A woman? Young? Poor? African-American? Native American? A UNC Board of Governors working group is scrutinizing centers that focus on you.

For the first time in its history, the BOG is reviewing the UNC System’s centers and institutes, narrowing the list to 34 that could face deep funding cuts or be dismantled altogether. And the mission of more than half of these centers could be viewed as counter to the agenda of the Republican-controlled state legislature.

Critics of the review argue that the process is neither as fair nor as objective as the Board of Governors claims, citing the fact that many of the centers under scrutiny focus on issues facing minorities, women and the economically underprivileged. Through budget cuts to social services, education and health care, all of these demographic groups have arguably suffered under Republican control of the legislature and governor’s office.

Jim Holmes Jr., a BOG member and the chairman of the working group, said this is a “fair and objective” process aimed to reduce any redundancies in research coming from similar centers.

“A lot of people think this was mandated by the legislature, but that’s simply not true,” Holmes said. “We have no political agenda.”

It’s hard to take that statement at face value. In September, the Board of Governors created a working group to review almost 240 centers and institutions in the UNC System’s 16 universities ostensibly to streamline it.

That’s the same month, both the Pope Foundation and the Civitas Institute called for such a review as a cost-cutting measure.

Both of those groups have a long history of animosity toward the UNC System. The Civitas Institute, a conservative think tank, has long assailed public education, often calling for UNC budget cuts. It is funded by the Pope Foundation, whose chairman is conservative millionaire Art Pope. He chaired the Civitas board until 2012, when Gov. Pat McCrory appointed him state budget director. In that position, Pope rejected the UNC System budget and sent it back to the BOG for revisions. He resigned as budget director earlier this year.

Even though Pope is officially out of state government, his reach continues. Working group member Steven Long served on the board of the Civitas Institute from 2009–2013.

The results of the review will not be released until January. The Board of Governors could choose to validate these centers, cut their funding, roll them into existing university departments or disband them entirely

“Will everybody be happy? Will we ever eliminate all of the complaints? No. That will never happen,” said Holmes, a Republican appointed to the BOG two years ago by a GOP-controlled House. “But I would ask everyone to hold comment until the final body of work is released. The end result is going to speak for itself. You’ve got to take away the fear of the unknown and put that aside for a moment.”

But that fear is realand realistic. Though the legislature did not directly mandate the review process, the Board of Governors is political. All 32 voting members of the board are appointed by the General Assembly, 16 by the Senate and 16 by the House.

“Once you get to this board, there is no political motivation or bias,” Holmes said. “We’re all political appointees. That’s how you get on the board, but once you get here, that doesn’t matter. It has been that way for a hundred years.”

One of the institutes under scrutiny is the Juvenile Justice Institute at N.C. Central University, a historically black college in Durham. Since 1999, it has researched how young people wind up in the criminal justice system. Recently, the center has been studying the school-to-prison pipeline and the disproportionately high rates of minority students who face disciplinary action in schools. The institute has an annual budget of about $214,000.

“I want to try to be open-minded about this, but looking at the centers that are left, I really have to wonder what’s motivating them,” said director Arnold Dennis. “If the centers that are cut are the ones that deal with minorities, with poverty and with young people, it sends a message about what our state cares about.”

Joseph Jordan, the director of UNC’s Sonja Haynes Stone Center for Black Culture and History recognizes the impact that these centers and institutions have on their communities. “It doesn’t just give a voice to people, it gives a presence,” Jordan said. “The Stone Center interjects a different narrative into the narrative of the campus, and that’s where our importance lies.”

Established in 1988, the Stone Center received $254,000 from the state last year. Though Jordan said he doesn’t think the center will be defunded, he fears that the review process could undermine confidence in the UNC system.

“It’s a little like cutting off your nose to spite your face,” Jordan said. “You’d end up hurting yourself more than helping anything. You can’t expect anybody to invest in a place that the state itself won’t invest in.”

Roseanna Belt is director of Western Carolina University’s Cherokee Center, which has an budget of $77,000. It has just two employees. “When I found out that our center had made it this far in the process, I thought, ‘Oh my gosh. I cant believe this is happening,’” Belt said. “The fact that we have to wait till January to hear what’s going to happen is pretty unnerving.”

Belt, a member of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, has been with the center for 12 years. She said she can’t imagine why the center is under review, given that it is the only point of contact the UNC System has with the Cherokee communityand cheap to run.

“Just by being here, this center shows that Western has made a commitment to the Cherokee community,” Belt said. “Why would the board want to jeopardize the university’s relationship with the tribe? “If we were cut, I think the reputation of our university in the tribal community would be ruined. The community will think the university just doesn’t care about them.”

A Change.org petition is circulating to end the review process. It has received about 2,500 signatures since Dec. 8.

“Maybe the petition will help,” Belt said. “Maybe there will be an epiphany of enlightenment over everybody, but we’d better not hold our breath.”

UNC Board of Governor’s Working Group

How it was assembled: Board of Governors Chairman John Fennebresque and Jim Holmes Jr. chose the seven members. “There was no rhyme or reason to why we picked them,” Holmes said. “There was no real criterion to decide who we picked. I wouldn’t read a whole lot into it.”

By race: All are white

By political affiliation: Six Republicans, one unaffiliated

By gender: Five men, two women

Members: Jim Holmes, Peter Hans, Steven Long, Mary Ann Maxwell, W. Edwin McMahan, R. Doyle Parrish, Joan Perry

INFO: www.northcarolina.edu/apps/bog/members

Centers and institutes still under review by the UNC Board of Governors


Brantley Risk and Insurance Center

Center for Economic Research and Policy Analysis

Research Institute for Environment, Energy and Economics


Center for Applied Computational Studies

Center for Diversity and Inequality Research

Center for Health Systems Research and Development

Center for Natural Hazards Mitigation Research

N.C. Agromedicine Institute

N.C. Center for Biodiversity

Rural Education Institute


Drug Information Center


Center for Cooperative Systems

Center for Human Machine Studies


Institute for Civic Engagement and Social Change

Juvenile Justice Institute


Institute for Emerging Issues


Carolina Center for Public Service

Carolina Women’s Center

Center for Faculty Excellence

Center for Law and Government

Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity

James B. Hunt, Jr. Institute for Educational Leadership and Policy

Sonja Haynes Stone Center for Black Culture and History

UNC Center for Civil Rights

Institute on Aging


Center for Creative Writing in the Arts

Center for Educational Research and Evaluation

Center for New North Carolinians

Center for Social, Community and Health Research and Evaluation


Swain Center for Business and Economic Services


Cherokee Center

Public Policy Institute


Center for Community Safety

Center for Economic Analysis

This article appeared in print with the headline “The politics of scrutiny”