The CAC Approach to DEI
How the use of datasets like HPI could reshape the conversation around the fight for equity.
Artist talk at The Pony Farm, a state-sponsored artist residency program in Amador County, California. 2022.
"DEI means people die," said Elon Musk, sputtering through the keyboard on X, blaming wildfires on LA's fire chief, Kristin M. Crowley’s enthusiasm for diversity hiring.
In a world of sensationalized news, where every moment seems to bring a new executive order from the President, keeping up with the sweeping changes in the federal government can be challenging. DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) has become a viral battleground. Grant programs quickly dissipate in favor of works that evoke national pride instead of ensuring equal access to arts funding. Musk's statement and chosen footage of the Los Angeles fires in his recent post show the administration's obsessive belief that these models are inefficient and dangerous. Trump's decision to dismantle DEI programming isn't surprising, but the outright elimination of a system designed to ensure equity raises alarm bells. Historically, The origins of DEI programs date to the Civil Rights Movement, which played a pivotal role in accelerating efforts to create more diverse and inclusive workplaces. The reality of these initiatives and policies being fully dismantled forecasts a grim future for the country's most at-risk communities.
a pre-existing debate
While Trump's motivations are obscured by the relentless churn of news and disaster-focused clickbait, discussions around DEI reform among leftists and radicals are not new.
"Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) have become major topics of conversation in arts and culture over the past decade. Studies have indicated a marked lack of DEI across all sectors, affecting audiences, artistic offerings, governing boards, professional staff, and financial support." [Williams]
Initiatives like racial equity statements and land acknowledgments gained traction after the Black Lives Matter movement in 2020. Still, their impact on the communities they aim to serve has been questionable. A study conducted by PBS on land acknowledgments found that "The historical and anthropological facts demonstrate that many contemporary land acknowledgments unintentionally communicate false ideas about the history of dispossession and the current realities of American Indians and Alaska Natives. These ideas can have detrimental consequences for Indigenous peoples and nations... No data demonstrates that land acknowledgments lead to measurable, concrete change. Instead, they often serve as little more than feel-good public gestures signaling ideological conformity to what historians Amna Khalid and Jeffrey Aaron Snyder have referred to—within the context of higher education's diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts—as a naïve, left-wing, paint-by-numbers approach to social justice.'"
The current administration's aggressive dismantling of DEI programs has forced a reckoning. Analysts and historians are scrambling to propose what should replace these initiatives to fill the growing equity void. On an emotional level, the outward destruction of these programs can cause panic, but some remain hopeful that this sweeping change will lead to a more effective framework in the long run. As Lily Zeng points out, "At this moment, leaders and practitioners invested in building healthier workplaces and societies for everyone have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reimagine this work—not only to adapt to a new sociopolitical climate but to let go of practices that have outlived their usefulness and refocus efforts on what works."
This is especially crucial in the arts, where federal grant-making is undergoing chaotic changes. Traditionally, arts funding has been a means to uplift communities and create opportunities, not merely a reward system for the most successful or well-positioned individuals.
What Comes Next?
One promising alternative can be found in California's adaptation of the Healthy Places Index (HPI) system. The Healthy Places Index is critical for promoting community health equity. By analyzing key drivers of health—such as access to education, job opportunities, and clean air—HPI enables policymakers and community leaders to identify and address health disparities effectively. In 2023, I was awarded a $132,000 grant from the KDA Creative Corps Program, a subset of the California Arts Council's Creative Corps Fellowship initiative that utilized HPI to determine funding allocations statewide. To this day, the fact that I received a life-changing arts grant while living in an isolated, unincorporated area of the Sierra Nevadas seems surreal.
What makes the HPI approach stand out is its focus on cumulative equity. It uses census data to level the playing field for all communities. Race and identity are considered alongside factors such as education access and air quality—issues all citizens can understand and relate to.
As a case study, the arts funding in Amador County—a conservative region with a predominantly white population—compels us to reevaluate our understanding of equal opportunities, a term that the current administration has recently dismissed. By leveraging HPI data, I demonstrated that although this community was not historically underserved, it faces modern challenges such as climate disasters and economic stagnation, resulting in one of the highest rates of self-harm and suicide in the state. The HPI system's ability to consider a broader range of factors, including but not limited to economic, social, and environmental factors, has fostered a more comprehensive understanding of needs throughout the state. As Lily Zeng points out, "Representation is when all people feel their needs are advocated for by those who represent them." While many local officials in Amador County strongly oppose diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts from local arts organizations, openly acknowledging their community’s cumulative needs could help reduce the resistance to inclusive strategies.
an imperfect solution
The Healthy Places Index represents a positive step in the conversation around Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). However, it would be remiss to praise California for the effectiveness of this new strategy without highlighting the issues as well. For one, the state faces a significant $28 billion deficit, resulting in major budget cuts to arts funding. This was precipitated by the controversy in 2023 over John Moscone’s sudden resignation following a last-minute revision of grant guidelines that caused hundreds of organizations to lose crucial funding, such as my project, The Pony Farm, Amador County’s only Artist-in-Residence program and permaculture farm. Despite introducing the Healthy Places Index and a new framework for grant funding, the Council continues to face criticism for prioritizing larger organizations while leaving smaller, more vulnerable ones without support, falling back into the trope of liberal virtue-signaling. With regular funding not expected to return until 2027, it will be a long time before we have enough data to assess whether the changes in state grantmaking will have a lasting impact.
In the interim, small organizations will likely adapt to private funding organizations such as the Getty Trust and Center for Cultural Innovation, which actively secures emergency funds for artists in Los Angeles affected by wildfires, or learn to campaign using tools offered by organizations like Fractured Atlas to develop new pathways to funding.