UNC-Chapel Hill Trustees Pressed Senior Staff for Admissions Information

As the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill entered the admissions season in October 2023, a member of the school’s Board of Trustees asked its chair to advise the group on how to recommend applicants they thought should be admitted.

“We need your guidance to the board Re your expectations for how trustees will approach these matters,” trustee Jennifer Lloyd wrote in a text message to chair John Preyer. “Admissions clearly said to write a few / limited thoughtful letters of rec re students you know well. Don’t talk about how great their families are or their potential as donors. Talk about the kid and why he should be admitted.”

“Advocate. Don’t expect favors,” Lloyd wrote in a follow-up text.

Over the following eight months, at least six trustees—Lloyd, Preyer, Ramsey White, Robert Bryan, Perrin Jones, and Dave Boliek—asked senior staff members at the university for information on specific applicants or the admissions process, according to more than 100 pages of texts from July 2023 to July 2024 that The Assembly obtained through a public records request. Most of the trustees did not return requests for comment. In an interview, Lloyd said that she advocated for specific students through appropriate channels and followed all guidelines provided during a new trustee orientation. 

The trustees texted several staff members in the university’s Office of Development and the Division of Enrollment, as well as Chris McClure, who as the university secretary is the liaison to the board.

The messages were heavily redacted, with many names apparently removed, as well as large swaths of texts in some places. It was not clear how many different applicants the texts referenced. The university’s records office cited the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, or FERPA, and the North Carolina Public Records Act as the reasons for the redactions.

Some texts showed trustees inquiring about students on the admissions waitlist or asking for an opinion about a student’s chances of admission. Multiple messages from Preyer, the board’s chair who is also president of the Raleigh-based environmental company Restoration Systems, appeared to urge McClure to communicate with admissions staff on his behalf.

“I would like to see [redacted] in,” Preyer wrote to McClure after referencing the waitlist. “This is a smart [redacted] who’d be good for lots of programs at UNC.”

The board of trustees advises the university at the behest of the General Assembly and UNC System Board of Governors, and the trustees are bound by the UNC System’s policy on expectations for board members. A spokesperson for the system said they are reviewing the texts obtained by The Assembly.

Kevin Best, the senior director of media relations at UNC-Chapel Hill, told The Assembly that the university is “committed to a rigorous and comprehensive admissions process” and that no single factor decides whether an applicant is admitted, including a reference from someone close to the school.

Best said trustees are verbally briefed on their role in the admissions process at new trustee orientations but declined to give more details. He said all UNC-CH employees mentioned or involved in the texts declined to comment.

“There is no written policy outlining how anyone may contact administration regarding admissions,” Best wrote in a statement. “In practice, it is common for board members to seek guidance from designees of the chancellor about admissions or other questions.”

Researchers have found that wealthy and well-connected applicants across the country have advantages getting into colleges. High-profile stories such as the bribery scheme involving several elite institutions and the 2023 Supreme Court ruling on the consideration of race in admissions, which involved UNC-CH, have drawn more attention to how colleges decide which students to accept. Still, to much of the public, the admissions process remains a black box.

“Even if you’re not doing anything other than checking in, trying to get some information to a friend or colleague about the waitlist, because you are a board member, this creates the appearance of other things afoot, and that does disservice to the institution and your role as a board,” said Demetri Morgan, an associate professor of education at the University of Michigan who studies governing boards. “The appearance of a conflict can be just as damaging as an actual one.”

Status Updates

Of the six trustees whose messages were provided by UNC-CH, Preyer’s spring 2024 texts to McClure were the most direct in pushing for updates on applicants’ admissions status. In some, Preyer urged McClure to talk with “Rachelle”—likely meaning Rachelle Feldman, the vice chancellor of enrollment.

In March, Preyer sent McClure the names of at least four applicants, all redacted, and asked for updates on their statuses. McClure replied that someone was “working to make it happen.”

