CSWE Guidance on ADEI in Social Work Education

This document is updated on a rolling basis. Last update: 1/22/2026

At their June 2025 meeting, the BOA approved an option for baccalaureate and master's programs to request an extension on implementation of the 2022 EPAS. In extenuating circumstances, this temporary extension permits programs to request a 1-year shift from July 1, 2025 to July 1, 2026 for their 2022 EPAS implementation date. The purpose of this temporary waiver is to permit an additional year for intentional planning and transition efforts to implement the 2022 EPAS. For more information, review the Temporary Extension Request Form | 2022 EPAS Implementation. 

We understand that programs are concerned about their accreditation status if they are unable to meet accreditation requirements due to federal or state enacted legislation. Rest assured that CSWE and its Board of Accreditation (BOA) are closely monitoring recent federal executive orders, state legislation, and institutional decisions regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and other restricted language. Per the statement released in February 2025, CSWE and its BOA will continue to support and accredit social work programs as they prepare social workers to engage in the depth and breadth of social work practice.

CSWE and its BOA continue to monitor threats that stifle higher education institutions’ ability to address fundamental values in social work education programs and remain committed to supporting social work programs across all U.S. states, district, and territories.

CSWE maintains strategic partnerships and engages an advocacy firm to take action where appropriate. Review the CSWE Statements section below for more information.

As this is an evolving landscape, we request your patience and compassion as we meet all program and public needs to the best of our ability. We ask that you continue sharing your stories with CSWE so we can develop and refine guidance.

Continue educating social workers according to the national standards and engage with legal counsel to avoid anticipatory or overcompliance. If any institutional and/or legal directives challenge a program’s ability to maintain compliance, contact the program's CSWE accreditation specialist to discuss specifics and supports requested. It is advisable to clarify with legal counsel whether the advice obtained reflects risk mitigation or legal violation.

Since each state’s legislation varies widely, programs and institutions are advised to consult with their legal team regarding any concerns about complying with the standards. It is also advisable to review federal and/or state enacted legislation for any exceptions related to accreditor requirements.

CSWE is not a legislative interpreter nor legal entity. CSWE cannot comment on the legality of the Department of Education's Dear Colleague Letter, Dear Colleague Letter FAQs, or Executive Orders. Legal counsel is not permitted to attend accreditation consultation services reserved for social work education programs. 

The Chronicle of Higher Education has the following resources to track legislation:

DEI Legislation Tracker

Tracking Higher Ed’s Dismantling of DEI 

The Assault on DEI

Periodic legislative and advocacy updates are emailed to all individual and program members via CSWE’s weekly Compass newsletter. Per CSWE bylaws, all students, faculty, and staff of accredited and candidate baccalaureate and master's social work programs are members of CSWE. Create your membership profile here and stay current on all social work education happenings.

The CSWE-BOA’s recognizing body, the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA), shared the following statements: Higher Education and the Importance of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and CHEA Statement in Response to Executive Order Targeting Accreditors

Per the Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards (EPAS), “The purpose of the social work profession is to promote human, community, organizational, and societal well-being. Guided by a person-in-environment framework, a global perspective, respect for human diversity, and knowledge based on scientific inquiry and other ways of knowing, the purpose of social work is actualized through its quest for social, racial, economic, and environmental justice; the creation of conditions that facilitate the realization of human rights; the elimination of poverty; and the enhancement of life for all people in their environments, locally and globally.

“Social workers promote social justice and social change with and on behalf of clients. ‘Clients’ is used inclusively to refer to individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities. Social workers are sensitive to cultural and ethnic diversity and strive to end discrimination, oppression, poverty, and other forms of social injustice.”

– NASW Code of Ethics, Preamble

Lived experience is complex and context is vital for understanding each person in their environment. Understanding intersectional identities, opportunity, and access – or lack thereof – allows social workers to serve each client with care, compassion, and respect helping them navigate the historical, biological, psychological, social, spiritual, cultural, and environmental factors influencing their path to well-being. Social work is for everyone, everywhere.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) principles are woven throughout the social work profession’s story as these concepts are core to the past, present, and future of social work across micro, mezzo, and macro practice with all clients, constituents, and communities.

