Companies mentioning LGBTQ+ directors in board disclosures have become far less common, according to a new Out Leadership report. The sharp fall matters because these filings offer a public measure of visibility, even though they don't show how many LGBTQ+ directors actually serve. A few companies are still adding detail, making the contrast especially striking.
LGBTQ+ board disclosures have fallen sharply
The change is stark on paper. Out Leadership counted 1,874 US public companies that mentioned LGBTQ+ people in board diversity disclosures for 2024; its latest report found 270. Among Fortune 500 companies, the figure dropped from 148 to 23. (Gayety; Out Leadership)【2】【3】
But those numbers count companies, not directors. A company qualified if its proxy or board documents mentioned LGBTQ+ directors, even to say there weren't any, so the decline signals reduced disclosure rather than a confirmed exodus from boardrooms. (Out Leadership)【3】
Why companies are changing their proxy language
Much of the drop came from Nasdaq-listed companies: the count fell from 1,602 to 206. The shift followed a federal appeals court decision that struck down Nasdaq's board diversity disclosure rules in December 2024, and a subsequent executive order targeting diversity, equity and inclusion programmes. (Gayety; US Securities and Exchange Commission; US Government Publishing Office)【2】【4】【7】
Out Leadership founder and chief executive Todd Sears has argued that the political campaign against DEI contributed to the retreat, though company filings don't state why firms changed their wording. That's an important distinction: the trend is visible, but its cause can't be pinned down from these figures alone. (Gayety; Out Leadership)【2】【3】
A wider retreat from board diversity criteria
LGBTQ+ disclosure isn't the only language disappearing from board documents. Bloomberg Law reported that 61 S&P 100 companies had removed explicit diversity criteria for directors since 2023, suggesting a broader shift in how companies describe board selection. (Bloomberg Law)【5】
That can leave investors and the public with less information, even when a company's actual board hasn't changed. Disclosure isn't the same as representation, but it does make scrutiny easier. (Out Leadership; Bloomberg Law)【3】【5】
Some companies are still putting LGBTQ+ representation on record
The overall decline isn't universal. Colgate-Palmolive retained sexual orientation and gender identity among the backgrounds it considers for board seats, and shareholders rejected a proposal to remove that language by a wide margin. (Gayety)【2】
There are also examples of companies adding specifics. Jacobs Solutions said two of its directors are LGBTQ+, while Corning introduced an LGBTQIA+ row in its board table, although none of its nominees was marked in that category. (Gayety; Jacobs Solutions proxy statement)【2】【6】
What investors should look for in proxy statements
For anyone comparing companies, the practical takeaway is to read the proxy statement rather than assume that silence means a board lacks LGBTQ+ representation. Check whether the company names its criteria, reports director identities, or simply offers general statements about inclusion. (Out Leadership; Jacobs Solutions proxy statement)【3】【6】
And keep the limits of the data in view. A disclosure count can show whether companies are making representation visible, but it can't by itself establish who serves on every board or why a company changed its wording. (Out Leadership)【3】
Visibility may be only one measure of progress, but losing it makes accountability harder.
Source Reference Map
Story idea inspired by: [1]
Sources by paragraph: