill’s School of Medicine, had been planning for months to attend a study section next week where nearly 60 grants were set to be reviewed, but she got word a couple of days ago that it was canceled.
“Ultimately, the NIH will continue to function, so maybe it’s not a huge issue, but for the people being reviewed now it is,” she said. “None of those grants will be reviewed on time. The question is: How are they going to get all of us together again to review the grant?”
And rescheduling the study sections for weeks or months after the communication restrictions lift may disrupt certain ongoing projects.
“Some people may be using this funding to do research that may have more time pressure,” Starbird said, noting that clinical research typically adheres to strict patient-monitoring timelines. “We have to acknowledge that there’s already a significant impact from this pause.”
‘Too Soon to Assume’ Worst-Case Scenario?
Carrie Wolinetz, a science and health policy consultant who worked for the NIH between 2015 and 2023, said in an email that the communications freeze is similar to memos from previous transitions. Although she acknowledged that pausing study section meetings seems broader than previous transitions, it doesn’t strike her “as tremendously outside the norm of activities that might be paused while a new team is transitioning.”
And though it’s understandable that all of these restrictions are “causing anxiety,” she said it’s “too soon to assume that worst case scenario.”
“It becomes a concern if there is a long cessation of activity, of the sort you might experience if there was an extended government shutdown,” she said. “There is likely to be minimal impact in the short term—other than for folks who hopped on flights only to discover their meeting was cancelled, which I imagine was pretty irritating.”
But others caution that having such restrictions in place for even a short time could force people out of their jobs, create a talent void and potentially stall innovation.
“Even if this is short-lived bumpiness, the uncertainty in funding can have career-altering implications, especially for young scientists,” Erica Goldman, a former academic and director of policy entrepreneurship for the Federation of American Scientists, said in an email.
“If conferences or travel are canceled, for example, the inability to present new ideas and network with senior colleagues can have cascading effects,” she continued. “I’m reminded of the experiments, data, and professionals who left the field during COVID-19. Even temporary pauses can have lasting consequences.”
-
Trump announces 10 new Education Department appointees
The Trump administration named 10 new Education Department appointees Thursday, four of whom have previously worked with the America First Policy Institute, a pro-Trump think tank formed in 2021 as the president ended his first term in office.
Education secretary nominee Linda McMahon was a co-founder of AFPI and served as the group’s president and CEO until she was selected to head the department.
Thursday’s announcement offers more insight into who will help carry out Trump’s education agenda. Until McMahon and Deputy Secretary–designate Penny Schwinn are confirmed by the Senate, a veteran agency official, Denise Carter, will serve as acting secretary.
The newest cohort of appointees includes:
- Rachel Oglesby, a former AFPI chief state action officer, as chief of staff.
- Jonathan Pidluzny, AFPI’s former director of higher education reform, as deputy chief of staff for policy and programs.
- Virginia “Chase” Forrester, former AFPI chief events officer, as deputy chief of staff for operations.
- Craig Trainor, a former congressional senior special counsel and AFPI senior litigation counsel, as deputy assistant secretary for policy in the Office for Civil Rights. (During his time at AFPI, Trainor worked under Pam Bondi, whom Trump has nominated as his attorney general.)
- Steve Warzoha as White House liaison.
- Tom Wheeler as principal deputy general counsel.
- Madi Biedermann as deputy assistant secretary for the Office of Communications and Outreach.
- Candice Jackson, who served in the first Trump administration, as deputy general counsel.
- Joshua Kleinfeld as deputy general counsel.
- Hannah Ruth Earl as director of the Center for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.
-
AAUP opposes “anticipatory obedience” to Trump, GOP
The American Association of University Professors released a statement Thursday urging universities not to engage in “anticipatory obedience,” which it defined as “acting to comply in advance of any pressure to do so.”
“As Donald Trump assumes the presidency for a second time, the outlook for higher education is dire,” begins the statement, which the AAUP said its elected national council approved this month.
“The Trump administration and many Republican-led state governments appear poised to accelerate attacks on academic freedom, shared governance and higher education as a public good,” the statement says. “They will attack the curricular authority of the faculty on a number of fronts … It is the higher education community’s responsibility not to surrender to such attacks—and not to surrender in anticipation of them. Instead, we must vigorously and loudly oppose them.”
The White House did not respond to Inside Higher Ed’s request for comment. Before JD Vance was elected vice president, AAUP president Todd Wolfson called him a “fascist.”
In the fall, media reported that the University of North Texas removed words such as “race” from course titles, despite Texas’s anti–diversity, equity and inclusion law specifically exempting “course instruction.” The AAUP statement says that was part of a trend.
