Nearly one year ago, the National Association of Realtors held a webinar titled “Advancing DEI in an Anti-DEI Climate.”
At the time, corporations were already rolling back or eliminating diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, initiatives and positions. Some feared a U.S. Supreme Court decision ending affirmative action at colleges and universities would open the floodgates for lawsuits challenging diversity efforts in the private sector.
Ryan Davis, then-vice president of diversity, equity and inclusion at NAR, acknowledged in the webinar that some legitimate concerns had been raised about “malpractice” in the space, but said “good DEI practice” remained at “the heart of doing good work.”
“Equity efforts do not promise equal outcomes,” he said. “They don’t promise that we’ll close equity gaps, but it promises that we’re focused on removing barriers to success for people.”
“Nobody is left out of DEI,” he later said.
By that fall, Davis’ title changed to vice president of culture, and every mention of NAR’s DEI strategy was removed from his webpage.
A NAR spokesperson said the change reflected his expanded role on the organization’s “Cultural Transformation Commission,” which was created after NAR’s former president was accused of sexual harassment. The spokesperson could not provide information on where diversity falls in the commission’s priorities, and Davis did not respond to requests for information.
“Smart companies always value diversity and inclusion. But the degree to which that was playing a dominant role, is out the window.”
Real estate firms, like much of corporate America, have rolled back their diversity, equity and inclusion programs in recent years, as The Real Deal recently reported. Since President Donald Trump’s crackdown on such initiatives, they have quickened the wind-down. Among Trump’s first moves in offices were threats, issued in executive orders, to rip federal grants and contracts from firms with DEI programs and positions. One of the orders also ominously called for potential investigations into private firms.
More than a dozen publicly traded real estate firms whose public documents were reviewed by The Real Deal added DEI language to Securities Equities and Commission filings after 2020 but removed it in their annual reports filed in early 2025 — after Trump’s DEI executive orders.
The changes raise questions about the future of such programs within and outside real estate, as well as the efficacy of such efforts.
Yvonne Riley-Tepie, who leads diversity, equity and inclusion efforts for the Real Estate Board of New York, said her organization and its members continue to recognize the importance of a diverse workforce and suppliers. She’s hopeful that the industry will see the results of programs like one at REBNY that connects students at a state college with internships at real estate firms. Still, she worries about firms that act too hastily.
“I’ve never been one to think, okay, diversity means go out and hire all the Black people that you can find, because that will be just taking it too far, and that has always been illegal,” she said. “What I’m concerned about is that people don’t look and research far enough or consider the longitudinal benefits of programs like the ones we have, and so they’re quick to jump the ship at the first opportunity that they get.”
Disappearing DEI
In September 2020, Vornado Realty Trust was figuring out how to target an acronym.
On a video panel, a human resources official at Vornado said the real estate investment trust was “making progress” on developing a diversity, equity and inclusion strategy.
Two years later the firm added a category of “diversity and inclusion” to its annual report, calling the REIT “a diverse and inclusive environment that empowers the individual and enriches the employment experience.”
TRD asked Instagram followers about how they see the state
of diversity efforts in the industry.
That phrasing appeared in reports published over the next three years, along with a line bragging that the company, of its own volition, had published demographic data since 2017.
But this year, in an annual report filed in February, the company deleted the “diversity and inclusion” paragraph that had appeared under the “Human Capital Management” heading in previous reports. The firm, however, kept a “Culture and Engagement” paragraph that says the company is committed to “creating a positive and inclusive culture [which] is essential to attracting and retaining engaged employees.” The Equal Employment Opportunity data, touted in previous reports, is not mentioned.
Vornado would not say whether the change is related to the Trump administration’s directives.
On his first day in office, Trump issued an executive order directing federal agencies to eliminate all DEI programs, policies and positions. Another requires institutions receiving federal grants or contracts to certify that they do not “operate any programs promoting DEI that violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws.”
After the death of George Floyd in 2020, some real estate executives acknowledged the need to address racial disparities in the industry and to combat barriers to entry for and work harder at retaining people of color. As of 2023, 96 percent of commercial real estate firms globally had DEI initiatives, according to a survey conducted by a group of 19 industry associations. Though hardly scientific, a TRD Instagram poll of industry readers pegged the figure at half that: Of 220 responses, 48 percent said “DEI was never a priority at my workplace.”
