key groups | Campus Safe Words

TERM: key groups
RISK LEVEL: moderate

Definition

“Key groups” typically refers to populations identified as especially important to a particular initiative, program, or institutional goal. In higher education, the term often appears in strategic planning, outreach, enrollment, and DEI-related efforts to denote demographic or stakeholder categories targeted for special attention or support.

Why It’s Risky

While seemingly neutral, “key groups” can become politically sensitive depending on context. In states with legislation restricting identity-based preferences or programming—such as Texas Senate Bill 17 and Florida’s Stop W.O.K.E. Act—the term may imply prioritization based on race, gender, or other protected characteristics. When used without clarification, it may suggest that certain demographic groups are being singled out for special treatment, which can raise concerns about fairness, reverse discrimination, or deviation from merit-based principles. Critics argue that vague references to “key groups” can obscure identity-based goals or resource allocation strategies, potentially exposing institutions to audit, legislative inquiry, or reputational damage.

Common Critiques

Critics caution that “key groups” is often used as a euphemism for race- or identity-based prioritization, especially in DEI planning or recruitment efforts. In politically regulated environments, such phrasing may be interpreted as an attempt to circumvent restrictions on race-conscious language. Lawmakers and trustees have expressed concern that identifying “key groups” without transparent criteria creates the appearance of political favoritism or institutional activism. The term’s vagueness can also lead to inconsistent implementation, making it vulnerable to public criticism and legal challenge. Some opponents argue that targeting services or resources to undefined “key groups” promotes division and undermines equal treatment by suggesting that some populations deserve heightened attention based on non-academic factors. In states with active oversight, institutions using this term in official documents may be required to explain or justify their selection criteria.

Suggested Substitutes

Priority student populations identified by academic need (in support programs);
Target audiences based on mission-aligned goals (in outreach materials);
Groups served by specific program objectives (in strategic plans);
Students facing documented barriers to success (in grant proposals);
Stakeholders essential to institutional effectiveness (in governance documents)

These alternatives clarify institutional intent while reducing ambiguity and political exposure.

When It May Still Be Appropriate

“Key groups” may be appropriate when clearly defined by neutral criteria such as academic readiness, financial need, or geographic origin. It can also be used in internal planning documents where audiences are well understood and legally compliant. If demographic factors are involved, ensure the term is paired with transparent, outcome-based rationale and aligned with legal standards.

NOTES: Avoid using “key groups” in public-facing documents without specifying neutral, performance-based selection criteria. Frame priorities around academic mission, institutional values, and documented need to preserve clarity and political defensibility.