DEIAB | Campus Safe Words

TERM: DEIAB
RISK LEVEL: extreme

Definition

DEIAB stands for Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, Accessibility, and Belonging. It is an expanded version of the DEI acronym, adding “Accessibility” to emphasize inclusion of individuals with disabilities and “Belonging” to highlight emotional and social integration within organizations. In higher education, DEIAB is often used to signal a holistic commitment to identity-conscious practices across hiring, curriculum, student support, and institutional culture.

Why It’s Risky

The inclusion of “Belonging” alongside DEI and Accessibility heightens political risk, particularly in states with active legislation targeting identity-based education and training programs. Conservative lawmakers frequently view DEIAB as an expansion of controversial DEI frameworks, with “Belonging” seen as a subjective concept used to justify ideological programming. Legislation such as Texas Senate Bill 17 and Florida’s Stop W.O.K.E. Act prohibits public colleges and universities from funding or requiring participation in DEI initiatives, and the DEIAB acronym is often interpreted as an effort to rebrand such efforts while maintaining their core ideological elements. Some elected officials and policy advocates have labeled “Belonging” as a political litmus test, citing concerns that it pressures students and staff to conform to particular worldviews in order to feel included.

Common Critiques

Critics argue that DEIAB embeds ideology into institutional operations under the appearance of support and fairness. The term “Belonging,” in particular, is seen as vague, subjective, and potentially coercive, since it often requires assessing emotional outcomes or perceived inclusion. Opponents also point to the operational costs of DEIAB offices, staff positions, and required trainings, questioning the measurable benefits of such investments. In legislative hearings, some have argued that DEIAB initiatives prioritize group identity over individual rights and academic rigor. Others claim that these programs can suppress diverse viewpoints, especially if “Belonging” is measured by alignment with progressive values. Faculty hiring practices, student orientation content, and campus marketing materials that reference DEIAB have come under scrutiny in multiple states, prompting university leaders to revise or remove such language to avoid compliance issues. The acronym is also seen by some as evidence of institutional overreach into personal belief systems, increasing the likelihood of reputational or legal challenges from trustees, donors, or legislators.

Suggested Substitutes

Equal opportunity and access (in hiring, admissions, or compliance language)
Inclusive student support services (in retention, advising, or campus life programs)
Workplace respect and professionalism (in HR, training, or employee engagement)
Accessible learning and service environments (in facilities, IT, or disability resources)
Supportive campus climate (in student affairs or wellness initiatives, avoiding ideological framing)

These alternatives preserve a focus on fairness and functionality while steering clear of politically charged terms.

When It May Still Be Appropriate

Use of DEIAB may still be appropriate in federally funded projects, especially those administered by agencies that explicitly include the term in guidance documents. It may also be acceptable in disability services or counseling programs if carefully focused on measurable support. Limit its use in official titles, job descriptions, and external materials in states with DEI-related restrictions or heightened legislative attention.

NOTES: Separate accessibility and legal compliance topics from broader cultural or emotional goals when possible. Emphasize clarity, objectivity, and mission alignment in institutional language. Avoid using “Belonging” as a stand-alone goal unless clearly defined and linked to tangible practices such as mentorship or resource access.