OCR COMPLAINT: Portland Public Schools

On March 3, 2025, Parents Defending Education (PDE) brings this complaint against Portland Public Schools (PPS) in Oregon for discrimination on the basis of race in programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance in violation of both Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq., and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

PDE makes this complaint as an interested third-party organization with members who are parents of school children throughout the country. PDE and its members oppose discrimination on the basis of race and political indoctrination in America’s schools.

On November 3, 2020, Portland residents voted on Measure 26-215, a $1.2 billion construction bond for Portland Public Schools that also established the district’s Center for Black Student Excellence.1 As the Cascade Policy Institute has pointed out, the legality of this bond initiative is questionable at best, as “[s]tate law requires that all proceeds from capital improvement bonds be used strictly for acquisition, construction, and repairs of school buildings and the purchase of assets. Other broader intangible uses—such as initial planning and community engagement—are not specifically allowed. In addition, sponsors of a bond issuance are expected to conduct thorough due diligence that supports the proposed capital projects and their anticipated price tags.”2

Portland Public Schools’ website for the program states that “The Center for Black Student Excellence comprises a constellation of academic programs, strategies, supports, and experiences reinforced by physical infrastructure. Each of these elements work in coordination to create a transformational Approach to Black student learning.”3 Under the “CBSE as a Redesign of the System” subhead, the site notes that “[t]he strategies of the Center for Black Student Excellence will scale to ensure that Black students across Portland Public Schools are seen, valued, and held to high standards.… Community leaders and organizations will contribute to a tightly woven network of educators, service providers, community members and entities working in coordination for the benefit of Black students. In the system redesign, every member of the community will feel a sense of shared responsibility for the outcomes of Black students, and the organization will establish accountability measures to reflect progress.”4

As the CBSE “Journey Map”5 details, on September 20, 2022,6 the Portland Public Schools Board of Education approved an agreement to collaborate with the Center for Black Excellence on black-exclusive programming at Portland Public Schools.7 Section I of the resolution states: “The approval of the 2020 PPS Bond enables Black-led and -serving educational organizations in the Albina community to engage in the design and implementation of the CBSE as a physical environment, focused on entering the experience, promoting opportunities, accelerating outcomes, and celebrating the achievements of Portland’s Black children, families, and educators. The engagement of, and consistent support from, Portland’s Black community in connection with the passage of the 2020 PPS Bond and the focus on improving the educational environment and outcomes for Black students, has created a foundation for the creation of the CBE and the implementation of its goals.”

On May 17, 2023, PPS released a report entitled “Center for Black Student Excellence: A Place, An Approach, and a Redesign of the System.” (Exhibit A). The CSBE’s Guiding Principles reflect its racial focus: it promises to “center Blackness unapologetically,” “ensure that Black students and Black Educators in PPS access empowering activities, services, and relationships,” “ensure that Black students will graduate with a post-secondary plan,” and “emulate intentionality around bringing out the excellence in Black students.” (Exhibit A at 52-53).

Although the report suggests improvements only for black students, it acknowledges that Portland students of all races struggle academically. A graphic on page 40, for example, highlights black non-Hispanic students’ struggle with reading proficiency: only 17 percent meet third grade reading proficiency level. But the same graphic shows that Pacific Islander students face even greater difficulties, with only 16.7 percent meeting the same standard – followed closely by Native American students at 17.6 percent. (Exhibit A at 40). Another page highlights that only 79.4 percent of black students graduate high school – while this same graphic shows that a mere 61.5 percent of Native American students, 73.7 percent of “Latinx” students, and 78.4 percent of “Multi Racial (Others)” do so. (Exhibit A at 43). In other words, PPS is failing students of all races and ethnicities, which makes this racially segregated program all the more egregious.

The report also lists a number of “Student Support” benefits specifically for black students:

• The “Black Student Union Programming & Leadership Development” section notes that “Black students are united across school communities through a shared standard for Black Student Union programming. Central to each of the affinity clubs’ success is the foundation of culture, identity, belonging and Black joy. They are encouraged to participate in rite of passage ceremonies, Historically Black College and University (HBCU) tours, and international trips.” (Exhibit A at 137).

• The “Mentorship” section notes that “Black students have access to a network of mentors that span their social, cultural, and career interests. In particular, the Center for Black Student Excellence connects students with recent graduates, business professionals, and elders. In addition, mentors coach students on responsibly navigating social media and technology as digital natives.” (Exhibit A at 137).

• The “Wraparound Support & Healing Services” section notes that “[t]he Center for Black Student Excellence provides students and families access to free and affordable food. In recognition of racial trauma, students have access to individual, group, and family mental health resources.” (Exhibit A at 138).

Likewise, under listed “Family Support” activities:

• The “Parent/Caregiver Affinity Groups” section notes that “Black families have access to differentiated support groups focused on: Parents of newborns/young children; Parents of elementary age children; Mothers; Fathers; grandparents/caregivers/guardians; Single parents; Pregnant parents.” (Exhibit A at 142).

• The “Parent/Caregiver Academy” section notes: “The parent/Caregiver Academy program provides Black parents/caregivers and non-Black parents/caregivers raising Black children with training, information, and resources to support their essential responsibility for influencing their children’s lives and maintaining the standard of excellence.” (Exhibit A at 143).