As a values-based profession, DEI concepts are our profession's legacy, promise, and responsibility. Historically, the accreditation standards addressed justice and diversity through an evolution of terminology. DEI is the current iteration of similar longstanding accreditation requirements. Per the 2022 EPAS ADEI information document released with the new standards in 2022, “Requiring programs to achieve and maintain competency in the areas of diversity, privilege, oppression, and intersectionality has been central to social work accreditation standards since 1952. A fundamental aspect of this foundational knowledge is to teach about historical institutionalization of privilege and oppression that has permeated our systems and social fabric.”

Educational preparation is the entryway to the social work profession and DEI ensures competent, ethical, and anti-oppressive social work practice to enhance well-being for all people in their environments. In section 1. Social Workers' Ethical Responsibilities to Clients of the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) Code of Ethics, cultural competence and humility are expected of all social workers. Section 6. Social Workers' Ethical Responsibilities to the Broader Society furthers this by expecting social workers to promote policies that safeguard the rights of and confirm equity and social justice for all people.

As a licensed health profession, DEI content in social work programs also prepares students for licensure requirements, including licensure exam content and licensure continuing education requirements (e.g., implicit bias training) Evidence also explores the positive outcomes of a diverse workforce.

Through regularly scheduled accreditation reviews and continuous compliance, social work programs tell their stories. Standards are crafted to ensure flexibility and malleability of accreditation requirements to match each program’s unique context, ensuring education is not one-size-fits-all.

CSWE-BOA also encourages programs to use creativity, innovation, experimentation, and pilot educational offerings and operations that allow each program to best achieve its mission and goals within its unique context to meet the changing demands of the social work profession and implement current best practices (policies 3.11 Educational Policy & Accreditation Standards; 4.9 Program Changes, Accreditation Policy Handbook).

While DEI definitions and guidance are provided in the available interpretation guides (2022 EPAS Interpretation Guide; 2025 Practice Doctorate Standards Interpretation Guide) the list of DEI examples is not prescriptive nor exhaustive. Examples are added annually, and programs are encouraged to network and brainstorm ideas for fulfilling the standards with peers and CSWE accreditation staff. Post-master's fellowship programs please see the Post-Master's Fellowship Accreditation Guidance section below.

Baccalaureate and Master's Programs

The current accreditation standards (i.e., 2022 EPAS) were officially approved for implementation by baccalaureate and master's social work education programs.

Upon publication, a 2022 EPAS Accreditation Toolkit was made available and shared directly with programs, including Anti-racism, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Information (ADEI) and the 2022 EPAS Interpretation Guide, which identifies compliance requirements and optional tips. The current tally of ADEI examples in the Guide is 155. The glossary of Guide includes definitions of anti-racism, diversity, equity, inclusion, and anti-oppression.

Additional ADEI-related info is available in the 2022 EPAS Reaffirmation Training and 2022 EPAS and ADEI - 2025 Annual Conference slide deck. CSWE staff continue to present on ADEI and copies of those presentations will be added to our website. This webpage also shares the value and benefits of accreditation.

Practice Doctorate Programs

The current accreditation standards (i.e., 2025 Accreditation Standards for Practice Doctorate Social Work Programs) were officially approved for implementation by practice doctorate social work education programs.

The 2025 Practice Doctorate Accreditation Toolkit is available and the 2025 Practice Doctorate Interpretation Guide includes ADEI tips, examples, and resources

Post-Master's Fellowship Programs

For post-master's fellowship applicable DEI guidance, please see the Post-Master's Fellowship Accreditation Guidance section below.

Per policy 4.5 Waivers to Accreditation Standards, DEI-related accreditation standards are not waiver-eligible. All social work education programs are accountable to upholding the standards and accreditation requirements, while being mindful of DEI Language/Content Restrictions and Program Context & Flexibility of Accreditation Standards sections of this page.

It is advisable to inquire with your higher education institution and/or system if there are any waivers or exemptions available for social work programs regarding implementing institutional-level DEI directives or actions. Such exemptions are not within CSWE’s scope, nor would programs be required to furnish documentation of exemptions to CSWE.

Per policy 4.6 Requesting an Extension or Timetable Change, accredited programs may request a 4-month, 8-month, or 1-year extension to their reaffirmation review. Candidate programs may request a 4-month extension at each benchmark phase. Rationales for such requests include implementing a new set of standards that have been published for less than three (3) years; unusual conditions requiring faculty attention; other, as described by the program; and more. Programs must complete the Accreditation Timetable Change Request Form, providing a clear rationale for the request.

