3 ms·

It's not based on titles. Here [1] is the proposal. It included "Furthermore, by employing and mentoring students from underrepresented backgrounds in STEM, thi

It's not based on titles. Here [1] is the proposal. It included "Furthermore, by employing and mentoring students from underrepresented backgrounds in STEM, this project will aim at bridging the gap in institutions across the US. It will train the next generation of scholars from minority serving universities and marginalized communities in the fields of cybersecurity, utilization of renewable resources, and machine learning to address the pressing problems of this age." Previously DEI adherence weighed into which proposals were awarded funding. They no longer do. It's unclear exactly how this is working but suspect they're flagging grants where either the entire point was DEI, or where the project was unrelated to DEI but the DEI stuff pushed it into the acceptable range (and/or drove the grant amount higher than necessary for the underlying science), and cancelling them. [1] - https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=2219701&HistoricalAwards=false https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=2219701&His...

sureglymop 2y ago
Interesting, thank you for the addendum! Do you believe it is likely that inclusions of things such as "by employing and mentoring students from underrepresented backgrounds in STEM, this project will aim at bridging the gap in institutions across the US" result in a higher likeliness of funding? I also wonder if Hacker News would generally consider it to be ethical to use this to increase the likeliness of funding. In this case it does seem unrelated to DEI otherwise.
- somenameforme 2y ago
  Definitely. The previous administration used executive power to direct various government organizations to factor DEI into all government funding, and this is also reflected in the last line of the proposal's abstract (extremely odd place for an administrative comment but that's where it is): "This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria." If there is a point scheme being used behind the scenes, as seems reasonably probable, then selecting all grants to be eliminated was probably not much more than a single SQL query.
  - nxobject 2y ago
    > The previous administration used executive power to direct various government organizations to factor DEI into all government funding, Not the NSF. Provisions in NSF's organic statute to create programs that "expand STEM opportunities" were introduced by the American Innovation and Competitiveness Act, and were retained through the CHIPS Act. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1862s-5 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1862s-5 > If there is a point scheme being used behind the scenes, as seems reasonably probable, then selecting all grants to be eliminated was probably not much more than a single SQL query. No. The NSF review process does not use numeric ratings. Panels of peer reviewers get a tranche of proposals, provide comments individually, and then collectively sort them into competitiveness categories. There is no "DEI score" or "DEI component". https://www.researchdevelopment.socsci.uci.edu/files/documents/2021/How%20NSF%20Makes%20Awards.pdf https://www.researchdevelopment.socsci.uci.edu/files/documen... https://sociobiology.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/exactly-how-an-nsf-panel-functions/ https://sociobiology.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/exactly-how-an...
    - somenameforme 2y ago
      The NSF falls under Federal executive authority which is exactly why Trump is able to do what he's doing. Biden did the equal but opposite thing with his very first executive order. It effectively required all branches of the Federal government to institute DEI policies and policies aimed at furthering DEI ends. [1] In fact his executive order specifically worked to undo a previous Trump executive order [2] which forbade Federal agencies from discriminating against/for individuals/groups based on their race or sex. To put a number to this, by the metric this report (from this topic) was using to measure DEI funding, 0.29% of NSF grants were for DEI stuff in 2021. By 2024, it was up to 27%! [3] Apologies for the excess citations here, but I think it's important on such a charged topic. [1] - https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/25/2021-01753/advancing-racial-equity-and-support-for-underserved-communities-through-the-federal-government https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/25/2021-01... [2] - https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/09/28/2020-21534/combating-race-and-sex-stereotyping https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/09/28/2020-21... [3] - https://www.commerce.senate.gov/services/files/4BD2D522-2092-4246-91A5-58EEF99750BC https://www.commerce.senate.gov/services/files/4BD2D522-2092... (page 2)

sureglymop 2y ago

Interesting, thank you for the addendum! Do you believe it is likely that inclusions of things such as "by employing and mentoring students from underrepresented backgrounds in STEM, this project will aim at bridging the gap in institutions across the US" result in a higher likeliness of funding? I also wonder if Hacker News would generally consider it to be ethical to use this to increase the likeliness of funding. In this case it does seem unrelated to DEI otherwise.

somenameforme 2y ago
Definitely. The previous administration used executive power to direct various government organizations to factor DEI into all government funding, and this is also reflected in the last line of the proposal's abstract (extremely odd place for an administrative comment but that's where it is): "This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria." If there is a point scheme being used behind the scenes, as seems reasonably probable, then selecting all grants to be eliminated was probably not much more than a single SQL query.
- nxobject 2y ago
  > The previous administration used executive power to direct various government organizations to factor DEI into all government funding, Not the NSF. Provisions in NSF's organic statute to create programs that "expand STEM opportunities" were introduced by the American Innovation and Competitiveness Act, and were retained through the CHIPS Act. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1862s-5 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1862s-5 > If there is a point scheme being used behind the scenes, as seems reasonably probable, then selecting all grants to be eliminated was probably not much more than a single SQL query. No. The NSF review process does not use numeric ratings. Panels of peer reviewers get a tranche of proposals, provide comments individually, and then collectively sort them into competitiveness categories. There is no "DEI score" or "DEI component". https://www.researchdevelopment.socsci.uci.edu/files/documents/2021/How%20NSF%20Makes%20Awards.pdf https://www.researchdevelopment.socsci.uci.edu/files/documen... https://sociobiology.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/exactly-how-an-nsf-panel-functions/ https://sociobiology.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/exactly-how-an...
  - somenameforme 2y ago
    The NSF falls under Federal executive authority which is exactly why Trump is able to do what he's doing. Biden did the equal but opposite thing with his very first executive order. It effectively required all branches of the Federal government to institute DEI policies and policies aimed at furthering DEI ends. [1] In fact his executive order specifically worked to undo a previous Trump executive order [2] which forbade Federal agencies from discriminating against/for individuals/groups based on their race or sex. To put a number to this, by the metric this report (from this topic) was using to measure DEI funding, 0.29% of NSF grants were for DEI stuff in 2021. By 2024, it was up to 27%! [3] Apologies for the excess citations here, but I think it's important on such a charged topic. [1] - https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/25/2021-01753/advancing-racial-equity-and-support-for-underserved-communities-through-the-federal-government https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/25/2021-01... [2] - https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/09/28/2020-21534/combating-race-and-sex-stereotyping https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/09/28/2020-21... [3] - https://www.commerce.senate.gov/services/files/4BD2D522-2092-4246-91A5-58EEF99750BC https://www.commerce.senate.gov/services/files/4BD2D522-2092... (page 2)