The Equal Protection Project has filed over 115 civil rights complaints against over 290 institutions regarding over 850 programs and scholarships. We have had many wins and impacts (over 340 by our count), but the most recent ruling and settlement by the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights (OCR) with the University of Central Arkansas may be one of our clearest victorys
On October 28, 2025, we filed a Civil Right Complaint against UCA:
We bring this civil rights complaint against the University of Central Arkansas (“UCA”) for offering, administering, and promoting ten (10) scholarships that discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, and/or sex in violation of Title VI and Title IX, respectively.
The details of the scholarships and why the racial and sex preferences were unlawful, were detailed in our prior post, Ten Discriminatory Scholarships at University of Central Arkansas Challenged by Equal Protection Project.
The case sat for 10 months with no sign of activity. That’s not unusual in OCR cases, we have very limited, if any, involvement after filing. But there was a lot of activity going on behind the scenes.
On August 28, 2026, we received two documents from OCR – a Resolution Letter issued by OCR and a Resolution Agreement signed by the President of UCA. I was taken aback, in a good way.
In the the Resolution Letter OCR states that UCA admitted “the scholarships at issue in this complaint are restricted on the basis of sex and/or race” and that UCA “does not assert a legal justification for the manner in which the scholarships are administered, offered, or promoted by the University”:
Summary of Preliminary Investigation
OCR reviewed the University’s website and information the University provided. The University informed OCR that it reviewed the scholarships at issue and the language within each scholarship instrument. The University reported that its review found that some of the language used to describe certain scholarships and/or the criteria used to determine eligibility contain restrictions and/or preferences for female students and/or non-white students. The University acknowledges that the scholarships at issue in this complaint are restricted on the basis of sex and/or race and does not assert a legal justification for the manner in which the scholarships are administered, offered, or promoted by the University.
Wow, pretty stark admission. At the request of UCA, a resolution negotiation was initiated and an agreement reached:
OCR’s investigation to date revealed concerns that the University administers or promotes sex-specific, sex-preferred, race specific, and/or race preferred scholarships that discriminate against students based on sex and/or race. Prior to the conclusion of OCR’s investigation and pursuant to Section 302 of OCR’s Case Processing Manual, the University expressed an interest in resolving this complaint and OCR determined that a voluntary resolution is appropriate. Accordingly, the University signed the enclosed Agreement which, when fully implemented, will address all of the allegations raised in the complaint. OCR will monitor the University’s implementation of the Agreement until the University has fulfilled its terms.
The Resolution Agreement contains the terms, and there are very vigorous self-examination and reporting requirements regarding “all its programs or activities, whether operated by UCA alone or in conjunction with other organizations, and UCA “will identify those that impose any sex- or race-based preferences or limitations.” At that point UCA will have to either discontinue the race- and sex-based preferences and limitations, or provide legal authority for continuing those practices.
In effect, UCA is required to go to confession and to confess all its race- and sex-based sins, not only the scholarships listed in the complaint.
1. The University will conduct a review of all its programs or activities (specifically including
all scholarship programs), regardless of whether a given program or activity is operated by
the school or in partnership or contract with another organization and will identify those
that impose any sex- or race-based preferences or limitations.REPORTING REQUIREMENT 1: Within 60 days of the date of this Agreement, the
University will submit a report to OCR that lists each program or activity identified, a
description of the nature and purpose of each, and a description of the nature of the sex- or
race-based preference or limitation. The report will also indicate whether the University has
discontinued or plans to discontinue those preferences or limitations. To the extent that
University opts not to discontinue a given preference or limitation, it must explain why it
believes that preference or limitation is consistent with Title VI and/or Title IX.
But it gets better.