• The “Family Advocacy & Case Management” section notes that “[t]he Center for Black Student Excellence also removes barriers preventing families from accessing available services and resources. Through public and private partnerships, families receive transportation assistance to and from school and community activities.” (Exhibit A at 144).

And under listed “Educator Capacity” activities:

• The “Educator Affinity Groups & Leadership Development” section notes that, “[a]t the Center for Black Student Excellence, Black educators meet for affinity and model educational excellence for students aspiring to become teachers. Educators build camaraderie with diverse educators from various content areas, with varying years of experience and pathways. They too, engage in peer and intergenerational mentorship while accessing mental health and healing resources for themselves. At the Center for Black Student Excellence, teacher leaders and veteran educators explore pathways to become administrators and opportunities to demonstrate their leadership in district-level discussions.” (Exhibit A at 151).

CBSE has wasted no time implementing its agenda. Between October 2022 and April 2023, CBSE’s “Guiding Coalition” held four meetings and conducted four “phases” of community engagement.8 The district’s “Design and Engagement Calendar” for the project shows that 39 events were held during Phase I; 50 were held during Phase II; 34 were held during Phase III; and 32 were held during Phase IV. (Exhibit A at 174-86). PPS presumably devoted a non-trivial amount of staff, time, and resources to this endeavor at a time when the district faces a $40 million deficit.9

The district’s decision to allocate resources to black students, and not students of other racial backgrounds, has created tension in the community. On January 7, 2025, a school board meeting “was upended by a passionate debate over whether to include an additional $40 million for a Native Student Success Center, an idea the board ultimately rejected.”10

In addition, financial oversight of the program raises accountability questions. In January 2025, a local news outlet reported that the Center has yet to break ground on its planned facility. “As the district loses track of time, it’s also losing money to inflation.… In December, Cathy Brady, a principal at the auditing firm Sjoberg Evashenk consulting, warned the district that the center was falling behind.”11

The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) maintained a similar program – its “Black Student Achievement Plan” – against which PDE filed a separate OCR complaint on July 11, 2023.12 After PDE filed the complaint, LAUSD “dropped race as an official factor” in “decid[ing] which students get extra educational services.”13 The District’s page for the program now states that it “is open to all interested students and operates in accordance with the District’s Non-Discrimination and Anti-Harassment Policy, based on applicable federal and state laws,”14 much to the chagrin of several California-based education professors.15

As the Department of Education is no doubt aware, discrimination on the basis of race raises concerns that Portland Public Schools has received federal funds in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which declares that “no person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.”

In addition, Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution asserts: “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” On these grounds, the Supreme Court held in 1954 that racial segregation of students is unconstitutional. Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954). Courts have likewise acknowledged that intentionally allocating educational resources to favor students of one race violates equal protection principles. See, e.g., United States v. Yonkers Bd. of Educ., 624 F. Supp. 1276, 1531(S.D.N.Y. 1985). Indeed, just two years ago, the Supreme Court confirmed that “race” cannot be used “as a factor in affording educational opportunities.” Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, 600 U.S. 181, 204 (2023).

PPS’s racially exclusive plan also runs afoul of this Department’s own guidance. On February 14, 2025, the Department released a “Dear Colleague” letter outlining schools’ nondiscrimination obligations under the Equal Protection Clause, Title VI, and Students for Fair Admissions.16 As the letter notes, “[a]lthough SFFA addressed admissions decisions, the Supreme Court’s holding applies more broadly. At its core, the test is simple: If an educational institution treats a person of one race differently than it treats another person because of that person’s race, the educational institution violates the law. Federal law thus prohibits covered entities from using race in decisions pertaining to admissions, hiring, promotion, compensation, financial aid, scholarships, prizes, administrative support, discipline, housing, graduation ceremonies, and all other aspects of student, academic, and campus life. Put simply, educational institutions may neither separate or segregate students based on race, nor distribute benefits or burdens based on race.”

A September 29, 2015 decision from the Department of Education Office for Civil Rights during the Obama Administration is directly on point: in 2015, following “the police actions involving African American victims in Ferguson and New York and subsequent events,” Oak Park & River Forest High School District 200 held a “Black Lives Matter” assembly during Black History Month. The assembly was convened “for African American students only” because the district wanted “to provide a comfortable forum for black students to express their frustrations.” Certain students “who self-identified as white were directed by District officials not to participate in the event as this assembly was designed for students who self-identify as black.” In the letter sent on September 29, 2015 (OCR Docket #05-15-1180), OCR found that the district violated the Equal Protection Clause and Title VI because the district’s actions could not withstand strict scrutiny. Specifically, the district failed to “assess fully whether there were workable race-neutral alternatives” and “did not conduct a flexible and individualized review of potential participants.” In a Resolution Agreement with OCR, the district agreed that its programs and activities would be “open to all students . . . regardless of their race” and to adopt policies and training to ensure the district’s compliance. OCR imposed these requirements even though the district had promised “not to hold such events in the future.”

Accordingly, we ask that the Department promptly investigate the allegations in this complaint, act swiftly to remedy unlawful policies and practices, and order appropriate relief.