The National Cancer Institute’s DEI Obsession

The National Cancer Institute (NCI), part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), is the federal government’s chief agency tasked with supporting cancer research.

That makes it all the more disturbing that the NCI has actively promoted racially discriminatory policies and practices through its own initiatives as well as its grantmaking activities.

Do No Harm conducted a deep dive into the NCI’s DEI obsession; several of these findings were covered in a report by Fox News that drew upon Do No Harm’s research.

Since the Trump administration took over from the Biden administration, many of these resources and statements have since been scrubbed from the NCI’s website, and given President Trump’s executive order targeting DEI in the federal government, it’s unclear the current status of the NCI’s DEI efforts. 

However, Do No Harm has archived the most egregious examples of the NCI’s infatuation with DEI and racial discrimination. Taken as a whole, these statements and initiatives represent a damning indictment of the prior administration’s ideological commitment to racial discrimination, and should be prime targets for an administration concerned with restoring merit and fairness to the medical field.

Institutional Commitments

First and foremost, the NCI published a statement expressly committing itself to “Attract and recruit talented scientists from diverse backgrounds to increase the diversity of the cancer research workforce.”

To define “diverse” individuals, the statement referred to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) definition of “underrepresented” (which has since been removed as well) that included the following racial groups: “Blacks or African Americans, Hispanics or Latinos, American Indians or Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders.”

In other words, the NCI’s hiring policy explicitly prioritizes certain racial groups over others. 

As if an agency-wide policy of racial discrimination wasn’t enough, the NCI also operates an “Equity Inclusion Program” overseen by the “NCI Equity Council” (NEC) and five working groups.

“Equity and inclusion are not issues we address in isolation—they cut across everything NCI does and are integral to how the institute operates,” the archived web page reads.

The Equity Inclusion Program “strives to increase the diversity of the cancer research workforce, build a more inclusive and equitable NCI community, address cancer disparities, and advance health equity,” according to the program’s archived “About” page.

To accomplish this, the NCI appears to be tracking racial demographic data among its workforce, as well as engaging in several DEI-related initiatives.

Then there’s the Diversity Career Development Program (DCDP), which aims to “provide postdoctoral fellows from diverse backgrounds with leadership skills and tools to achieve their full potential at NCI and advance in their research careers.” The program strongly encourages  candidates from “underrepresented” backgrounds to apply, again referring to the NIH’s racially discriminatory definition of “underrepresented.”

The NCI also maintains race-focused groups, such as the “Black Cancer Researchers” group that aims to “enhance the environment and experiences of Black cancer scientists at the National Cancer Institute.”

Meanwhile, these DEI sentiments have been echoed by NCI personnel.

For instance, during a 2021 meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, former NCI Director Dr. Norman Sharpless presented a panel on advancing equity in the field of cancer research.

“NCI believes increasing diversity in all areas of cancer research will lead to faster progress that will redefine what cancer means for everyone,” the description of the panel reads. 

This is saying the quiet part out loud: the NCI’s position is that prioritizing race over merit will improve the quality of cancer research. It’s unclear how this argument is supported, whether by facts or basic logic.

Divisional DEI

Practically every NCI division has its own laundry list of statements and initiatives in support of DEI and/or racial discrimination.

This demonstrates the sheer scope of the NCI’s DEI commitments and the extent to which the ideology has pervaded the agency at even the most granular levels.

Take the Center for Cancer Research; an archived version of the center’s DEI statement includes a commitment to “be intentional in our efforts to recruit and retain faculty underrepresented in biomedical research.” This is in addition to state

The Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis (DCTD) makes a similar commitment, stating it has implemented “procedures for broadly advertising DCTD job openings and promoting targeted outreach/engagement with candidates from underrepresented groups” and is “collaborating with the NCI Equity and Inclusion Program” to “provide NCI staff with the resources and training required to ensure DEIA in every aspect of the hiring process.”

Given the NCI’s endorsement of racially discriminatory policies, we don’t need to speculate what “DEIA in every aspect of the hiring process” looks like.

In addition to promoting race-conscious hiring practices, the Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics (DCEG) pledged to engage in a division-wide cultural revolution in which it would be “Weaving DEIA into the Fabric of DCEG.”

This includes an “Inclusivity Minute” email project featuring discussions on a variety of DEI-related topics including structural racism and “microaggressions,” as well as the DCEG’s anti-racism working group.

The Center to Reduce Cancer Health Disparities (CRCHD) is another leader in NCI’s DEI efforts, explicitly focusing its mission on racial disparities and “health equity.”

The center funds several initiatives and grants to increase the “diversity” of the cancer research workforce through what appear to be discriminatory hiring and recruiting practices, targeting individuals as young as middle school and high school age.

This discriminatory DEI ideology is evident in the blue chip cancer research programs sponsored by the NCI. For instance, the CRCHD’s “Cancer Moonshot Scholars” program is part of the Biden administration’s ambitious Cancer Moonshot program to expedite cancer research.

“The program seeks to diversify the NCI R01 portfolio by enhancing the number of applications submitted by Early Stage Investigators from diverse backgrounds, including those from groups identified as underrepresented (NOT-OD-20-031) in the biomedical, clinical, behavioral, and social sciences research workforce,” the Cancer Moonshot Scholars description reads, again referencing the NIH definition of “underrepresented.”

The Early Investigator Advancement Program also references that same definition in its bid to increase diversity among cancer researchers.

Leadership Complicity

To illustrate the extent of DEI’s grasp on the NCI even further, many of the NCI’s leaders also serve in a dual capacity as advocates of DEI.

There are too many to count, but to provide a small sample, Do No Harm scoured the public statements of the NCI.

For example, in 2024, the CRCHD announced the Cancer Equity Leaders (CEL), a “diverse team of premier cancer research leaders who will reimagine and transform the future of cancer health equity.” The statement said the initiative “will be co-chaired by NCI CRCHD Director Sanya A. Springfield, Ph.D.,” and the statement mentions that numerous NCI officials will also have roles in the team.

As another example, Jackie Lavigne, Ph.D., M.P.H., the DCEG training director, has received numerous awards for her work on diversity in previous administrations.

“With the hiring of Jackie Lavigne, Ph.D., M.P.H., to direct the Office of Education (OE) in 2007, DCEG expanded beyond gender to focus on recruiting and retaining individuals from groups traditionally underrepresented in the biomedical and scientific workforce,” a 2022 DCEG statement reads. “While we have borrowed some of the approaches to gender parity, a series of events in 2020 galvanized the community and stimulated a series of steps to re-orient the journey. In addition, the work of Professor Ibram X. Kendi has inspired many across the Division to take up the mantle of becoming anti-racist.” 

An endorsement of noted pro-racism advocate Ibram X. Kendi is hardly a reassuring sign.

It’s clear that the NCI has become firmly committed to a radical and discriminatory ideology.

For the good of the country’s health, the current administration should do everything in its power to restore the NCI to its true mission, rather than allowing it to remain a vehicle for a toxic and regressive political agenda.