Candidacy

Candidacy visitors are required to consult on approval standards and provide feedback on developmental standards, which include DEI standards. Baccalaureate, master's, or practice doctorate programs with upcoming visits are encouraged to review the relevant 2015 EPAS Interpretation Guide, 2022 EPAS Interpretation Guide, or 2025 Practice Doctorate Interpretation Guide to prepare for these discussions. These guides feature hundreds of examples of how to comply with the DEI standards.

During the Visit

Programs may choose not to discuss a standard that does not align with their context. Programs may elect to use language reflective of their context in discussions with the visitor.

Visitors will not offer advice, guidance, or interpretation regarding any federal or state policies or legislation. This includes:

» laws that restrict discussion or implementation of ADEI initiatives

» requests for help navigating such laws or their implications

» questions about compliance strategies or legal risk.

Visit Report

If programs are unable to address a specific accreditation standard related to ADEI due to legal constraint the visitor:

» will report only what was or was not discussed/observed

» will not speculate or explain “why” the program did or did not meet a requirement

» will not reference specific laws or legislation

Program Response

The accreditation process allows programs to fully explain their circumstances in their formal response to the visit report. In the program’s response, it is the program’s responsibility to:

» explain any legal factors affecting their ability to meet standards

» demonstrate how they are addressing the standards within their institutional or legal framework​

​​Reaffirmation 

Reaffirmation site visitors are required to gather stakeholder experiences and ask questions about DEI using at least one (1) question from the 2015 EPAS or 2022 EPAS General Questions Bank. Baccalaureate or master's programs with upcoming visits are encouraged to review the relevant bank and the 2015 EPAS Interpretation Guide or 2022 EPAS Interpretation Guide (see above) to prepare for these discussions. The guides feature hundreds of examples of how to comply with the DEI standards.

During the Visit

Programs may choose not to discuss a standard that does not align with their context. Programs may elect to use language reflective of their context in discussions with the visitor.

Visitors will not offer advice, guidance, or interpretation regarding any federal or state policies or legislation. This includes:

» laws that restrict discussion or implementation of ADEI initiatives

» requests for help navigating such laws or their implications

» questions about compliance strategies or legal risk.

Visit Report

If programs are unable to address a specific accreditation standard related to ADEI due to legal constraint the visitor:

» will report only what was or was not discussed/observed

» will not speculate or explain “why” the program did or did not meet a requirement

» will not reference specific laws or legislation

Program Response

The accreditation process allows programs to fully explain their circumstances in their formal response to the visit report. In the program’s response, it is the program’s responsibility to:

» explain any legal factors affecting their ability to meet standards

» demonstrate how they are addressing the standards within their institutional or legal framework

It is at each program’s discretion to make DEI-related updates to public-facing materials such as the program’s mission statement, policy handbooks/manuals, and website language, this includes removal of any language identified in federal and/or state enacted legislation.

Programs in states with enacted legislation prohibiting ADEI-related content will have the opportunity to adapt competency language in accreditation documentation to align with state legislation, while maintaining the integrity of the nine 2022 EPAS social work competencies. Programs in states with enacted legislative changes are expected to demonstrate continued compliance with existing accreditation standards and show how they prepare students to engage in professional practice using language that is permissible within their state context. Specifically, programs will be required to:

» Identify the applicable state legislation that prohibits or restricts ADEI-related content

» Identify the specific competency language and corresponding behaviors that must be adapted in response to state legislation, while maintaining alignment with the nine 2022 EPAS social work competencies

» Explain how their curricula align with the nine 2022 EPAS competencies and associated behaviors for both generalist and specialized practice

Programs submitting accreditation materials must identify the competencies and accreditation standards impacted by legislative requirements. Based on these identified areas, programs should submit accreditation documents (e.g., self-studies, benchmarks, etc.) which demonstrate how they will continue to meet the standards and enact the nine competencies given the permissible language. For example:

» for AS 2.0.1, programs may discuss how they prepare students to work across system levels with a variety of individuals, families, communities, group, and organizations;

» for AS 2.0.2, programs may discuss how they create a learning environment that is welcoming to students from a variety of backgrounds;

» for AS 3.1.2, M3.2.1, and M3.2.4, programs may use language permissible in their state to respond to accreditation standards in ways that demonstrate adequate preparation of students for practice in the competency area;

» for AS 5.0.1, programs may describe how they are assessing student competence around areas described in AS 3.1.2, M3.2.1, and M3.2.4, as applicable to the program level; and

» for AS 5.0.2, programs may describe how they are assessing their student learning environment around areas described in AS 2.0.2.