It is unclear how many of those initiatives are intact, but the public-facing language about them has changed completely. Of 22 the publicly traded residential and commercial real estate companies in the U.S. reviewed by TRD, 15 companies that added or ramped up their DEI language after 2020 removed it by 2025, after Trump’s orders. Most made those changes this year, though three began dialing back such language in 2024 before removing it entirely.
For example, Anywhere Real Estate, the parent company of Corcoran, Sotheby’s and Coldwell Banker, formerly known as Realogy, added a diversity and inclusion section to its annual report in 2021, noting that “Since our inception, Realogy has had a focus on diversity.” In 2024, that phrasing appeared under a different heading, “Culture,” indicating that “since our inception, Anywhere has focused on creating a workplace that attracts and retains diverse talent and fostering inclusion.”
The culture section, and any mention of a diverse workforce, was eliminated from the report filed in February 2025.
Getting the words right
The removal of the language could indicate a number of things: The efforts were superficial to begin with, so their removal was a simple matter; the companies are regrouping and figuring out how to shape programs that don’t put them in the crosshairs of the Trump administration; or they are removing explicit DEI language while not actually changing their day-to-day operations.
Commercial brokerage Marcus & Millichap removed its DEI section from its annual report this year, but still appears to have a head of diversity, equity and inclusion, though the firm wouldn’t comment on whether her role will change. A job listing posted within that office still lists support for diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives as a job responsibility.
Firms that eliminated DEI language could follow JPMorgan Chase’s lead in their next reports. The bank is swapping “equity” for “opportunity” to better reflect that the “E” means “equal opportunity to us, not equal outcomes,” according to an internal memo reported by Reuters. The company is also reducing its training related to DEI.
“The words DEI have become charged,” Andrew Turnbull, an attorney with Morrison Foerster who co-chairs a task force dedicated to DEI strategy and defense at the firm, said. “Using that terminology may make you more of a target.”
He said that some companies are simply “derisking or debranding but not changing what they are doing.”
Turnbull said fellowships, internships or hiring targets based on race or gender pose a higher legal risk because they may be viewed as discriminatory.
“It is going to come in and out of fashion, and instead of rushing to demonstrate our commitment to diversity and then backing away from it, we’re going to run a fair company.”
Edward Blum, who co-founded Students for Fair Admissions, the group behind the case that resulted in the Supreme Court rejecting affirmative action policies at Harvard and the University of North Carolina, acknowledged that some DEI programs are not in tension with civil rights laws. But he thinks companies are wise for getting rid of DEI statements and practices.
“DEI is overwhelmingly unpopular and polarizing; and, importantly, usually illegal,” Blum said in an email.
Dropping DEI initiatives could also affect where companies choose to plant their flag. John Boyd Jr., a consultant for companies scouting new corporate locations, said social impact considerations, including locations where available hiring pools are diverse, is still an important factor in selecting a site — just not the central one.
“Smart companies always value diversity and inclusion,” he said. “But the degree to which that was playing a dominant role, is out the window.”
Rhetoric vs. action
REBNY’s Riley-Tepie said the trade group partners with the city’s Department of Youth and Community Development to recruit students of varying backgrounds. She said widening the pool of potential candidates — rather than just hitting up the same Ivy League schools — is a good place to start.
“Before I came to REBNY, people would bring their nephews to work with them, and so you had the same people coming year after year working as interns in real estate, and a lot of students were excluded,” she said.
Real estate brokerage Redfin, which is in the process of being acquired by Rocket Mortgage, was one of the few companies reviewed by TRD that never included DEI language in its annual reports with the SEC since going public in 2017.
The firm, however, publishes a separate report every year detailing the diversity of its workforce. CEO Glenn Kelman said in March that he expects those reports to continue.
In 2022, the company expanded its diversity recruiting efforts, that report mentioned, as part of a settlement agreement in a lawsuit accusing Redfin of violating the Fair Housing Act.
Last year, the report acknowledged that underrepresentation of people of color at the firm, especially Black employees, was “principally the result of less hiring, coupled with still-higher attrition rates for people of color.” It pointed to mentorship programs linking employees and executives of color, “so it isn’t so lonely being the only Latino manager or the only Black agent on a team.”
The company also requires that for 61 percent of its roles, at least one candidate from an underrepresented group is interviewed as part of the hiring process. For some markets, that percentage is higher.
“Diversity is a priority at Redfin. It is not the top priority, but it will always be a priority,” he said. “It is going to come in and out of fashion, and instead of rushing to demonstrate our commitment to diversity and then backing away from it, we’re going to run a fair company.”
“We’re not looking for anyone to give us a gold star, or signal virtue to anyone,” he added.”