In early April, Preyer reached out about an applicant that he said he’d received a call about. McClure told Preyer that the individual was waitlisted. He added that the applicant was “middle of the pack from [redacted]” and may have a full ride to Princeton University, though he said he would “make another run at it.”

The first part of Preyer’s response is largely redacted, but in the latter part he wrote: “… so that is hard to see as middle of pack unless there is a bunch of Asians involved?”

In May, Preyer told McClure that “a little push would be nice” after asking him to check someone’s status. The following month, he asked McClure “whether [redacted] could get a second look.”

Near the end of June, Preyer sent McClure what appeared to be multiple redacted names, saying they were for McClure’s “last push with R.”

McClure responded: “No movement re waitlist. They were good if movement had occurred but no one was moved off transfer wait list.”

Preyer replied: “That’s it—no fuck off or go to hell?”

“No it’s just that they didn’t take anyone off the transfer waitlist,” McClure said. “Those names of course were good candidates had the wait list opened up.”

Waiting on Updates

Two other trustees sent messages about admissions to senior employees in the university’s development office, which handles donor relations and fundraising.

White, who previously worked at the development department at the Morehead-Cain Foundation, which awards merit scholarships, sent multiple messages to Michael Andreasen, the vice chancellor of the university’s development office, about what appeared to be applicants on the waitlist.

“Any update on [redacted] and [redacted]? I know people have started moving off the waitlist,” White texted Andreasen on May 2.

“I don’t,” replied Andreasen. “I also haven’t been able to get an update on waitlist. My understanding is that nothing has moved or changed. Surprised to hear that there is movement.” Later that day, Andreasen said that “the issue has been cleared.”

Lloyd also frequently messaged Jen Bowman, the associate vice chancellor for donor relations, marketing, and volunteer engagement. In one conversation, Lloyd told Bowman that she wrote a “strong letter of recommendation” for an applicant, which Lloyd said she submitted through the admissions portal.

“Total superstar,” Lloyd told Bowman. “pls add to tracking.”

Following a paragraph that was entirely redacted, Bowman thanked Lloyd for the “heads-up,” adding that the applicant sounded “like a great potential Tar Heel!” Lloyd reacted with a heart to the message.

In February, Lloyd asked Bowman whether UNC-CH offered any scholarships in music, arts, or drama that granted automatic admission. “That’s a good question,” Bowman responded. “I’ll have to ask around.”

Lloyd said that some of her conversations with Bowman were related to her role as vice chair of the Board of Trustees’ student affairs committee, which sometimes discusses admissions. Lloyd also said she had no direct contact with admissions on behalf of specific students.

“We are not supposed to interact with admissions,” Lloyd told The Assembly. “The substance of my communications would show that.”

One trustee did communicate with an admissions staff member. Bryan, who is also the co-owner of a franchisee of Slim Chickens restaurants, asked Feldman, the vice chancellor for enrollment, several times about specific students’ odds of getting off the waitlist.

In one instance, after Feldman told Bryan “[redacted] is currently on the waitlist,” Bryan asked about the likelihood of getting off the waitlist as a transfer applicant. Feldman responded that it depended on the university’s yield, or the number of admitted applicants that then enroll.

In a separate conversation, Bryan texted “From a friend” before a long redacted message. Feldman replied: “It will be a while before we go to waitlist but will flag [redacted]. That gpa is pretty low in our pool.”

“That’s what I figured,” Bryan responded.

At least one trustee seemed frustrated to be dealing with admissions questions. Boliek, who was recently elected state auditor and can’t continue serving on the board, sent a message to McClure in April that read: “Good morning, is there anyway I can get some kind of update on this [redacted] so that I don’t have to continually answer phone calls thank you.”

Later in the month, he wrote: “Can you please check with admissions on [redacted]? I still get blown up on this.”

Erin Gretzinger is a higher education reporter at The Assembly. She was previously a reporting fellow at The Chronicle of Higher Education and is a graduate of the University of Wisconsin at Madison. You can reach her at erin@theassemblync.com.