Update on changes to the AVMA COE accreditation standards
A recent decision by the AVMA Council on Education® (AVMA COE®) to stop requiring veterinary colleges to report on DEI activities has caused misunderstanding in some areas of the profession. The AVMA COE’s action was made with the intent of supporting veterinary colleges and students. At the same time, the AVMA itself continues its commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).
Clarifying the roles: AVMA vs. AVMA COE
To allay this confusion, it’s important first to understand the separate roles of the AVMA and the AVMA COE.
The AVMA COE is the accrediting body responsible for setting veterinary education standards and assessing veterinary colleges to meet the minimum requirements for graduating day-one-ready veterinarians. It is recognized as an accreditor by the U.S. Department of Education, which allows access to Title VII Health Profession Student Loans. These loans are routinely accessed by today’s veterinary student.
The AVMA COE is functionally autonomous from the AVMA. Because it is recognized by the U.S. Department of Education as an accrediting body, the COE is required to maintain independence from the AVMA itself. This includes making independent decisions regarding accreditation of veterinary schools, the standards of accreditation, and its policies and procedures.
All stakeholders, including students, have the right and are encouraged to provide comments on pending revisions to the AVMA COE accreditation standards through the public comment process.
Understanding the COE’s decision
In order to help veterinary colleges and schools avoid potential conflicts, the AVMA COE provided updated guidance on how colleges may or may not comply with the AVMA COE’s reporting on DEI activities. The following is an excerpt from a Dear Colleague letter that was sent to all veterinary school deans in March 2025:
“In recognition of the potential conflicts arising due to changing state and federal law, regulations, and guidance, the COE will not require programs to report on, or comply with, current aspects of the Standards of Accreditation that relate to DEI or other related language in a manner that conflicts with applicable law or other institutional directives or regulations as determined by impacted institutions.”
The COE recognized that current executive orders and some state mandates/laws have the potential to negatively impact critical research funding and access to Health Profession Student Loans for veterinary students.
By removing the requirement to report on DEI-related activities, the AVMA COE is not forbidding DEI-related activities. It is providing colleges with the choice of reporting or not reporting those activities to the AVMA COE in order to avoid unintended consequences for the schools, students, and faculty.
AVMA’s commitment remains unchanged
The AVMA emphasizes its ongoing commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion, focusing on building environments and workplaces where veterinarians, members of our teams, and students from all backgrounds and experiences feel welcomed and supported.
We firmly believe that promoting a positive workplace culture is essential to our ability to deliver high-quality veterinary care, ensure animal health and safety, and best serve our clients and communities.
Initiatives like Journey for Teams, the DEIW Summit, the Brave Space certificate program, and our workplace culture programming are still active and remain core to our mission.
We hear you—and we're listening
We’ve heard the concerns, questions, and frustrations. We understand that this is a confusing and challenging time for many.
Transparency matters, and we’re communicating with you now to clarify what this decision means—and doesn’t mean—for AVMA members and our communities. We welcome continued feedback and want you to stay engaged in the conversation and the work ahead.
What you can do now
- Stay involved—This is a time to commit to our shared core values, not disengage.
- Share facts—Use this blog post to help others understand the distinction between AVMA and the COE, and the ongoing commitment to inclusion and wellbeing across our profession.
- Continue participating in AVMA programs. Your involvement ensures these critical resources stay strong, relevant, and member-driven.
Comments
Recent Decision by AVMA COE
As a veterinary student and member of this profession, I want to express concern over the recent decision to stop requiring veterinary colleges to report on DEI activities. While I appreciate the AVMA’s stated commitment to fostering inclusive and supportive environments, I find a disconnect between these values and the COE’s decision.
When you say that DEI is essential to building positive workplace culture and ensuring high-quality veterinary care, that commitment should be reflected in action. Removing the reporting requirement sends the message that DEI efforts are optional—and in many cases, optional means nonexistent. The institutions most affected are those already facing pressure to eliminate or suppress DEI initiatives. Without accountability, those who benefit most from DEI programs—students and professionals from underrepresented backgrounds—stand to lose the most.
The AVMA is in a uniquely influential position. Rather than yielding to external political pressure, this is a critical moment to stand firmly by the values you claim to uphold. Saying you are committed to inclusion while stepping back from meaningful oversight is not only confusing—it is contradictory.
This is a pivotal point for veterinary medicine. I urge the AVMA and AVMA COE to reconsider this approach and to recognize that leadership means standing up for core values, especially when they are under threat.
COE should demonstrate courage, not capitulation
In 1963, at the height of the civil rights movement, the Medical Committee for Civil Rights picketed the annual American Medical Association convention to protest medical segregation in the South. Many of the AMA’s constituent local societies barred Black physicians, effectively excluding them from hospital access privileges. Politically cautious and reluctant to rock the boat, the AMA quietly tolerated its members’ segregationist policies. However, after the MCCR’s public protest, the AMA began pressuring local societies to integrate. This moment marked an institutional turning point to embrace equity despite discomfort or controversy.
Veterinary medicine now faces its own moral inflection point.
Today, our profession ranks among the least racially diverse in the United States. Over 92% of veterinarians in the U.S. are white. Black, Hispanic, Native American, and other underrepresented groups together comprise less than 8% of the profession—even as pet ownership becomes increasingly diverse, and society demands better representation in all fields of medicine. Our lack of diversity has tangible consequences for animal welfare, public health, and the profession’s continued relevance.
In the face of this challenge, the decision by the AVMA Council on Education to drop diversity-related reporting requirements from accreditation standards is staggering. It signals to the public, to prospective students, and to our colleagues that we prioritize political safety over moral leadership, and we are unwilling to meaningfully confront inequity. It preemptively capitulates to a demand that hasn’t been made yet. It dismisses the experiences of veterinarians from underrepresented backgrounds. And it contradicts the well-established truth that diverse teams deliver better outcomes, more innovative ideas, and stronger connections with the communities they serve.
Accreditation standards are more than bureaucratic checklists; they are statements of values. They tell the world what we believe is essential to excellent veterinary education. By removing diversity reporting requirements, the COE reveals an ugly truth about the insincerity of our commitment to inclusivity and progress.
No profession improves by retreating from its principles. How do we remediate decades of exclusion if not through intentional efforts? How do we foster a profession that reflects the society it serves? We cannot create a more inclusive profession by hoping it happens. We must demand it.
I urge the COE to reconsider its decision and commit to a more just, inclusive, and forward-looking veterinary profession. In the words of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., “The time is always right to do what is right.”
Accreditation Should Not Fold to Political Pressure on DEI
Dear AVMA Council on Education,
I am writing to express my concern regarding the proposed changes to accreditation standards, particularly the suspension of required DEI reporting. This is not a neutral policy adjustment — it is a reaction to an ongoing political effort to dismantle DEI work in education.
Across the country, we’ve seen coordinated efforts to eliminate DEI departments, censor conversations about identity and equity, and restrict how institutions address systemic inequality. These moves are being driven by political agendas, not by students, educators, or communities asking to be better served. Veterinary schools have already been forced to rebrand, gut, or erase DEI programming just to stay in line with new state laws or to avoid losing funding. The decision by the COE to “pause” DEI requirements aligns with this troubling trend, and it sends a clear message: that equity can be deprioritized when it becomes politically inconvenient.
This is not the leadership we need. DEI work has never been easy or universally popular, but that’s not a reason to step back. If anything, this is when the profession needs to stand firm in its values — especially if we hope to foster a more inclusive, culturally competent veterinary workforce.
I urge the Council not to distance itself from DEI, but to reaffirm it as a core part of accreditation. Students, especially those from underrepresented backgrounds, deserve a profession that doesn’t compromise on their inclusion for the sake of political ease.
Sincerely,
A Concerned Veterinary Student
Add New Comment