“Under no circumstances should an institution go further than the law demands,” the AAUP wrote. “Yet, the examples above depict an eagerness to obey on the part of administrative officers, portending a bleak future.”
The association recommended that faculty act by reviewing “handbooks and contracts to strengthen and reinforce faculty rights” in employment decisions and curricular changes. It also suggested reforming “policies to strengthen faculty oversight in areas currently being used to exercise excessive and undue discipline against faculty, staff and students,” including policies on Title IX, Title VI, acceptable use of institutional resources, outside speakers and campus protests.
-
Trump signs executive order targeting DEI policies at colleges
This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.Dive Brief:
- President Donald Trump signed an executive order Tuesday targeting diversity, equity and inclusion programs at colleges and other “influential institutions of American society,” escalating the Republican-led crusade against DEI.
- The executive order declares that DEI policies and programs adopted by colleges and others can violate federal civil rights laws and directs federal agencies to “combat illegal private sector DEI preferences, mandates, policies, and activities.”
- Trump’s order also directs each federal agency to identify up to nine corporations or associations, large foundations, or colleges with endowments over $1 billion as potential targets for “civil compliance investigations.”
Dive Insight:
Republicans have railed against diversity and inclusion programming on college campuses for years, with state lawmakers enacting 14 pieces of legislation that restrict or bar DEI since 2023, according to a tally from The Chronicle of Higher Education.
Federal lawmakers have likewise targeted DEI programs at colleges in hearings and proposed bills. With Trump’s flurry of recent executive orders, however, the newly sworn-in president has made clear that his administration will ramp up the fight against DEI at the federal level.
“Institutions of higher education have adopted and actively use dangerous, demeaning, and immoral race- and sex-based preferences under the guise of so-called ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion,’” the order states.
Jeremy Young, director of state and higher education policy at PEN America, a free expression organization, voiced concerns about the executive order.
“It launches a series of investigations into universities for merely having a DEI office or promoting DEI, diversity work on their campus,” Young said. “That, to us, is a pretty straightforward violation of the intellectual freedom of a university to promote ideas of all kinds on its campus.”
At minimum, government investigations could amount to a nuisance, but at maximum, they could lead to lawsuits and actions against colleges, Young added.
Young also said the order is designed to sow division in the higher education sector by targeting colleges with endowments worth $1 billion or more.
“My hope is that higher education institutions will see this attack on a subset of their members as an attack on everyone,” Young said.
Trump’s new order also lacks a clear definition of what it deems as DEI programs or policies, Young said, raising concerns about unconstitutionally vague language.
State bills banning DEI similarly don’t have clear definitions, Young said.
“They become effectively a license to censor,” Young said. “Any government agency looking at them can claim that something is DEI because there is no actual definition in the order.”
Trump’s order directs the nation’s attorney general, in consultation with federal agencies, to propose potential litigation against the private sector to enforce civil rights laws. It also orders agencies to identify “potential regulatory action and sub-regulatory guidance.”
Trump also directed the U.S. education secretary to work with the nation’s attorney general to issue guidance to federally funded colleges within the next 120 days regarding how they can comply with the landmark 2023 Supreme Court decision that struck down race-conscious admissions. Trump’s nominee for education secretary, former World Wrestling Entertainment president and CEO Linda McMahon, is awaiting Senate confirmation hearings for the post.
Tuesday’s executive order comes after he signed several other directives on the first day of his presidency meant to dismantle DEI efforts within the federal workforce.
Tim Walberg, the Michigan Republican who chairs the House Committee on Education and Workforce, lauded the executive actions against DEI.
“DEI has bloated education budgets while telling students what to think instead of how to think,” Walberg said in a Wednesday statement. “I commend the Trump administration for dismantling DEI.”
Tuesday’s executive order clarifies that instructors at colleges that get federal aid are not prohibited from “advocating for, endorsing, or promoting the unlawful employment or contracting practices prohibited by this order” in their academic courses.
But Young said he hasn’t seen any legislation or executive order claiming to restrict DEI that doesn’t also restrict faculty instruction or roles in some way. “We have come to the conclusion that it may be impossible to do that,” Young said.
Trump’s order also says it does not prevent colleges from engaging in speech protected by the First Amendment.
Young, however, said language like this amounts to a meaningless statement, as the First Amendment supersedes an executive order.
“The problem is that the language plainly does violate the First Amendment, and therefore it’s going to be years before the courts adjudicate it and, meanwhile, people have to live under these executive orders,” Young said.
-
Liberty University in the Trump Era
Responding to changing demographics, beliefs, and norms, US religious colleges must reflect what’s popular and profitable: Christian evangelism, prosperity theology, contemporary technology, and international outreach. Like other areas of higher education, Christian higher education must focus on the realities of revenues, expenses, and politics, as well as religious dogma.
