IU trustees ditch contentious Kinsey not-for-profit plan after state funding ban
Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
The Indiana University Board of Trustees unanimously agreed Friday morning to not split the Kinsey Institute into a not-for-profit to satisfy a new state law passed last year banning the institute from using state dollars. Instead, it directs the university toward an internal accounting solution.
The decision falls in line with President Pamela Whitten’s recommendation, the university said in a news release, as well as an internal working group’s recommendation for an accounting solution. The trustees said the university will submit a proposed plan to the Indiana State Board of Accounts to confirm their compliance.
The accounting solution would involve requiring IU to maintain separate financial books for the institute that document the source of all its funding as well as all of its direct and indirect costs.
“With the action taken today, we are taking steps to ensure that the Kinsey Institute remains a beacon of intellectual inquiry,” Whitten said in the release. “I offer my thanks to the Board of Trustees for their unwavering commitment and support.”
The Kinsey Institute, which houses research, scholarship and collections surrounding sexuality, gender and relationships, has been targeted by conservative legislators and protestors nearly since its inception in 1947. Often, those attacks are based on misinformation and debunked allegations.
In late October as a solution to the new law, the university proposed splitting some of the institute’s administrative and operating functions to a newly created not-for-profit, while its collections and archives would remain under university ownership. The trustees tabled the matter at its November meeting to gather feedback and to develop the logistics of the not-for-profit option further.
The university also said in the release it will support the Kinsey Institute in a slew of additional ways, as recommended by the working group. That includes philanthropic campaigns, funding for faculty and staff salaries to ensure current affiliations continue, more security measures and support for the institute’s work against misinformation.
‘Exactly what we wanted’: Kinsey reactions
The not-for-profit option was at odds with the will of Kinsey’s faculty, staff and students who say that the move would significantly weaken the world-renowned institute by separating it from its library and collections and the university structure. They have pushed for an “accounting solution for an accounting problem.”
However, the trustees’ decision surprised them, with student Melissa Blundell-Osorio saying it was exactly what they were fighting for. Other faculty, staff and students are celebrating on social media, calling the decision a huge victory.
“We’re incredibly grateful to Pamela Whitten for the shift in the recommendation and to the trustees for passing it,” Blundell-Osorio said. “This is exactly what we’ve been fighting for the last several months, and we’re so incredibly happy.”
Student Melissa Blundell-Osorio talks about her reaction to the trustees’ decision.
Blundell-Osorio said this is one of the first times in this process they’ve felt heard by the university, and she hopes this decision is a turning point.
How we got there
Rep. Lorissa Sweet, R-Wabash, proposed banning funding from the Kinsey Institute by an amendment to the state budget in February 2023. Her argument against the institute was based on debunked allegations regarding institute founder Dr. Alfred Kinsey’s research and the nature of current research and scholarship. The legislation was voted through both chambers, largely by party lines.
The Kinsey Institute does not directly receive state dollars from the state-funded portion of the university budget. Rather, it is largely supported by grants, contracts and donors to operate, and the money IU does give stems from other sources, like tuition or reserves. Where the concern lies with compliance is how the university separates expenses that are often bundled with other departments, like shared campus resources and utilities.
Jonathan Friedman, PEN America director of free expression and education programs, said the situation IU is in with the Kinsey Institute does not appear to have precedent, but it reflects a tide of academic freedom-infringing legislation across the country.
“It seems that this effort to defund or delegitimize the Kinsey Institute is based on a misunderstanding, misinformation, a smear campaign,” he said. “If there was concern about the operation of the Kinsey Institute in the university, makes no sense that legislators would take this step unless they had a particular ideological axe to grind.”
Friedman’s advice to universities is that they should interpret them as written, instead of attempting to read into it, since much of this legislation is vaguely written. With the legislation targeting Kinsey, he said finding a solution is a challenge since the law was not clear on how to comply and there are political factors to consider in that decision.
“The national climate surrounding higher education is emboldening legislators to, in some cases, get creative with how they are trying to exert new ideological control over higher education,’ he said.
Kinsey faculty and students have previously expressed their worries about a chilling effect and potential compounding legislation targeting academic freedom.