I think a lot of good points have been made, but having read illa's last comment, I had to respond. As a "triple minority" (1-female, 2-black, 3-African), I would be absolutely horrified if admission to pharmacy school was based solely (or mostly) on race. I have worked too damn hard in my life to be viewed as some token, and would rather be judged according to my abilities. I do think that a good point has been made in that the applicant pool is not large enough among URMs, but I think that a better way to increase diversity in pharmacy applicants is to have a variety of programs designed to interest youth, adolescents, and college undergrads in research, science, and healthcare fields in which they are underrepresented. Such programs do exist, but 1) there aren't enough, and 2) most of them seem to focus more on medicine as opposed to other fields such as pharmacy,genetics, health informatics, and the like. Programs such as these can help combat influences that may otherwise prevent such students from considering these fields. The HRSA-funded Health careers opportunity programs are an example; they work with high-achieving elementary, middle, and high school minority youth and low-income youth of all backgrouds by hosting "Saturday school" and summer programs where the youth take science courses, shadow health care professionals, and do limited research on health disparities.
I don't have a problem with adcoms considering "extenuating circumstaces" as ONE of the soft factors after considering grades, etc, but I am a strong advocate of SOCIOECONOMIC factors (poverty, attending poorly rated, academic disadvantaged schools, first generation college student, etc) being considered as opposed to race. That was no one who is truly needy (i.e. the white kid from a trailer park or from a rural area with limited opportunities) is excluded.