While a number of Christian colleges and seminaries close each year, and many more face lower enrollment and financial woes, one conservative Christian university stands out for robust enrollment, stellar finances, and political pull: Liberty University. There are other older schools, particularly Catholic schools with more wealth and prestige, but that’s changing. And it could be argued that those schools are religious in a historical sense rather than a contemporary sense.
Two Liberties
Liberty University is an educational behemoth, and has the advantage of being a nonprofit school that uses proprietary marketing strategies. The brick-and-mortar school, with an enrollment of less than 20,000 students, is predominantly straight, white, and middle-class. The school also has a strict honor code called the Liberty Way, which prohibits activity that may be counter to conservative Christian beliefs.
The growing campus includes a successful law school that serves as a pipeline to Christian businesses and conservative government. The Jesse Helms School of Government and the ban of a Young Democrats club reflect its conservative principles. Liberty also houses the Center for Creation Studies and Creation Hall, with a museum to promote a literal interpretation of the Christian Bible, to include the stories of God and the beginning of time, Adam and Eve, Noah and the Ark, and Moses and the Ten Commandments.
Liberty University Online (LUO), an international Christian robocollege with about 100,000 students, is more diverse in terms of age, race/ethnicity, nationality, and social class. Despite a lower than average graduation rate, the online school is thriving financially, and excess funds from the operation help fund the university’s growing infrastructure, amenities, and institutional wealth. Liberty spends millions on marketing and advertising online, using its campus as a backdrop. And those efforts result in manifold profits.
Liberty History
Liberty University was founded in 1971 by Jerry Falwell Sr., a visionary in Christian marketing and promotion, who used technology the technology of the time–television–to gain adherents and funders. Fawell’s vision was not to create a new seminary, but to educate evangelical Christians to be part of the fabric of professional society, as lawyers, doctors, teachers, and engineers.
Responding to the political and cultural winds, Falwell Sr. moved away from his segregationist roots as he built his church Liberty University. It was not easy going for Liberty in the early years, which had to rely on controversial supporters. The minister also used the abortion question, the homosexual question, and conservative Christian evangelism in Latin America and Africa to energize his flock and to create important political alliances during the Ronald Reagan era. Information about those years are available at the Jerry Falwell Library Archives.
During the Reagan era and beyond, Falwell’s idea of a Moral Majority proposed that Church and State should not be divided, and those thoughts of a strong Christian theocracy have spread for more than four decades.
In March 2016, Jerry Falwell Jr. referred to presidential candidate Donald Trump as America’s King David. And under the first Trump Administration, the school gained favor from the President.
Under Donald Trump’s second term, Liberty University should be expecting to get closer to that goal of a Christian theocracy. For the moment, LU has the political power and the economic power that few other schools have to enjoy.
Related links:
Jerry Falwell Library Digital Archives
Dozens of Religious Schools Under Department of Education Heightened Cash Monitoring
Liberty University fined record $14 million for violating campus safety law (Washington Post)
How Liberty University Built a Billion Dollar Empire Online (NY Times)
-
Trump administration allows immigration arrests at colleges
The acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security on Tuesday rescinded guidance that prevented immigration arrests at schools, churches and colleges.
Since 1993, federal policy has barred immigration enforcement actions near or at these so-called sensitive areas. The decision to end the policy comes as the Trump administration is moving to crack down on illegal immigration and stoking fears of mass deportations.
“This action empowers the brave men and women in [Customs and Border Protection] and [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] to enforce our immigration laws and catch criminal aliens—including murders and rapists—who have illegally come into our country,” acting DHS secretary Benjamine Huffman said in a statement. “Criminals will no longer be able to hide in America’s schools and churches to avoid arrest. The Trump administration will not tie the hands of our brave law enforcement, and instead trusts them to use common sense.”
Advocates for undocumented people have warned that such a policy change was possible, and some college leaders have said they won’t voluntarily assist in any effort to deport students or faculty solely because of their citizenship status, although they said they would comply with the law. On Wednesday, the Justice Department said it would investigate state and local officials who don’t enforce Trump’s immigration policies.
-
Trump Issues Executive Order to Restrict Gender Ideology in the Federal Government
by CUPA-HR | January 22, 2025
On January 20, the Trump administration issued an executive order (EO) titled, “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.” The EO was one of several executive orders and actions published by the Trump administration on its first day in office.
The EO states that the United States government will recognize only two sexes — male and female — and defines sex as “an individual’s immutable biological classification as either male or female.” The definition continues to say that sex is “not a synonym for and does not include the concept of ‘gender identity.’” The executive order also defines “woman” and “girl” and “man” and “boy” to be adult and juvenile human females and males, respectively.
The EO orders the secretary of health and human services to provide guidance expanding on the definitions established in the EO. It also directs all federal agencies to use the definitions set forth in the order “when interpreting or applying statutes, regulations, or guidance and in all other official agency business, documents, and communications.” All federal agencies will also be directed to use the term “sex” and not “gender” when administering or enforcing sex-based distinctions in applicable federal policies and documents.
It also appears that the Trump administration hopes to codify these definitions into law through Congressional action. Specifically, the EO directs the assistant to the president for legislative affairs to provide the president proposed bill text to codify the definitions set in the order within 30 days.
The EO also discusses the Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, which held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The EO states that the Biden administration argued that the Bostock decision “requires gender identity-based access to single-sex spaces under, for example, Title IX of the Educational Amendments Act,” which the Trump administration states is “legally untenable.” As such, the EO directs the U.S. attorney general to issue guidance to federal agencies to “correct the misapplication” of Bostock to “sex-based distinctions in agency activities.” The EO also directs the attorney general to issue guidance and assist federal agencies in protecting sex-based distinctions.
The EO directs all federal agencies to submit an update to the Trump administration on implementation of this order within 120 days. The update is required to include information on changes to agency documents and agency-imposed requirements on federally funded entities, including federal contractors, that were implemented to comply with the order. The head of each federal agency is also directed to rescind all guidance documents inconsistent with the requirements of the order, and the EO includes a partial list of documents that the administration deems as inconsistent, including several Department of Education guidance documents on Title IX and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s 2024 Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace.
Finally, the EO directs agencies to take “all necessary steps, as permitted by law, to end the federal funding of gender ideology” and to “assess grant conditions and grantee preferences” to “ensure grant funds do not promote gender ideology.”
Federal agencies will soon begin to take action and announce guidance to comply with the EO requirements. Institutions should therefore be aware of forthcoming guidance from the Department of Education on Title IX as a result of this EO. There could also be future ramifications for institutions that receive federal funds, including grants and contracts. CUPA-HR will continue to monitor for agency actions as well as any additional updates from the Trump administration as it relates to sex and gender-related policy.
-
Trump Signs Executive Order Ending DEI Programs Including Affirmative Action
by CUPA-HR | January 22, 2025
On January 22, President Trump signed an executive order (EO) titled “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity.” The EO directs all federal agencies to “terminate all discriminatory and illegal preferences, mandates, policies, programs, activities, guidance, regulations, enforcement actions, consent orders, and requirements,” to enforce “longstanding civil rights laws,” and to “combat illegal private-sector DEI preferences, mandates, policies, programs, and activities.” The White House also published a fact sheet to supplement the order.
The EO lists several other executive orders that the Trump administration is revoking. Notably, the Trump EO revokes executive order 11246, titled “Equal Employment Opportunity,” which has required federal contractors to have affirmative action plans since 1965. Additionally, the EO orders the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) at the Department of Labor (DOL) to immediately cease “promoting diversity,” “holding federal contractors and subcontractors responsible for taking ‘affirmative action,’” and “allowing or encouraging federal contractors or subcontractors to engage in workforce balancing based on race, color, sex, sexual preference, religion, or national origin.” Both of these actions are explained by the EO to streamline the federal contracting process “to enhance speed and efficiency, reduce costs, and require federal contractors and subcontractors to comply with our civil rights laws.”
The EO also directs each federal agency to include in every federal contract or grant award a term requiring a contractual counterparty or grant recipient to agree that it is in compliance with all applicable federal anti-discrimination laws and a term requiring the counterparty or recipient to certify that it does not operate “any programs promoting DEI that violate any applicable federal antidiscrimination laws.”
The EO also includes orders to encourage the private sector to cease DEI programs and initiatives. Specifically, the EO directs the attorney general, in consultation with other relevant agencies, to promulgate a report with recommendations to enforce civil rights laws and encourage the private sector to end DEI practices. The report is required to identify “the most egregious and discriminatory DEI practitioners in each sector of concern.” It also requires each agency to identify up to nine potential civil compliance investigations as a way to deter DEI programs or principles. The EO lists institutions of higher education with endowments over $1 billion as potential targets for the civil compliance investigations.
Finally, the EO directs the attorney general and secretary of education to issue guidance to state and local educational agencies and institutions of higher education that receive federal dollars or participate in the Title IV federal student loan assistance program regarding “the measures and practices required to comply with Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College.”
The EO will have widespread implications for federal contractors in the higher education community. CUPA-HR will share further developments on this EO as they are released.