CSWE establishes the accreditation framework that identifies competencies students must achieve in preparation for social work practice. Programs retain autonomy in the design and delivery of their curriculum to educate social work students to meet these competencies. CSWE will continue to support programs as they navigate policy changes, legislative developments, and compliance with the 2022 EPAS through ongoing communication, consultation, resources, and partnerships that prepare the next generation of social workers for professional practice.

We have not and will not ask any programs or individuals to break any laws, nor will we lessen the significance of the accreditation standards. Instead, we will work with programs to determine how they can align with the former while still meeting the requirements of the latter.

Beyond Accreditation Standard 4.0.3, 2015 EPAS, Accreditation Standard 5.0.1(d), 2022 EPAS, and Accreditation Standard D5.0.1(d), 2025 Practice Doctorate Standards requiring public-posting of programs’ assessment plan(s) and summary data/outcomes, there are no standards requiring specific public-facing content. Policy 4.9 Program Changes confirming that such changes are not required to be reported to CSWE-BOA, unless the program is under an accreditation review.

Each baccalaureate and master's social work program is required teach knowledge, values, skills, and cognitive & affective processes (e.g., critical thinking, synthesizing, reflecting) related to Competency 3: Engage Anti-Racism, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (ADEI) in Practice at the generalist and specialized practice levels. ADEI content, including Competency 3, are required to be taught in the explicit curriculum and assessed twice minimally, at least once within field education. It is important to note that Competency 3 does not mandate specific theories (e.g., Critical Race Theory) be taught for student competency attainment through the formal curriculum design.

Additionally, website, learning management system, and syllabi content are at the program’s discretion to make DEI-related updates to internal or external-facing materials. Review the DEI Language Restrictions section for more information.

Syllabi:

Per policy 4.7 Document Formatting & Submission Requirements in the Accreditation Policy Handbook, syllabi submitted to the BOA do not need to be the same copies provided to students / syllabi of record. If the program is not under an accreditation review, then interim reporting of syllabi changes are not required. The BOA trusts programs are making changes to comply with the 2022 EPAS per state legislation, as needed. Programs will be evaluated for compliance at their next regularly scheduled reaffirmation review .

Additionally, there are no requirements regarding the content or formatting of syllabi, with the exception that submitted syllabi to the BOA must be consistently formatted. A syllabus must be provided in accreditation documents for each required social work course identified on a curriculum matrix must be included in Volume 2. Programs may provide a master syllabus when there are multiple sections of a course. These master syllabi must include descriptions of the social work course content identified on a curriculum matrix, as well as descriptions must provide sufficient detail for BOA readers to evaluate consistency between a curriculum matrix and syllabi. Programs may also present condensed versions of their syllabi (e.g., versions downloaded from learning management systems) if the syllabi include sufficiently detailed descriptions of the social work course content identified on a curriculum matrix. 

Review the Directives & Legal Consultation section on this page regarding contacting the program's CSWE accreditation specialist if any institutional and/or legal directives challenge a program’s ability to maintain compliance in this area.

Tip: Programs may consider discussing the DEI-related legislation and executive orders as case studies in class, encourage students to participate in NASW’s state and national Legislative Education & Advocacy (LEAD) Days, or empower students to contact their elected officials to comment on proposed legislation or matters of importance to social workers and the clients/communities they serve. In section 6.04 Social and Political Action of the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) Code of Ethics, advocacy and political action are encouraged to improve social conditions, meet basic human needs, and promote social justice.

Accreditation Standard 4.0.3, 2015 EPAS and Accreditation Standard 5.0.1(d), 2022 EPAS require online public posting of baccalaureate and master's programs’ assessment plan(s) and competency-based student learning data/outcomes on their website. This is a requirement per CHEA recognition standards. Standard 2.B Accountability and Transparency, states: “Accredited institutions and programs to provide current, readily accessible, accurate data to the public regarding student learning outcomes and/or achievement data.”

To meet this requirement, programs may continue posting the required 2015 EPAS or 2022 EPAS form according to the national standards, or alternatively, programs operating under the 2022 EPAS may publicly post an alternative version of the required data reporting form which identifies competencies by numbers only, and removes the competency titles. 