UCA also has to conduct a “review of all memberships, partnerships, and/or scholarships with
external organizations that are advertised, hosted, contracted, or otherwise introduced to
students through the University by means such as, but not limited to, room rental, hosting,
advertising, website lists, or other forms of promotion or communication” and report that information to OCR:
2. University will conduct a review of all memberships, partnerships, and/or scholarships with
external organizations that are advertised, hosted, contracted, or otherwise introduced to
students through the University by means such as, but not limited to, room rental, hosting,
advertising, website lists, or other fonns of promotion or communication, and will identify
those that impose any sex- or race-based preferences or limitations.REPORTING REQUIREMENT 2: Within 60 days of the date of this Agreement, the
University will submit a report to OCR that lists each membership, partnership, and/or
scholarship identified, a description of the nature and purpose of each, and a description of
the nature of the sex- or race-based preference or limitation. The report will also indicate
whether the University has discontinued or plans to discontinue those memberships,
partnerships, and/or scholarships. To the extent that University opts not to discontinue a
given membership, partnership, and/or scholarship, it must explain why it believes that its
race- or sex-based preference or limitation is consistent with Title VI and/or Title IX.
This is amazing. Not only are UCA’s campus and internal operations subject to scrutiny and reporting, so too are their outside activities. This is so important.
One trend we have seen is universities trying to outsource the discrimination through partnerships or programs with outsiders, often non-profit groups offering discriminatory scholarships and programming. We also have seen segregated campus housing and other accommodations in conjunction with conferences hosted on campus. All of that must be reviewed by the university and findings reported back to OCR.
Compliance is subject to a two-year monitoring agreement with possible additional action for non-compliance:
The University understands that OCR will monitor this agreement for two years. OCR will not close
the monitoring of this Agreement until such time as OCR determines that the University is in
compliance with the ten11S of this Agreement and its obligations under Title VT, Title TX, and their
implementing regulations.The University understands that OCR may initiate administrative enforcement proceedings or refer
the case to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for judicial proceedings in the event of University’s
breach of this Agreement. Before initiating such proceedings, OCR will give University written
notice of the alleged breach and 60 calendar days to cure.
I’m trying to think of proper metaphors. Perhaps a self-administered colonoscopy?
The Washington Times (sorry, paywalled) covered the story:
The Department of Education has found that 10 scholarships at the University of Central Arkansas illegally favored women and racial minorities.
University President Houston Davis agreed in a signed resolution obtained by The Washington Times to end “any sex- or race-based preferences or limitations” in the eligibility requirements that violated federal civil rights guidelines for publicly funded institutions.
Mr. Davis also committed to two years of monitoring by the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights — a stricter requirement than past settlements that relied on the word of administrators at other schools to end similar practices.
“This is the Trump effect in action,” Education Department spokeswoman Ellen Keast said in an emailed statement.
“We are pleased to see the University of Central Arkansas coming into compliance with federal law, upholding the law and the universal truth that all students should be judged on their merit and hard work, not their sex or the color of their skin,” Ms. Keast added….
University spokeswoman Tiffany L. Head said the school previously revised eligibility guidelines for eight of the privately funded scholarships to comply with Trump administration guidelines. She pledged not to distribute awards from the remaining two programs until they are also changed….
As of Thursday, some scholarships on the university website continued to name women and minorities as their intended recipients….
William Jacobson, a Cornell University law professor who founded the Equal Protection Project to support colorblind civil rights policies, filed the complaint on Oct. 28.
He said the university’s public-facing guidelines for all 10 scholarships remained discriminatory at the time, as many schools either ignored Mr. Trump’s policies or disguised their compliance.
“This new resolution does away with administrators playing whack-a-mole with programs by forcing the university to confess any race-based or sex-based sins,” Mr. Jacobson said in a phone call. “We hope it will be a model for the Department of Education moving forward.”
Jennifer Brooks, a supervisory attorney in the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights, told Mr. Jacobson in an Aug. 28 letter sharing the resolution that the University of Central Arkansas made no effort to “assert a legal justification for the manner in which the scholarships are administered, offered, or promoted.”
Launched in February 2023, the Equal Protection Project has received dozens of resolution letters confirming that schools it filed complaints against agreed to discontinue race-based scholarships or change their eligibility standards.
That includes Missouri State University, the University of Wisconsin-Madison and eight campuses in the California State University system.
I hope this form of agreement — which we have never seen before — becomes a model for OCR agreements. It addresses the ‘hide and seek’ and rebranding games universities play, as well as the whack-a-mole problem where the university ends or modifies one program only for another to pop up elsewhere. This is a whole-of-university approach, and we love it.
Reminder: we are a small organization going up against powerful and wealthy government and private institutions devoted to DEI discrimination. Donations are greatly needed and appreciated.
======================
—-
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.