Download a copy of the alternative form below:  

2022 EPAS Alternative Form AS B5.0.1(d) Public Reporting of Assessment Outcomes Baccalaureate (Competency Titles Only)

2022 EPAS Alternative Form AS M5.0.1(d) Public Reporting of Assessment Outcomes Master's (Competency Titles Only)

2015 EPAS Alternative Form AS 4.0.3-B Public Reporting of Assessment Outcomes Baccalaureate (Competency Titles Only)

2015 EPAS Alternative Form AS 4.0.3-M Public Reporting of Assessment Outcomes Master's (Competency Titles Only)

Review the Directives & Legal Consultation section on this page regarding contacting the program's CSWE accreditation specialist if any institutional and/or legal directives challenge a program’s ability to maintain compliance in this area.

Each program is required to engage in specific and continuous efforts within the implicit curriculum related to ADEI. The implicit curriculum includes: student development - admissions, advising, retention, and termination; student participation in governance; faculty; administrative and governance structure; and resources.

The standards do not require a specific fund, dollar amount, budget line item, or spending on DEI efforts. Monies may not be necessary to implement DEI efforts within the implicit curriculum. Review the plethora of examples under Accreditation Standard 3.0.1, 2015 EPAS Interpretation Guide and Accreditation Standard 2.0.2, 2022 EPAS Interpretation Guide, or Accreditation Standard D2.0.2, 2025 Practice Doctorate Interpretation Guide capturing creative ideas on how to engage in low-to-no cost efforts.  

The standards do not require specific faculty, student, or staff extra/co-curricular mandatory trainings on DEI within the implicit curriculum. Review the plethora of examples under Accreditation Standard 3.0.1, 2015 EPAS Interpretation Guide and Accreditation Standard 2.0.2, 2022 EPAS Interpretation Guide, or Accreditation Standard D2.0.2, 2025 Practice Doctorate Interpretation Guide capturing creative ideas on implementing DEI efforts in the implicit curriculum.

The standards do not require specific DEI offices and staff positions within the implicit curriculum. Review the plethora of examples under Accreditation Standard 3.0.1, 2015 EPAS Interpretation Guide and Accreditation Standard 2.0.2, 2022 EPAS Interpretation Guide, or Accreditation Standard D2.0.2, 2025 Practice Doctorate Interpretation Guide capturing creative ideas on implementing DEI efforts in the implicit curriculum.

The standards do not require diversity statements within the implicit curriculum for the purposes of hiring, admission, or culture/climate work. Review the plethora of examples under Accreditation Standard 3.0.1, 2015 EPAS Interpretation Guide and Accreditation Standard 2.0.2, 2022 EPAS Interpretation Guide, or Accreditation Standard D2.0.2, 2025 Practice Doctorate Interpretation Guide capturing creative ideas on implementing DEI efforts in the implicit curriculum.

Each program is required to describe how their admissions processes are equitable and inclusive, with particular attention to underrepresented as well as historically and currently oppressed groups. It is important to note that this standard does not equate to requiring affirmative action or race-conscious admissions. Admission processes span from recruitment through orientation/post-admission supports. Review examples under Accreditation Standard 4.1.1, 2022 EPAS Interpretation Guide, Accreditation Standard D4.0.1, 2025 Practice Doctorate Interpretation Guide capturing creative ideas on how to make the admissions process more equitable and inclusive for all students from start to finish.

CSWE accreditation staff may provide a customized letter clarifying the standards and accreditation requirements per policies 4.1 Primary Contact & Accreditation Communications and 4.10 Special Compliance Reviews in the Accreditation Policy Handbook If a letter is requested, it is helpful to provide source material (e.g., memo or policy) that outlines the specifications requested for an accreditor to include in the letter.

An executive order was issued on January 21, 2025 banning diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in governmental operations, which may impact field placements at federally-funded sites. 

Below is guidance regarding upholding programmatic accreditation requirements for baccalaureate and master's programs:

Field Education Hour Reductions

In response to federal hiring freezes impacting government employees’ ability to support learners, note the following information regarding field education hours:

CSWE-BOA has not issued a formal field hour reduction for federally-funded field placement sites. However, the standards encourage a variety of options to fulfill field hours during disrupted learning environments.

Program-initiated Reduction of Field Hours to EPAS Minimum

The EPAS require students enrolled in baccalaureate programs complete 400 field hours, master’s students complete 900 field hours, and master’s advanced standing students complete 900 field hours between their baccalaureate and master’s degree programs. If programs currently require more than the EPAS minimum, they are welcome and encouraged to initiate their own reduction of field hours to reflect the EPAS minimum.

Licensure Implications

When considering a field hour reduction, we advise programs consult with their state-based social work licensing board to ensure students can meet post-degree licensing requirements related to field education (Accreditation Standard 3.3.3). 

Virtual/Remote Field Activities  

BOA interpretation allows “in-person” contact in field settings to be accomplished through digital technologies (e.g., telehealth, telework, phone contact with colleagues, clients, and constituents, remote access to platforms and projects). There is neither a minimum requirement regarding in-person contact hours nor a maximum regarding virtual contact hours (Accreditation Standard 3.3.3). 

Additional Options for Accruing Field Hours 

BOA interpretation also allows field supervision and field seminar hours to be counted toward the accrual of field hours. Such activities should prepare students for the appropriate practice level (i.e., generalist or specialized) and demonstration of the social work competencies and behaviors (Accreditation Standard 3.3.3).

Affiliation Agreements

Affiliation agreements are not an accreditation requirement, but an institutionally preferred contract between the social work program and its field placement sites. As such, it is not a requirement for affiliation agreements to include DEI terminology. Instead, the terms of agreement may reflect the site's commitment to the student's safety, success, and resources needed to learn effectively under the auspices of a qualified social worker. 

Learning Contracts & Alternative Field Instruction

Learning contracts are not an accreditation requirement, but an institutionally preferred contract between the social work program, the student, and their field placement site. Typically, the content of the learning agreement lists all competencies, behaviors, and related student tasks; including DEI terminology. If a site is unable to sign learning contracts due to the presence of DEI language, the social work program may assume responsibility for a competency-based education. For example, the field instructors at federally-funded sites may serve as task supervisors while the program appoints an alternative field instructor (e.g., field director, field liaisons, field seminar instructors, alum) per Accreditation Standard B/M3.3.6.

Alternative Field Instructor Supervision Logistics

Programs may customize the design of alternative field instruction/supervision, including:

Location (e.g., in-person, online, hybrid, after field seminar)

Frequency (e.g., weekly, bi-weekly)

Format (e.g., individual, group, both)

Duration (e.g., 30-minutes, 1-hour, 2-hours)

This allows one or more alternative field instructors to meet with affected students in individual and/or group settings, streamlining supervision and building a rich peer-support network for learning.

Teaching & Assessment of Competency 2 and 3 in Field Education Classroom Settings

Social work programs may teach DEI concepts in competency 2 and 3 in classroom settings via field-based activities, simulations, virtual reality, and/or artificial intelligence per Accreditation Standard 2.0.1, Accreditation Standard 3.1.2, and Accreditation Standard M3.2.4. If learning activities are completed during field seminar synchronous class meeting time, the hours may count toward the minimum required field hours per Accreditation Standard 3.3.3. 

If competency 2 and 3 are taught in classroom settings in lieu of the field placement site, then the task supervisor and alternative field instructor can jointly assess student competence. For example, the task supervisors may assess student demonstration competencies 1 and 4-9, while the alternative field instructor assesses student demonstration of competency 2 and 3. Or the alternative field instructor may also assess student demonstration of all social work competencies.

Per policy 4.11 Complaints Regarding Program Compliance, formal complaints to the CSWE-BOA must pertain to matters related to program compliance with accreditation standards. The BOA is not authorized to adjudicate, arbitrate, or mediate individual student, faculty, or staff grievances against a program or individual. Complainants must use all appropriate institutional and professional channels of appeal before filing a formal complaint with CSWE-BOA. CSWE does not accept complaints regarding individual student, faculty, or staff conduct related to DEI federal and/or state enacted legislation.

CSWE, its Department of Social Work Accreditation, and the Board of Accreditation (BOA) express care and concern for the safety and well-being of social work students, faculty members, staff, and communities affected by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids on college campuses and revocation of scholars’ visas. The safety of students, educators, social workers, and their clients and communities is paramount. 

Social work programs are encouraged to share “know your rights” resources. Here are example resources to prepare constituents should they encounter ICE:  

» American Civil Liberties Union: Know Your Rights | Immigrants' Rights 

» National Immigrant Justice Center: Know Your Rights | If You Encounter ICE 

» National Immigration Law Center: Know Your Rights | Education Providers and Immigration Enforcement 

To promote safety in the educational environment, please note the following options regarding learning modality, field education, and accreditation visits.  

Learning Modality 

The program's accreditation status is not impacted by individual student, faculty, or staff accommodations to complete work online/virtually, including broadcasting courses to those unable to be present at a physical campus/location. Such accommodations are not defined as the program offering a new online program option (i.e., structured pathway to degree completion) which requires CSWE approval.  

Field Education 

Program-initiated Reduction of Field Hours to EPAS Minimum 

The EPAS require students enrolled in baccalaureate programs complete 400 field hours, master’s students complete 900 field hours, and master’s advanced standing students complete 900 field hours between their baccalaureate and master’s degree programs. If programs currently require more than the EPAS minimum, they are welcome and encouraged to initiate their own reduction of field hours to reflect the EPAS minimum. 

Licensure Implications 

When considering a field hour reduction, we advise programs consult with their state-based social work licensing board to ensure students can meet post-degree licensing requirements related to field education (Accreditation Standard 3.3.3).  

Virtual/Remote Field Activities   

BOA interpretation allows “in-person” contact in field settings to be accomplished through digital technologies (e.g., telehealth, telework, phone contact with colleagues, clients, and constituents, remote access to platforms and projects). There is neither a minimum requirement regarding in-person contact hours nor a maximum regarding virtual contact hours (Accreditation Standard 3.3.3).  

Additional Options for Accruing Field Hours  

BOA interpretation also allows field supervision and field seminar hours to be counted toward the accrual of field hours. Such activities should prepare students for the appropriate practice level (i.e., generalist or specialized) and demonstration of the social work competencies and behaviors (Accreditation Standard 3.3.3). 

Reaffirmation Site Visits and Candidacy Visits  

Reaffirmation site visits and candidacy visits scheduled for programs affected by ICE raids on college campuses and revocation of scholars’ visas may be hosted virtually or rescheduled. Programs and visitors are encouraged to contact our CSWE accreditation staff for information about changing the visit format or rescheduling. 

Additional information is available in the Policy Handbook within sections 5.9 Candidacy Visits 1, 2, & 3 and 6.6 Site Visit. Please also visit the Accreditation Process page, which include a Virtual Visit Policies and Tips resource.  

In November 2025, the CSWE Board of Accreditation Executive Committee voted that programs in states with enacted laws prohibiting ADEI-related content can adapt language in accreditation documentation.​ Affected programs are required to demonstrate how they continue to prepare students/trainees to the highest professional standards, leading with social work knowledge, skills, and integrity, using permissible language.​ This flexibility extends to post-master’s social work fellowship programs. ​

There are two standards in the Post-Master’s Social Work Fellowship Accreditation Standards that refer to anti-racism, diversity, equity, and inclusion, AS 3.1.1 and AS 3.3.7. Below are information and tips on how post-master's fellowship progams may respond to this standard within their unique context. Examples are added regularly, and programs are encouraged to network and brainstorm ideas for fulfilling the standards with peers and CSWE accreditation staff. All programs have the option to select their own terminology to describe ADEI.

Accreditation Standard 3.1.1: The program publishes equitable and inclusive admissions policies, with particular attention to underrepresented groups. At a minimum, the program requires that the trainee has earned a master’s degree in social work from a CSWE-accredited program. This includes individuals whose degree was recognized as equivalent through CSWE’s International Social Work Degree Recognition and Evaluation Service (ISWDRES) and graduates from Canadian social work programs accredited by CASWE covered by the memorandum of understanding between CSWE and CASWE.

For programs under active accreditation review:

You may choose to add the following language to add to the self-study template, program response, or other relevant accreditation materials:

Check the box, if applicable:

☐ Due to federal requirements or state enacted legislation, the program will use permissible terminology while maintaining full compliance with CSWE accreditation standards. 

Examples of complying with AS 3.1.1:

Important note: This guidance is not prescriptive nor exhaustive.

» Programs can select their own terminology to describe ADEI (e.g., access, opportunity, belonging, fairness, openness, respect).

» Consider discussing how trainees from a variety of backgrounds are recruited and retained.

» Each program is required to describe how their admissions processes are equitable and inclusive, with particular attention to underrepresented groups. However, it is important to note that this standard does not equate to requiring affirmative action or race-conscious admissions. Admission processes span from recruitment through orientation/post-admission supports. Here are some ideas on how programs may address this standard. 

» Focus of this standard: Equity and inclusion within admission policies, practices, and processes to reduce unfair bias.

» Admissions span the entire process, including:

»» Strategic outreach and marketing

»» Recruitment of prospective trainees

»» Review and evaluation of applications

»» Formal notification of applicants’ admission decision

»» Offering financial aid, funding, and /or scholarship programs

»» Orientation

»» Elimination of any admission barriers, including platform, process, and criteria

»» Periodic reviews of the admissions process for opportunities to prioritize equity and inclusivity, including seeking feedback for applicants and trainees

» Examples:

»» Recruitment office locations

»» Funded visits to the training site

»» Timing information sessions and open houses (e.g., online, evenings, weekends) to maximize access across time zones and include prospective trainees with various work-life priorities (e.g., family care)

»» Offering childcare during onsite recruitment events

»» No application fees or fee waivers

»» Accessibility of application platform

»» Inclusive demography questions on the application

»» Objective application evaluation criteria or a holistic admissions rubric, as defined by programs (Include prompt on application for trainees to “tell their story” by providing context and addressing any extenuating circumstances in their academic and professional history)

»» Optional or elimination of standardized test scores as an admission criterion

»» Employing multiple evaluators per application 

»» Requiring unconscious bias training for application evaluators 

»» Alternative methods for conducting admission interviews (e.g., videoconferencing, phone)

»» Option for transgender individuals to change their name and pronouns on admissions applications

»» Recruitment fairs

»» Optional early orientation to build social connections

»» Admission process and orientation supports for second career trainees

Accreditation Standard 3.3.7: The program implements policies and procedures that demonstrate a commitment to providing an anti-racist, diverse, equitable, and inclusive learning environment for trainees and instructors.

For programs under active accreditation review:

You may choose to add the following language to add to the self-study template, program response, or other relevant accreditation materials:

Check the box, if applicable:

☐ Due to federal requirements or state enacted legislation, the program will use permissible terminology while maintaining full compliance with CSWE accreditation standards. 

Examples of complying with AS 3.3.7:

Important note: This guidance is not prescriptive nor exhaustive.

» Programs can select their own terminology to describe ADEI (e.g., access, opportunity, belonging, fairness, openness, respect).

» Consider discussing how a learning environment is created to welcome and support trainees from a variety of backgrounds.​​​​​

» The standards does not require a specific fund, dollar amount, budget line item, or spending on DEI efforts; monies may not be necessary to implement DEI efforts. Additionally, the standards do not require specific employees or require trainings on DEI. Lastly, the standards do not require diversity statements for the purposes of hiring, admission, or culture/climate work. 

» Focus of this standard: What intentional efforts are made throughout program operations, outside of the formal curriculum and delivery to prioritize ADEI?

» Examples:

»» Conferences and speaker series

»» Social movement organizing

»» Fundraisers for agencies, causes, or drives

»» Food, toiletry, clothing, and/or toy drive collections

»» Community garden, food pantry, clothing and/or toiletry closet for trainees and their families

»» Social identity affinity groups

»» Safe/brave space for trainees from diverse backgrounds

»» Symbols and aesthetics in the environment (e.g., pride flag)

»» Inclusive space/room (e.g., nursing, neurodivergent, prayer, meditation)

»» Trainee orientation activities and events

»» Intentional support for second career trainees

»» Extended or virtual office hours

»» ADEI Committee

»» Faculty and/or trainee team research foci (e.g., public scholarship and translating complex social work topics for mass engagement)

»» Ethical research engagement guidelines (e.g., community-based participatory research)

»» Program provided ADEI-related consultation, trainings, or resources to trainees/community partners

»» Statements and land acknowledgements with action plans

»» Trainee community guidelines

»» Low/no cost professional development, trainings, or continuing education credits for trainees and employees (e.g., bystander intervention, inclusive language, financial literacy)

»» Accessible learning management system, educational technology,, and educational spaces (e.g., wellness room, inclusive restrooms, nursing spaces, spiritual practice spaces)

»» Option for transgender individuals to change their name and pronouns in platforms and records

»» No cost refreshments/meals shared during educational events

»» Childcare at extracurricular events

»» Unconscious bias training for trainee/trainee evaluators 

»» Diversity initiatives and culture/climate work

»» Scholarship programs

»» Offering office hours, group/trainee organization opportunities, and resources to support trainees in navigating the program

»» Strategies to reengage and reintegrate trainees who took a leave of absence (e.g., parents, caretakers, active duty military, trainees experiencing loss, financial hardship, or other emergencies)