```
DOD Service Academies: More Actions Needed to Eliminate Sexual Harassment
(Chapter Report, 01/31/94, GAO/NSIAD-94-6).

A GAO survey found widespread sexual harassment at the nation's military
academies, with between 93 and 97 percent of female students reporting
some form of sexual harassment in 1991.  The most common forms of
harassment were derogatory personal comments and suggestions that
standards had been lowered for women.  GAO found a strong link between
harassment and stress.  The academies generally have complied with the
minimum requirements the Defense Department has set for programs to
eliminate sexual harassment. Inspectors General have yet, however, to
expressly review sexual harassment prevention and education at the
academies.  Moreover, none of the academies has developed usable data to
assess whether their sexual harassment eradication programs are working.
In reviewing the efforts of other organizations, GAO noted several
approaches to preventing sexual harassment that may prove effective at
the academies.  GAO summarized this report in testimony before Congress;
see: DOD Service Academies: Further Efforts Needed to Eradicate Sexual
Harassment, by Mark E. Gebicke, Director of Military Operations and
Capabilities Issues, before the Subcommittee on Force Requirements and
Personnel, Senate Committee on Armed Services.  GAO/T-NSIAD-94-111, Feb.
3, 1994 (12 pages).

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  NSIAD-94-6
     TITLE:  DOD Service Academies: More Actions Needed to Eliminate 
             Sexual Harassment
      DATE:  01/31/94
   SUBJECT:  Sexual harassment
             Military service academies
             Students
             Military offenses
             Discrimination
             Women
             Program evaluation
             Surveys
             Education or training
             Crimes or offenses

             
**************************************************************************
* This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a GAO        *
* report.  Delineations within the text indicating chapter titles,       *
* headings, and bullets are preserved.  Major divisions and subdivisions *
* of the text, such as Chapters, Sections, and Appendixes, are           *
* identified by double and single lines.  The numbers on the right end   *
* of these lines indicate the position of each of the subsections in the *
* document outline.  These numbers do NOT correspond with the page       *
* numbers of the printed product.                                        *
*                                                                        *
* No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although figure    *
* captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but may not resemble     *
* those in the printed version.                                          *
*                                                                        *
* A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO Document    *
* Distribution Facility by calling (202) 512-6000, by faxing your        *
* request to (301) 258-4066, or by writing to P.O. Box 6015,             *
* Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015. We are unable to accept electronic orders *
* for printed documents at this time.                                    *
**************************************************************************

Cover
================================================================ COVER

Report to Congressional Requesters

January 1994

DOD SERVICE ACADEMIES - MORE
ACTIONS NEEDED TO ELIMINATE SEXUAL
HARASSMENT

GAO/NSIAD-94-6

DOD Service Academies

Abbreviations
=============================================================== ABBREV

  DOD - Department of Defense
  EEOC - Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
  UCMJ - Uniform Code of Military Justice

Letter
=============================================================== LETTER

B-254494

January 31, 1994

The Honorable Sam Nunn
Chairman, Committee on
 Armed Services
United States Senate

The Honorable John Glenn
Chairman, Subcommittee on
 Military Readiness and Defense
 Infrastructure
Committee on Armed Services
United States Senate

The Honorable Richard C.  Shelby
Chairman, Subcommittee on
 Force Requirements and
 Personnel
Committee on Armed Services
United States Senate

As requested, we reviewed the issue of sexual harassment at all three
of the service academies.  This report addresses (1) the extent to
which sexual harassment occurred at the academies, the forms it took,
and its effects on those subjected to it and (2) an evaluation of the
academies' efforts to eradicate sexual harassment.  This report
expands upon the preliminary results we presented at the hearing on
the service academies before the Subcommittee on Manpower and
Personnel on June 2, 1992. 

We are sending copies of this report to interested congressional
committees; other interested Members of Congress; the Secretaries of
Defense, the Army, the Air Force, and the Navy; and the
Superintendents of the Military, Air Force, and Naval academies.  We
will also make copies available to other parties on request. 

This report was prepared under the direction of Mark E.  Gebicke,
Director, Military Operations and Capabilities Issues.  If you or
your staff have any questions concerning this report, he can be
reached on (202) 512-5140.  The major contributors to this report are
listed in appendix III. 

Frank C.  Conahan
Assistant Comptroller General

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
============================================================ Chapter 0

   PURPOSE
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:1

In the spring of 1990, a student in her second year left the Naval
Academy after an incident in which she was handcuffed to a urinal in
the men's room and other midshipmen gathered, with some taking
pictures.  The Academy investigated the incident, and two midshipmen
received demerits.  One of the reasons the woman cited for leaving
the Academy was her disillusionment with Academy officials over their
inability to see that what had happened to her was not an isolated
incident and her belief that Academy norms regarding the treatment of
women were not appropriate.  This and other incidents at the Naval
Academy in 1989 and 1990 increased congressional interest in the
treatment of students at the service academies. 

At the request of the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Armed
Services and the former Chairman of its Subcommittee on Manpower and
Personnel, GAO undertook a review of sexual harassment of students at
the Air Force, Naval, and Military academies.  The objectives of the
review were to (1) determine the extent to which sexual harassment
occurred at the academies, the forms it took, and its effects on
those subjected to it and (2) evaluate the academies' efforts to
eradicate sexual harassment. 

   BACKGROUND
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:2

Sexual harassment can be broadly defined as words, gestures, or
actions with sexual connotations which are unwelcome and tend to
intimidate, alarm, or abuse another person.  The Department of
Defense (DOD) established a Human Goals Charter in 1969 that calls
for respect for the serviceman, servicewoman, civilian employee, and
family members.  The charter is the foundation of DOD's equal
opportunity programs.  DOD also has a formal policy to provide "an
environment free from sexual harassment." In July 1991, the Secretary
of Defense directed each DOD component to implement a program to
eradicate sexual harassment and established minimum requirements for
such a program. 

At the core of GAO's review were surveys of academy students,
faculty, and staff, and focus groups of academy students.  Because
the surveys were conducted in late 1990 and early 1991, GAO reviewed
the results of more recent surveys conducted by the academies to
determine whether its results were still valid. 

The proportion of men to women at the academies has remained fairly
constant over the last few years.  In the class of 1996, women
constitute 13.7 percent of the 1,240 midshipmen at the Naval Academy,
11.4 percent of the 1,188 cadets at the Military Academy, and 12.6
percent of the
1,221 cadets at the Air Force Academy. 

   RESULTS IN BRIEF
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:3

The academies have not met DOD's broad human charter goals or its
policy of providing an environment that is free from sexual
harassment.  Although only a few cases of sexual harassment are
formally reported, responses to GAO's survey indicated that between
93 and 97 percent of academy women reported experiencing at least one
form of sexual harassment during academic year 1991.  The most common
forms of harassment were derogatory personal comments and comments
that standards had been lowered for women.  GAO's survey showed a
relationship between students experiencing a high degree of sexual
harassment and those feeling stress. 

The academies generally have complied with the minimum requirements
DOD has established for sexual harassment eradication programs.  For
example, the academies have issued policy statements on the issue and
have conducted prompt and thorough investigations of reported
incidents.  An exception to this compliance has been the lack of
inspector general reviews conducted at the academies that included
sexual harassment prevention and education as an item of special
interest. 

None of the academies has developed usable trend data to assess the
effectiveness of its sexual harassment eradication program.  The
Military and Air Force academies, in particular, have not conducted
routine, systematic program evaluations.  A disciplined evaluation
approach is critical to determining whether current efforts to
eradicate harassment are working or new efforts should be tried. 

In reviewing the efforts of other organizations, GAO also identified
several approaches to sexual harassment prevention that may prove
effective at the academies. 

   PRINCIPAL FINDINGS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:4

      SEXUAL HARASSMENT CONTINUES
      AT ACADEMIES
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:4.1

Between half to about three quarters of academy women experienced
various forms of harassment at least twice a month, GAO's survey
shows.  Women said the basis for the harassment was most often
gender, rather than race, religion, or ethnic origin.  The vast
majority of men reported never having experienced sexual harassment. 
Academy studies conducted after the GAO survey confirmed that sexual
harassment remains a problem at the academies. 

The harassment women experienced usually took the form of derogatory
personal comments; comments that standards had been lowered for
women; comments that women did not belong at the academy; exposure to
offensive posters, signs, graffiti, or T-shirts; or mocking gestures,
catcalls, accents, or slang.  Few reported unwanted pressure for
dates or unwanted sexual advances. 

Only a small fraction of sexual harassment complaints are formally
reported.  For example, GAO's survey shows that between 93 and 97
percent of academy women reported experiencing at least one form of
sexual harassment during academic year 1991.  However, only 26
incidents were formally reported, and most of these involved more
grievous forms of sexual misconduct.  For instance, the most common
type of reported behavior involved a male student entering a female
student's room after hours and making unwanted sexual advances (such
as kissing, touching, fondling) toward the sleeping student. 

      SEXUAL HARASSMENT CAN
      PRODUCE STRESS
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:4.2

GAO's survey results indicate that sexual harassment can have
detrimental effects on cadets and midshipmen.  A correlation exists
between a student's reported exposure to sexual harassment and higher
levels of stress.  Similarly, a correlation exists between levels of
stress and decreased interest in staying at the academy and making
the military a career.  However, because many factors may contribute
to stress, GAO could not draw a direct link between harassment and
decreased interest in staying at the academy and making the military
a career. 

      ACADEMY PROGRAMS GENERALLY
      MET DOD STANDARDS
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:4.3

To varying degrees, sexual harassment eradication programs at each of
the academies met the minimum criteria established by DOD.  For
example, each academy

  issued a policy statement, though the content varied as to the
     extent of information on ways to deal with sexual harassment and
     on the consequences of harassing someone;

  offered training as part of leadership courses or human
     relations/equal opportunity training courses; and

  took some steps to evaluate its equal opportunity climate, although
     there was not always a clear link between the evaluation results
     and changes in training or other programs. 

However, one area where the academies had not met the DOD criteria
was inspector general reviews.  As of September 1993, no inspector
general reviews had been conducted at the academies that included
sexual harassment prevention and education as an item of special
interest.  The Navy Inspector General intends to specifically examine
sexual harassment during an inspection scheduled for late 1994.  The
Air Force Inspection Agency has scheduled a review at the Air Force
Academy for 1995. 

      ACADEMIES HAVE NOT EVALUATED
      THEIR SEXUAL HARASSMENT
      ERADICATION PROGRAMS IN A
      ROUTINE, SYSTEMATIC MANNER
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:4.4

The academies have evaluated their sexual harassment eradication
programs to varying degrees.  The Naval Academy has conducted three
assessments of its equal opportunity climate since 1990 by surveying
and interviewing students and collecting other types of data.  The
assessments have focused on identifying equal opportunity/sexual
harassment problems and recommending solutions.  However, the Academy
had difficulty compiling the data needed for these assessments, and
the data developed for each assessment cannot be readily compared to
analyze trends.  The Military and Air Force academies have evaluated
elements of their equal opportunity programs, but these efforts were
less focused and systematic than the evaluation approach taken by the
Naval Academy. 

As part of their sexual harassment eradication programs, other
institutions have undertaken efforts that may be effective at the
academies.  Examples of these actions include preparing and
distributing pamphlets or brochures on the issue; expanding the
explanation of the range of behaviors that can be regarded as sexual
harassment; offering a variety of personal strategies for dealing
with sexual harassment; and varying the methods used in, and the
content of, sexual harassment prevention training. 

   RECOMMENDATIONS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:5

To better achieve DOD's goal of a sexual harassment-free environment,
GAO recommends that the academy superintendents take the following
actions: 

  Gather and analyze data, through routine reviews of case files,
     student surveys, and focus groups, on the extent of reported and
     unreported incidents of sexual harassment. 

  Evaluate, on a systematic basis, the effectiveness of sexual
     harassment eradication programs on the basis of such data. 

  If the eradication programs are not proving to be effective,
     institute and evaluate different approaches to work toward
     eradicating sexual harassment.  These approaches may include
     expanding the explanation of behaviors that could constitute
     sexual harassment, issuing sexual harassment pamphlets or
     brochures, offering lower risk confrontation options, and
     varying the methods and content of training. 

   AGENCY COMMENTS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:6

DOD generally agreed with GAO's findings, conclusions, and
recommendations (see app.  I).  In commenting on the report, it
stated that it is aware of continuing problems and is comprehensively
addressing these problems at each of the academies.  It also stated
that the academies are leading institutions in establishing gender
and racial tolerant climates. 

INTRODUCTION
============================================================ Chapter 1

Sexual harassment has become an issue throughout American society,
and the U.S.  military has been no exception.  Some recent, highly
publicized cases of sexual harassment--the treatment of women during
the Persian Gulf War, the conduct of Navy officers at the 1991
Tailhook convention, and the treatment of women at the Naval and the
Air Force academies--have raised questions about how well the
Department of Defense (DOD) and the military services are dealing
with the issue.  Sexual harassment at the service academies is the
specific focus of this report. 

The proportion of men to women at the academies has remained fairly
constant over the last few years.  In the class of 1996, women
constitute 13.7 percent of the 1,240 midshipmen at the Naval Academy,
11.4 percent of the 1,188 cadets at the Military Academy, and 12.6
percent of the
1,221 cadets at the Air Force Academy. 

   BACKGROUND ON SEXUAL HARASSMENT
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:1

In 1980, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) defined
sexual harassment as a form of discrimination based on gender and a
violation of title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: 

     "Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and
     other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute
     sexual harassment when (1) submission to such conduct is made
     either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an
     individual's employment, (2) submission to or rejection of such
     conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment
     decisions affecting such individual, or (3) such conduct has the
     purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an
     individual's work performance or creating an intimidating,
     hostile, or offensive working environment."\1

The EEOC guidelines and subsequent court decisions delineated two
types of sexual harassment in work environments:  (1) quid pro quo
harassment and (2) hostile environment harassment.  Quid pro quo
harassment involves the exchange of employment benefits by a
supervisor or employer for sexual favors from a subordinate employee. 
Hostile environment harassment consists of conduct, such as verbal or
physical abuse, that creates an intimidating or offensive working
environment.  The prohibitions against sexual harassment for civilian
workers are contained in federal law and guidelines, while the
prohibitions for military personnel are contained in DOD policy
statements, directives, and instructions on equal opportunity.  Title
VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in
"terms, conditions, or privileges, of employment" because of race,
color, religion, sex, or national origin.\2 Since the early 1970s,
the courts and EEOC have interpreted the law to mean that employers
must strive to maintain a workplace environment that is free of
racial, sexual, ethnic, or religious discrimination, and employers
have been held liable when racial or ethnic harassment created a
psychologically debilitating environment.  During the 1970s, the
concept of harassment was extended to include the basis of sex. 

Sexual harassment has been reported as a problem throughout American
society, including the private sector, the federal civil service, the
military, and the academic world.  Accordingly, sexual harassment, to
the extent it occurs in the service academies, reflects the societal
problem.  A number of studies have found that more than half of the
female college students surveyed reported experiencing some form of
harassment.  The most frequently reported type of harassment
experienced at civilian colleges was sexist or derogatory remarks or
comments.\3 In addition, a 1993 Harris Poll of public school students
in grades 8 through 11, commissioned by the American Association of
University Women, showed that four of every five students have
experienced some form of sexual harassment in school.  The most
frequently experienced forms of sexual harassment were sexual
comments, jokes, gestures, or looks, followed by being touched,
grabbed, or pinched in a sexual way and being intentionally brushed
up against in a sexual way.  While the negative impact of sexual
harassment in school is significant for all students, girls suffer
greater effects than boys. 

--------------------
\1 29 C.F.R.  1604.11(a) (1992). 

\2 42 U.S.C.  2000-e2(a)(1).  Title VII does not apply to the
uniformed members of the armed services.  See Roper v.  Department of
the Army, 832 F2d 247 (2nd Cir.  1987). 

\3 A 1981 survey at Iowa State University, a 1985-86 Department of
Education survey at two large public universities, and a 1989 survey
of students at all five University of Minnesota campuses. 

      SEXUAL HARASSMENT IS NOT
      EASY TO DEFINE
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:1.1

Determining precisely what actions constitute sexual harassment has
been the subject of some debate.  While the Civil Rights Act of 1964
declared that discrimination on the basis of sex was illegal, it was
not until the 1970s that sexual harassment was cited as a form of
illegal discrimination.  In 1986, the Supreme Court, in a unanimous
decision in Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v.  Vinson, 477 U.S.  57
(1986), held that the claim of hostile environment sexual harassment
is a form of sex discrimination actionable under title VII of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964. 

While the concept of hostile environment is now accepted, consensus
regarding what constitutes such an environment and whose perspective
it should be viewed from has been problematic.  The most consistent
finding of studies aimed at defining sexual harassment has been that
men and women differ in their views regarding what constitutes
sexually harassing behavior, with women more likely to label a given
situation as harassment than men.  A 1984 article in the Harvard Law
Review noted that studies

     "show a high incidence in the workplace of conduct that working
     women perceive to be sexually harassing.  Some of these studies,
     however, also show that many of the actions women find offensive
     are perceived by men to be harmless and innocent.  This gap
     between male and female perceptions indicates a lack of social
     consensus on appropriate standards of behavior and reflects the
     ambiguity of existing social norms."\4

Examples of the different perspectives can be seen in the results of
a study reported in 1985.  Whereas 67 percent of men surveyed said
they would be complimented if they were propositioned by a woman at
work, only 17 percent of women said they would take such a
proposition as a compliment.  In addition, 84 percent of the women
considered sexual harassment to include sexual touching, but only 59
percent of the men did.\5

The different perspectives of men and women have recently been
recognized in the courts.  Historically, the standard used to
determine the existence of a hostile environment has been what the
"reasonable person" would find offensive.  However, in a 1991 case,
Ellison v.  Brady, 924 F.2d 872 (9th Cir.  1991), the 9th Circuit
Court of Appeals found that the reasonable person standard was
implicitly biased toward a male perspective.  The Court relied
instead on the "reasonable woman" standard.  Other courts have
adopted the reasonable woman standard.\6 In 1993, the Supreme Court,
in Harris v.  Forklift Systems, Inc., 507 U.S.  (1993), held that an
abusive or hostile work environment is one that a reasonable person
would find hostile or abusive and which the victim subjectively
perceives to be abusive.  It went on to hold whether an environment
is hostile or abusive can be determined only by looking at all the
circumstances, which may include the frequency of the discriminatory
conduct; its severity; whether it is physically threatening or
humiliating, or a mere offensive utterance; and whether it
unreasonably interferes with an employee's work performance. 

Defining what actions constitute sexual harassment has been no less
problematic in the military and at the academies.  A Navy study found
that the extent of sexual harassment varied depending upon how the
question was phrased.  For instance, fewer women responded
affirmatively that they had been subjected to sexual harassment than
responded affirmatively to questions on specific forms of harassing
behavior.  Similarly, after viewing videotaped role plays as part of
the Naval Academy's sexual harassment eradication program, midshipmen
disagreed about whether a given vignette did or did not constitute
sexual harassment. 

--------------------
\4 "Sexual Harassment Claims of Abusive Work Environment Under Title
VII," 97 Harvard Law Review 1449 (1984). 

\5 Barbara A.  Gutek, Sex and the Workplace (San Francisco: 
Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1985). 

\6 Robinson v.  Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc., 760 F.Supp.  1486 (M.D. 
Fla.  1991); Schneider v.  NBC News Bureau, 56 FEP 1602 (S.D.  Fla. 
1991); and Radtke v.  Everett, 56 FEP 923 (Mich.  Ct.  App.  1991). 

      EFFECTS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:1.2

Social science research over the past decade has documented that
sexual harassment can have both psychological and physical effects. 
According to the American Psychiatric Association, stress as a result
of sexual harassment is recognized as a specific, diagnosable
problem.  Among the stress effects suffered is "emotional stress,"
which covers a range of responses, including anger, fear of physical
safety, anxiety, depression, guilt, humiliation, and embarrassment. 

In 1982, the Working Women's Institute found that about 90 percent of
sexual harassment victims experienced some form of psychological
stress.  In a 1988 study of the harassment of women by their male
peers on college campuses, researchers found the following impact on
women: 

     "The cumulative effect of repeated harassment can be
     devastating.  It reinforces self-doubt and can affect a woman's
     entire academic experience.  Some women who experience the more
     severe forms of harassment may even find it difficult to trust
     or have friendships with men.  When harassment comes primarily
     from classmates in a particular field, some women may change
     classes or majors, change schools, or drop out altogether .  . 
     .  Besides these psychological effects, peer harassment can
     cause physical symptoms such as headaches, stomachaches, and
     pinched nerves in the neck .  .  .  ."\7

Physical stress of harassment victims may manifest itself as sleeping
problems, headaches, weight changes, and other physical ailments. 
The Working Women's Institute survey found that 63 percent of
questionnaire respondents who experienced harassment also experienced
physical stress problems, most frequently nausea, headaches, or
tiredness. 

--------------------
\7 Jean O'Gorman Hughes and Bernice R.  Sandler, Project on the
Status and Education of Women, Association of American Colleges, Peer
Harassment:  Hassles for Women on Campus, September 1988, pp.  1-2. 

      RESPONSES TO SEXUAL
      HARASSMENT INCIDENTS
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:1.3

Research has found that because of a long history of silence on the
subject, many women feel uncomfortable, embarrassed, or ashamed when
they talk about personal incidents of sexual harassment.  In a 1978
survey conducted by the Working Women's Institute, the women who took
action to stop the harassment found that nothing was done, they were
not taken seriously, or they suffered repercussions. 

As a consequence of these fears, women tend to respond to sexual
harassment with various coping behaviors.  In testimony during a 1991
sexual harassment case, Robinson v.  Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc., a
national consultant in the area of sexual harassment prevention
stated that typical coping methods include:  (1) denying the impact
of the event or blocking it out, (2) avoiding the workplace or the
harasser, (3) engaging in joking or other banter to defuse the
situation, (4) telling the harasser to stop, and (5) threatening to
make or actually making a complaint.  According to a 1990 study on
the use of sexual harassment grievance procedures, most victims of
harassment stated that they simply wanted to end the offending
behavior rather than punish the offender.  The goal of a coping
strategy would be to end the harassment rather than judge (and
punish, if appropriate) the offender.\8

--------------------
\8 Stephanie Riger, "Gender Dilemmas in Sexual Harassment Policies
and Procedures," American Psychologist, May 1991, pp.  497-505. 

   EEOC AND DOD PROVISIONS
   REGARDING SEXUAL HARASSMENT
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:2

EEOC provides policy guidance on preventing sexual harassment in the
workplace.  DOD provisions on sexual harassment are largely based on
this guidance.  EEOC Notice N-915-050, "Policy Guidance on Current
Issues of Sexual Harassment" (Mar.  19, 1990), states that management
must

     "take all steps necessary to prevent sexual harassment from
     occurring, such as affirmatively raising the subject, expressing
     strong disapproval, developing appropriate sanctions, informing
     employees of their right to raise and how to raise the issue of
     harassment under Title VII, and developing methods to sensitize
     all concerned."

DOD provisions regarding sexual harassment are contained in various
equal opportunity documents.  These documents include the DOD Human
Goals Charter, first issued in August 1969; DOD Directive 1350.2,
"The Department of Defense Military Equal Opportunity Program," dated
December 23, 1988; DOD Instruction 1350.3, "Affirmative Action
Planning and Assessment Process," dated February 29, 1988; and a
Secretary of Defense memorandum, "Department of Defense Strategies to
Eradicate Sexual Harassment in the Military and Civilian
Environment," dated July 12, 1991. 

The Human Goals Charter is the foundation of DOD equal opportunity
programs.  Since it was issued, it has been endorsed by each
Secretary of Defense, most recently by former Secretary of Defense
Cheney on April 17, 1990.  According to a DOD equal opportunity
official, the charter is being revised and will be submitted for
approval by the Secretary of Defense and the secretaries of the
military services once the secretaries' nominations have been
confirmed by the Senate.  The charter states: 

     "Our Nation was founded on the principle that the individual has
     infinite dignity and worth.  The Department of Defense, which
     exists to keep the Nation secure and at peace, must always be
     guided by this principle.  In all that we do, we must show
     respect for the serviceman, the servicewoman, the civilian
     employee, and family members, recognizing their individual
     needs, aspirations, and capabilities."

DOD's equal opportunity directive states that it is DOD policy to
"provide for an environment that is free from sexual harassment by
eliminating this form of discrimination in the Department of
Defense." The directive further states that it is DOD policy to
support the military equal opportunity program and to use the chain
of command to promote, support, and enforce the program.  The
directive contains a definition of sexual harassment that is
consistent with the EEOC guidelines. 

DOD's affirmative action instruction focuses on the DOD policy for
the military services to monitor and report on selected dimensions of
their personnel programs to ensure equal opportunity and fair
treatment for all service members through affirmative actions and
other initiatives.  The instruction also assigns responsibilities and
establishes minimum reporting requirements. 

In response to the findings of the 1988 Merit Systems Protection
Board survey of federal employees and the 1989 survey of DOD
employees that sexual harassment was a problem in the government and
the military, the Secretary of Defense, in a July 12, 1991,
memorandum, directed each DOD component to implement a sexual
harassment eradication program that would incorporate, at a minimum,
the following seven elements:  (1) annual policy statements; (2)
training programs for all personnel; (3) quality control mechanisms
to ensure that training is working; (4) prompt, thorough
investigations and resolutions of complaints; (5) procedures to hold
commanders, supervisors, and managers accountable for providing
guidance to personnel; (6) designation of sexual harassment as a
special interest item for DOD Inspector General inspections/visits;
and (7) accountability for compliance reflected in annual performance
ratings and fitness reports as well as possible loss of benefits and
imposition of penalties.  Annual reports are required in response to
this memorandum.  The reports are to include a record of
accomplishments as well as plans for the future. 

   SUMMARY OF REGULATIONS AT THE
   SERVICE ACADEMIES
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:3

Each academy has provisions in its disciplinary system prohibiting
harassment based on gender, religion, race, and ethnic origin.  These
prohibitions may be either explicit or implicit under standards of
behavior.  Punishments can vary from minor administrative sanctions
(such as demerits) to dismissal, depending upon the severity of the
behavior and a student's prior record. 

      NAVAL ACADEMY
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:3.1

Naval Academy regulations distinguish aggravated sexual harassment
from other forms of sexual harassment.  Aggravated sexual harassment
includes requests for sexual favors to a member of a lower class when
submission to such a request is made a condition to the receipt of
some privilege, right, or other benefit.  Such actions constitute
quid pro quo sexual harassment.  Other sexual harassment comprises
forms of harassment that are not specifically stated, regardless of
seriousness. 

      MILITARY ACADEMY
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:3.2

At the Military Academy, the regulations of the U.S.  Corps of Cadets
define sexual harassment as (1) influencing, offering to influence,
or threatening the pay or job of another person in exchange for
sexual favors and (2) deliberate or repeated offensive comments,
gestures, or physical contact of a sexual nature in a work- or
duty-related environment.  The regulations state that harassment in
any form or for any reason is unacceptable and will not be tolerated. 

      AIR FORCE ACADEMY
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:3.3

Air Force Academy definitions regarding sexual harassment are
contained in (1) Air Force Regulation 30-2 (Social Actions Program)
and (2) Air Force Cadet Wing Regulation 537-6 (Personal and
Professional Conduct). 

Air Force Regulation 30-2 provides the following definition of sexual
harassment: 

     "Unwelcomed sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and
     other verbal or physical conduct of sexual nature when: 

     "(a) submission to or rejection of such conduct is made either
     explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of a person's job,
     pay, or career, or

     "(b) submission to or rejection of such conduct by a person is
     used as a basis for career or employment decisions affecting
     that person, or

     "(c) such conduct interferes with an individual's performance or
     creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment, or

     "(d) any person in a supervisory or command position uses or
     condones implicit or explicit sexual behavior to control,
     influence or affect the career, pay, job of a military member or
     civilian employee, or

     "(e) any military member or civilian employee makes deliberate
     or repeated unwelcomed verbal comments, gestures, or physical
     contact of a sexual nature."

Air Force Cadet Wing Regulation 537-6 contains a briefer, but similar
definition.  The regulation defines sexual harassment as

     "sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal
     or physical conduct of a sexual nature if (1) such behavior is
     made explicitly or implicitly a term or condition or a person's
     job, pay, or career, or (2) submission to or rejection of such
     conduct has the purpose or effect of interfering with an
     individual's performance or creating an intimidating, hostile or
     offensive environment."

      SEXUAL HARASSMENT UNDER THE
      UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY
      JUSTICE
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:3.4

The academies also can prosecute an individual charged with sexual
harassment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  This
code applies to uniformed members of the military services, including
cadets and midshipmen.  A September 2, 1988, Secretary of Defense
memorandum to the secretaries of the military departments provides
examples of conduct which might constitute both sexual harassment and
an offense under UCMJ (see table 1.1). 

                          Table 1.1
           
             Sexual Harassment Offenses Under the
               Uniform Code of Military Justice

If the sexual           The sexual harasser     Violation
harasser:               may also be guilty of:  of:
----------------------  ----------------------  ------------
1. Threatens to         Extortion.              Article 127
influence adversely     Assault.                Article 128
the career, salary, or  Communicating a         Article 134
job of another in       threat.
exchange for sexual
favors.

2. Offers rewards for   Bribery and graft.      Article 134
sexual favors.

3. Makes sexual         Indecent, insulting,    Article 134
comments and/or         or obscene language     Article 117
gestures.               prejudicial to good     Article 89
                        order.                  Article 91
                        Provoking speech or
                        gestures.
                        Disrespect.

4. Makes sexual         Assault consummated by  Article 128
contact.                a battery.              Article 134
                        Indecent assault.       Article 120
                        Rape.

5. Engages in sexual    Dereliction of duty.    Article 92
harassment to the
detriment of job
performance.

6. Is an officer.       Conduct unbecoming an   Article 133
                        officer.

7. Is cruel to or       Cruelty and             Article 93
maltreats any person    maltreatment.
subject to his/her
orders.

8. Uses his/her         Failure to obey a       Article 92
official position to    lawful general order.
gain sexual favors or
advantages.
------------------------------------------------------------
Punishment under UCMJ usually takes one of two forms:  a trial by
court martial or commanding officer's nonjudicial punishment under
article 15.  Nonjudicial punishment is available to any commanding
officer as disciplinary punishment for minor offenses and may consist
of such punishments as restriction, confinement, forfeiture of pay,
or extra duties. 

   OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND
   METHODOLOGY
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:4

The Chairman of the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the former
Chairman of its Subcommittee on Manpower and Personnel asked us to
undertake a broad review of student issues at the military service
academies.  We have issued separate reports on academics, gender and
racial disparities, and hazing and the treatment of fourth class
cadets and midshipmen.  This report focuses on sexual harassment at
the academies.  Specifically, our objectives were to (1) determine
the extent to which sexual harassment occurred at the academies, the
forms it took, and its effects on those subjected to it and (2)
evaluate the academies' efforts to eradicate sexual harassment.  We
testified in June 1992 on the preliminary results of our review.\9

We reviewed the EEOC guidance, DOD provisions, and Department of
Education regulations relating to sexual harassment.  At the
academies, we reviewed their rules and regulations on conduct in
general and sexual harassment specifically, studies related to the
treatment of academy women and sexual harassment, and files on
disciplinary cases involving sexual harassment and sexual misconduct
related offenses.  We interviewed academy officials, faculty, and
cadets and midshipmen.  We also obtained information on sexual
harassment prevention programs at other institutions to determine
whether they had features that could be effective at the academies. 

We administered questionnaires at each of the three academies to
samples of cadets, midshipmen, and faculty and to all members of the
commandant's staff during late 1990 and early 1991.  A detailed
discussion of our survey and related methodological issues appears in
appendix II.  We reviewed the results of more recent surveys
conducted by the academies to determine whether our results were
still valid.  At each academy, we conducted several focus group
discussions with student representatives of various academy
organizations that emphasized professional interests, ethnic
interests, athletic interests, and gender interests to clarify
information obtained from our questionnaires. 

We performed our review at the Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland;
the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, Colorado; and the Military
Academy in West Point, New York. 

We requested written comments from DOD, and it generally agreed with
our findings, conclusions, and recommendations. 

We performed our review from June 1990 to September 1993 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

--------------------
\9 DOD Service Academies:  Status Report on Reviews of Student
Treatment (GAO/T-NSIAD-92-41, June 2, 1992). 

MANY ACADEMY WOMEN EXPERIENCE
SEXUAL HARASSMENT ON A RECURRING
BASIS
============================================================ Chapter 2

More than half of the academy women responding to our survey
indicated experiencing various forms of sexual harassment at least
twice a month.  The primary type of sexual harassment they
experienced was verbal.  Fewer women reported unwanted pressure for
dates or unwanted sexual advances.  Our data, as well as the results
of subsequent surveys by the academies, indicate that the academies
are a long way from achieving the Secretary of Defense's goal of "an
environment that is free from sexual harassment." Furthermore, our
review indicates that the number of sexual harassment incidents that
are formally reported understates the extent of the sexual harassment
problem. 

   ACADEMY STUDENTS EXPERIENCED
   VARIOUS FORMS OF HARASSMENT
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:1

The percentage of female academy students who reported experiencing
one or more forms of harassment\1 on a recurring basis was as
follows: 

  50 percent at the Naval Academy,

  76 percent at the Military Academy, and

  59 percent at the Air Force Academy.\2

About 90 percent of the women perceived that the harassment they
experienced was based on their gender, as opposed to race, religion,
or ethnic origin.  The most frequently reported forms of harassing
behavior were verbal.  Few women reported experiencing the quid pro
quo form of harassment.  For example, female students complained very
little about unwanted pressure for dates and unwanted sexual
advances.  The survey results were corroborated by individual
write-in comments and focus group discussions. 

The majority of men reported never having experienced harassment. 
The percentage of male academy students who reported experiencing one
or more forms of harassment on a recurring basis was as follows: 

  11 percent at the Naval Academy,

  24 percent at the Military Academy, and

  20 percent at the Air Force Academy. 

Of the men who reported experiencing recurring harassment at the
Naval Academy, 9 percent perceived that the harassment they
experienced was based on their gender, as compared to 12 percent at
the Military Academy and 15 percent at the Air Force Academy. 

Figure 2.1 shows the percentage of academy women who responded as
having experienced recurring sexual harassment for each of the 10
forms of harassment included in our survey. 

   Figure 2.1:  Percentage of
   Academy Women Reporting Having
   Experienced Sexual Harassment
   in Academic Year 1990-91

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Source:  Responses to GAO questionnaire. 

Examples of the behaviors women experienced included a full-page list
of reasons why beer is better than women appearing in an academy
humor magazine, the distribution of a former Secretary of the Navy's
statement critical of the role of women in the Navy through the
midshipmen's mail and display of the statement on dormitory bulletin
boards, and the spreading of unfounded rumors about female students'
dating upperclassmen.\3 One focus group characterized the types of
harassment as follows:  a lot of little things, such as comments
about women in their uniforms, prank phone calls, and comments from
alumni, faculty, officers, guests, and sponsors.\4 The group
indicated that derogatory comments about their gender occurred
primarily in the dormitory but also in classrooms and social
settings. 

The following write-in comments by respondents to the questionnaire
show the extent to which some male students resist the presence of
women at the academies and the cost of reporting harassment as seen
by some female students. 

     "Women don't belong here!  The majority of the women here expect
     special treatment because they are women.  They enter a world
     that has been dominated for a long time by men and they expect
     us all to get along.  It doesn't work!  .  .  .  I know a great
     number of women come here just to have a 10:1 man/woman ratio so
     they can have sex as often as they'd like .  .  .  .  The last
     thing we need is more women officers here."

     "I wish I had been born with my parents' generation before
     females destroyed this place.  The West Point I attend is
     nothing like that I read about that produced MEN like Lee,
     Eisenhower, and the many other brave SOLDIERS.  What makes them
     want to become men?  Even [though] I would never openly harass
     women, I hope they understand they are not welcome here."

     "While the academy has done a good job of bringing women into
     the academy, it seems that lately all that they have been doing
     is patting themselves on the back.  There is still a lot of
     resentment of women being here and a lot of harassment and
     sexual harassment cases that never get reported because if a
     girl complains her male classmates will resent her."

     "I am a female plebe and I know for a fact that I'd get
     reprisals for turning someone in for a [conduct] violation
     ESPECIALLY upperclassmen.  I spoke to a female upperclassman in
     my company about my team leader.  I had been feeling very
     sexually harassed by him.  She is the one who turned him in, and
     now, about a month and a half after she turned him in, I'm still
     catching all kinds of heat about it.  Very few people among the
     upperclass in my company will speak to me, and my own classmates
     treat me like a crybaby .  .  .  My team leader hates me now
     openly, and my chain of command does nothing to hide their
     feelings either.  I feel like I'm being harassed in 2 ways. 
     First, by my team leaders, secondly by everyone who knows, which
     is about 40% of my company."

--------------------
\1 Our survey included 10 forms of harassment that were derived from
previous surveys of harassment conducted among federal workers by the
Merit Systems Protection Board in 1980 and 1987 and a 1988 survey of
active duty military personnel conducted by the Defense Manpower Data
Center.  We tailored the items somewhat to the academy environments. 

\2 We asked respondents to indicate how often they experienced each
of 10 forms of harassment.  The response categories were "Never," "1
or 2 times a year," "A couple of times a semester," "A couple of
times a month," "A couple of times a week," and "Daily or almost
daily." For presentation purposes, we have combined the last three
categories into one covering "A couple of times a month or more
often," which we see as representing a recurring exposure. 

\3 Fraternization (dating between a freshman and an upperclassman) is
prohibited at the academies. 

\4 Sponsors are officer and civilian families residing near the
academies with whom students can associate informally. 

   FEWER ACADEMY FACULTY MEMBERS
   AND STAFF PERCEIVE SEXUAL
   HARASSMENT AS A PROBLEM
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:2

Compared with female students, fewer academy faculty and staff
perceived that sexual harassment was a problem.  In response to our
questions on the extent of harassment students experienced in
academic year 1989-90, the percentage of commandant's staff who
perceived that the average female student was exposed to some form of
harassment on a recurring basis was as follows: 

  41 percent at the Naval Academy,

  59 percent at the Military Academy, and

  41 percent at the Air Force Academy. 

The percentage of academy faculty who perceived that the average
woman was exposed to some form of harassment on a recurring basis was
as follows: 

  40 percent at the Naval Academy,

  35 percent at the Military Academy, and

  32 percent at the Air Force Academy. 

   ACADEMIES' OWN SURVEYS FOUND
   SEXUAL HARASSMENT
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:3

In addition to our survey, each academy has collected information, to
varying degrees, from its students regarding sexual harassment.  The
results of those surveys conducted more recently than ours indicate
that sexual harassment continues to exist at the academies.  Because
the methodologies of these studies were not consistent with our
methodology, we were not able to evaluate whether the level of sexual
harassment had changed. 

The 1993 Naval Academy's command assessment of the equal opportunity
climate indicated that about 53 percent of female students totally or
moderately agreed that sexual harassment (subtle or overt) was a
problem, compared with about 31 percent of male students. 

The Military Academy's survey of the senior class of 1993 indicated
that 80 percent of the female respondents either observed or
personally experienced sexist comments being made at movies or
sporting events.  In the last year, 52 percent of the women reported
that they had frequently heard disparaging remarks about women at
West Point from other students.  Twenty percent of the women
responded that they had experienced the situation at night, after
lights out, where a cadet entered their rooms and improperly touched
them. 

Since our survey, the Air Force Academy surveyed cadets on the
Academy's social climate in March 1992.  In describing the results of
this survey to the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the
Services, the Academy stated that

     "there were some indications of a chronic nature that the cadet
     climate may be offensive, intimidating, or threatening to women,
     if not discriminatory in some ways.  The common attitude that
     sexism or harassment exists is evident in the lower endorsement
     for women to be as effective in leadership roles, for women to
     be respected for their leadership, and for their ability to give
     constructive feedback.  Additionally, there is evidence that
     sexist jokes or demeaning remarks are fairly pervasive, and the
     superior/subordinate relationship between male and female cadets
     is more than occasionally compromised by their fraternization."

Specific results from the survey indicated that 52 percent of male
cadets heard sexist jokes or demeaning remarks about women on a daily
basis.  Seventy-eight percent of the female cadets reported the same. 

Additionally, in September and December 1992, the Air Officers
Commanding (the commissioned officers in charge of student squadrons)
conducted focus groups within their squadrons to determine the extent
of sexual harassment among cadets and awareness of human relations
issues.  During the first series of focus group discussions, cadets
raised several issues from these discussions, including the
destructive nature of the verbal harassment throughout the cadet wing
and the offensiveness (to some cadets) of adult reading material
(magazines and pictures) in dormitory rooms.  The second series of
focus group discussions found that (1) a minority of cadets were
unfamiliar with or unwilling to see the importance of human
relations, (2) more education was necessary, (3) human relations
programs needed more emphasis, (4) racial as well as gender issues
needed to be addressed, (5) clarification was needed on the perceived
issue of quotas, and (6) cadets wanted more feedback when problems
occurred to avoid rumors. 

The Air Force Academy's Ad Hoc Committee on Respect and Dignity
reported to the Superintendent in May 1993 that

     "disturbing numbers of female cadets reported to the
     Superintendent that instances of sexual assault, improper
     fondling, and sexual harassment and discrimination had occurred
     to them while at the Academy.  Only a tiny fraction of these
     instances had ever been reported.  Perhaps for that reason, male
     cadets tended to be far less aware of the extent of such
     problems than the female cadets were.  For example, a much
     larger percentage of female cadets than male cadets said they
     personally knew a cadet who had been a victim of sexual assault
     while at the Academy.  In other words, something that was
     relatively common knowledge among female cadets was far less
     well known by the males."

   SEXUAL HARASSMENT APPEARS TO BE
   UNDERREPORTED
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:4

From 1988 to 1993, students at the three academies officially
reported
107 sexual misconduct incidents, including incidents of sexual
harassment.  Our survey results suggest that the reported sexual
harassment cases represent a small fraction of the total that
actually occur.  The wide gap in the number of actual and reported
incidents is understandable given the tendency of women to deal with
harassment informally and their hesitancy to formally report an
incident.  Specifically, of the female respondents, 43 percent at the
Military Academy, 37 percent at the Naval Academy, and 53 percent at
the Air Force Academy indicated a hesitancy to report harassment for
fear of reprisal.  (See ch.  3 for a discussion of the negative
consequences associated with reporting harassment.)

Because sexual harassment may be prosecuted under various offense
categories, we reviewed all available misconduct cases filed between
June 1988 and May 1993.  The academies had identified some cases as
being within their definitions of sexual harassment (discussed in ch. 
1).  At the Naval Academy, we reviewed cases charged under the two
sexual harassment conduct codes as well as sexual misconduct cases
and cases involving possible violations of UCMJ.  Since the Military
and Air Force academies did not have specific conduct offense
categories for sexual harassment, we reviewed all available
misconduct cases, paying particular attention to cases charged under
conduct unbecoming an officer and error in judgment with major
effect.  We applied the definitions in EEOC guidance and academy
regulations and the examples used in the DOD and GAO questionnaires
to the descriptions in the cases to identify possible sexual
misconduct cases.  Table 2.1 shows the distribution, by academy, of
the 107 sexual misconduct\5 cases we identified. 

                          Table 2.1
           
              Academy Incidents Involving Sexual
              Misconduct, Academic Years 1988-93

                                     Military      Air Force
Academic year    Naval Academy        Academy        Academy
---------------  -------------  -------------  -------------
1988                         1              1              3
1989                         3              2             10
1990                         5              8             10
1991                        13              9              5
1992                         2             12              6
1993                         2              8              7
============================================================
Total                       26             40             41
------------------------------------------------------------
Our survey results indicate that the number of formally reported
cases involving sexual harassment significantly understates the
extent of the problem.  According to our survey, between 93 and 97
percent of the
1,415 women at the academies experienced some form of sexual
harassment during academic year 1991.  However, we found only 26
reported incidents of sexual misconduct during this period. 

The incidents that were formally reported tended to be more grievous
forms of sexual misconduct.  Generally, the forms of sexual
harassment included in the written responses to our questionnaire and
discussed in the focus groups were not the kind that students would
report to a formal complaint system.  For example, women reported to
us that

  it was commonplace for men to make remarks and tell jokes at meals
     or in classes;

  unchecked comments and jokes would be made about a female commander
     in drill trousers;

  harassment was a lot of little things, such as comments about women
     in their uniforms, derogatory name calling, prank phone calls,
     offensive posters, and comments from alumni, faculty, guests,
     and sponsors; and

  they were subjected to upperclassmen entering their rooms during
     study time and bothering them. 

On the other hand, examples of sexual misconduct being formally
reported more frequently are the following: 

  A male student entering a female student's room after curfew and
     making unwanted sexual advances (such as kissing, touching, or
     fondling) toward the sleeping student. 

  An upperclass male student conducting the training of an underclass
     female student in a sexually offensive manner.  For example, an
     upperclass male student ordered a freshman female student to
     stay with him after he dismissed the rest of the squad and to
     stand near him.  He then attempted to kiss her against her will. 

  A male student making various unwanted sexual advances (physical
     contact) toward a female student. 

In addition, examples of sexual misconduct being formally reported at
least once are the following: 

  A male student videotaping or watching a female student taking a
     shower. 

  A male student sexually assaulting a female student. 

  A male student raping a female student. 

  A male student making unwanted sexual advances toward an underage
     civilian female. 

  A male student exhibiting sexually suggestive behavior toward
     another male student. 

--------------------
\5 At the Naval Academy, sexual misconduct is a specific conduct
offense and refers to certain sexually related conduct, both
consensual and nonconsensual.  A conviction under this conduct
offense could result in separation from the Academy.  The term
"sexual misconduct" in this discussion is used in a more general
sense to include a range of behaviors that could be considered sexual
harassment. 

WOMEN AT THE ACADEMIES TEND TO
DEAL WITH SEXUAL HARASSMENT
INFORMALLY
============================================================ Chapter 3

Academy students reported that taking no action or avoiding the
person responsible were the least effective strategies for dealing
with harassment, while they reported that confronting the person or
reporting the incident to the chain of command were the most
effective strategies.  Further, there was general agreement that if
an incident was reported, it would be thoroughly investigated and the
offender would be appropriately disciplined.  However, there was also
general consensus that there would be negative consequences to
reporting the harassment, such as being viewed as a "crybaby," being
viewed less favorably by the student and officer chains of command,
or receiving lower military performance grades.  Consequently,
students tended to deal with sexual harassment informally if
possible. 

   ACADEMIES HAVE MANY CHANNELS
   FOR SURFACING GRIEVANCES
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:1

All the academies have a policy of encouraging students to resolve
problems at the lowest level possible, starting with confronting the
individual with whom one has a problem.  The student may also try to
resolve the problem informally by consulting with an academy
chaplain, counselor, or others outside the official chain of command. 
However, all the academies have procedures for formally reporting a
grievance to the chain of command.  In addition, the academies offer
alternative official channels.  Finally, students may make use of
external channels, such as reporting the incidents to the media or
Members of Congress. 

      INFORMAL CHANNELS
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:1.1

Students at the academies have access to a variety of means for
informally seeking advice and counseling on personal problems,
including sexual harassment.  For instance, they may consult with
chaplains, counselors (including legal advisers), friends, doctors,
nurses, mentors, sponsors, and faculty advisers.  If a student is
sensitive about keeping any discussions of problems confidential, the
chaplains and legal advisers are bound by a privileged relationship,
while others provide limited confidentiality and may report problems
to academy authorities. 

      FORMAL CHANNELS
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:1.2

If a student wishes to formally report a grievance, or if more
informal attempts at resolving the problem have failed to be
satisfactory, he or she may report the problem to the student chain
of command.  If this approach was not satisfactory, the matter could
then be reported to the officer chain of command.  All the academies
have procedures for investigating and resolving formal complaints of
sexual harassment.  In general, the complaints are handled through
the academy disciplinary systems. 

      ALTERNATIVE CHANNELS
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:1.3

Because a victim of sexual harassment may be reluctant to file a
complaint with the chain of command, the academies have established
alternative official channels for reporting sexual harassment.  The
alternative channels are unique to each academy. 

         NAVAL ACADEMY
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 3:1.3.1

The Academy Commandant established an ombudsman program in August
1990 to provide an alternative channel for reporting grievances. 
Such a program was recommended in an internal study on the
assimilation of women at the Academy.  Two commissioned officers
outside the chain of command serve as ombudsmen to assist in hearing
any problems not resolved within the chain of command.  According to
Academy officials, the ombudsmen maintain no formal records of
grievances brought before them.  The Academy also has six senior
enlisted advisers who can discuss problems with midshipmen and
provide information and advice.  Communication with neither the
ombudsmen nor the senior enlisted advisers is considered privileged
or confidential. 

Within the Office of the Inspector General of the Navy, there is a
toll-free fraud, waste, and abuse hotline that may be used for
reporting grievances.  This hotline is available to all naval
personnel, including Academy midshipmen. 

         MILITARY ACADEMY
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 3:1.3.2

The Military Academy offers three alternative channels to cadets. 
First, cadets may send electronic mail messages to the Commandant. 
Second, two noncommissioned officers outside the chain of command are
specially trained to handle harassment issues.  Third, a problem may
be reported to the Inspector General of the Military Academy, who has
conducted investigations in response to allegations concerning human
relations problems. 

         AIR FORCE ACADEMY
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 3:1.3.3

Cadets have several alternatives for reporting incidents of sexual
harassment.  First, cadets may contact the Cadet Counseling Center. 
As part of the Academy's Social Actions Program, the staff of the
Cadet Counseling Center provides professional counseling and conducts
complaint clarifications and investigations of possible equal
opportunity and treatment violations.  The Center has also employed
other strategies such as writing letters to students who have engaged
in sexually harassing behavior and mediating on behalf of students. 

Cadets also may turn to the Way of Life Committee for assistance. 
The Way of Life Committee was established about 20 years ago to
address social climate and "quality of life" issues that had a direct
impact on both enrollment and attrition rates for minority cadets. 
Since then, the Way of Life Committee has evolved into a weekly forum
that provides a sociocultural support base for those cadets who might
otherwise find it difficult to acclimate to a predominately white
setting. 

Other alternative channels available to cadets are talking to peer
counselors called specialists (a trained second-class student in the
cadet chain of command who serves as an adviser to fourth-class
cadets), contacting the commandant directly through an electronic
mail system similar to that in use at the Military Academy, or filing
a complaint with the Academy's Inspector General.  Academy officials
told us that student support is also formally provided by the newly
established Center for Character Development and by the Air Officers
Commanding.  Additionally, any academy staff member who a cadet
trusts may listen to the problem and then report it to the
appropriate agency. 

   PERCEIVED EFFECTIVENESS OF
   VARIOUS STRATEGIES FOR DEALING
   WITH HARASSMENT
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:2

Academy students responding to our survey generally considered the
strategy of confronting the harasser as the most effective, while the
more passive strategies, such as taking no action or avoiding the
person responsible, were seen as the least effective.  (See figs. 
3.1 and 3.2.) At all three academies, female students were somewhat
less likely than male students to indicate that confronting the
person responsible was likely to make things better. 

   Figure 3.1:  Perceived
   Effectiveness of the Strategy
   of Confronting the Person
   Responsible

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Source:  Responses to GAO questionnaire. 

   Figure 3.2:  Perceived
   Effectiveness of Other Personal
   Strategies for Dealing With
   Sexual Harassment

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Source:  Responses to GAO questionnaire. 

Students reported that the informal channels were somewhat effective. 
For instance, about half or more of the respondents believed that
telling a chaplain or counselor would make things better. 

Students generally perceived that using the student and officer
chains of command to formally report grievances was likely to make
things better.  (See fig.  3.3.) However, men indicated more
confidence than women in the chain of command, especially the student
chain of command. 

   Figure 3.3:  Perceived
   Effectiveness of Formal
   Reporting Channels

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Source:  Responses to GAO questionnaire. 

Students were somewhat less confident in using the alternative
official channels.  About half or fewer of the respondents saw the
alternative channels (such as reporting the harassment to the
Commandant, the Inspector General, a "hotline", or the Way of Life
Committee) as making things better.  The exceptions were the Naval
Academy's ombudsmen and the Air Force Academy's cadet specialists. 
At the Naval Academy, 78 percent of the women perceived that
reporting an incident to an ombudsman would make things better.  At
the Air Force Academy, 70 percent of the women perceived that
reporting an incident to a cadet specialist would make things better. 

The students indicated that the external channels were the least
effective option for surfacing grievances and were more likely to
make things worse.  At the Naval Academy, 94 percent of the women
believed that reporting an incident of harassment to the media would
either have no effect or make things worse, compared to 87 percent at
the Military Academy and 90 percent at the Air Force Academy. 
Similarly, 88 percent of the women at the Naval Academy believed that
reporting an incident to a Member of Congress would either have no
effect or make things worse, compared to 70 percent at the Military
Academy and 80 percent at the Air Force Academy. 

   STUDENT PERCEPTIONS OF
   CONSEQUENCES OF REPORTING
   HARASSMENT
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:3

Students saw both positive and negative consequences to reporting
harassment.  The majority of students believed that if reported,
harassment incidents would be thoroughly investigated and the
offender disciplined.  But students also saw negative consequences of
reporting, such as receiving little support from the chain of command
and peers, being viewed as a crybaby or shunned, and receiving lower
military performance grades.  Students saw as the least likely
negative consequence of reporting that the victim would be given
extra duties. 

      STUDENTS PERCEIVED THAT
      INCIDENTS WOULD BE
      THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATED AND
      THE OFFENDER DISCIPLINED
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:3.1

At each of the academies, the majority of women indicated that it was
likely or extremely likely that an incident of harassment reported to
the chain of command would be thoroughly investigated and the
offender would be appropriately disciplined (see fig.  3.4). 

   Figure 3.4:  Student
   Perceptions of Positive
   Consequences of Reporting
   Sexual Harassment

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Legend

NA = Naval Academy
MA = Military Academy
AFA = Air Force Academy

Source:  Responses to GAO questionnaire. 

However, as shown in the figure, less than half the students felt
that the victim would receive peer support.  At the Naval Academy, 31
percent of the women believed that it was likely or extremely likely
that the victim would be supported by classmates, compared to 33
percent at the Military Academy and 44 percent at the Air Force
Academy.  Similarly, at the Naval and Air Force academies, 27 percent
of the women believed that it was likely or extremely likely that the
victim would be supported by company mates/squadron mates, compared
to 34 percent at the Military Academy.  At the Air Force and Military
academies, the men and women were generally in agreement as to how
likely the positive consequences were.  At the Naval Academy, women
were less optimistic than men about the likelihood of positive
consequences from reporting harassment. 

      MANY STUDENTS ASSOCIATED
      NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES WITH
      REPORTING HARASSMENT
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:3.2

Our questionnaire asked respondents to indicate how likely the
following 10 negative consequences were if harassment were reported: 
the victim would be viewed as a crybaby, the victim would be shunned
by others, the victim would be viewed less favorably by the student
chain of command, the victim would be viewed less favorably by the
officer chain of command, the victim would receive lower military
grades, the victim would be subjected to more of the same treatment,
nothing would be done, the incident would be swept under the rug, the
victim would receive extra duties, and the victim would be
transferred.  Generally, a higher proportion of women than men saw
the negative consequences as likely or extremely likely.  (See fig. 
3.5.)

   Figure 3.5:  Student
   Perceptions of Negative
   Consequences of Reporting
   Sexual Harassment

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Legend

NA = Naval Academy
MA = Military Academy
AFA = Air Force Academy

Source:  Responses to GAO questionnaire. 

The most likely consequence of reporting harassment was that the
victim would be viewed as a crybaby.  Overall, students reporting
harassment were believed to be more likely to experience negative
consequences from their peers than from officers.  For example, at
each academy, fewer respondents believed that it was likely or
extremely likely that the victim would be viewed less favorably by
the officer chain of command than by the student chain of command. 

SEXUAL HARASSMENT CAN PRODUCE
STRESS
============================================================ Chapter 4

Our survey results indicate that sexual harassment can have
detrimental effects on cadets and midshipmen.  A correlation exists
between a student's reported exposure to sexual harassment and higher
levels of stress, and higher levels of stress were correlated with
decreased interest in staying at the academy and making the military
a career.  However, because many factors may contribute to stress, we
could not draw a direct link between harassment and decreased
interest in staying at the academy and making the military a career. 

Past studies by the Merit Systems Protection Board have suggested
that sexual harassment costs the federal government millions of
dollars each year.  In surveys of federal employees in 1980 and 1988,
the Board estimated the annual cost of sexual harassment to the
government at $189 million and $267 million, respectively.  The
estimates were based on costs related to job turnover, emotional
stress, reduced productivity, and absenteeism. 

   VICTIMS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT
   EXPERIENCED HIGHER LEVELS OF
   STRESS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 4:1

Our questionnaire included items aimed at assessing how often
respondents had experienced various psychological and physical
symptoms of stress.  On the basis of social science research, we
delineated 8 psychological stress symptoms--anger, frustration,
isolation, powerlessness, self-doubt, nervousness, depression, and
feeling that your superiors are against you--and 15 physical stress
symptoms--trouble breathing, trouble sleeping, back pains, stomach
problems, skin rash, headaches, stiffness or swelling of joints,
indigestion, fatigue quickly, trouble staying asleep, difficulty
getting up in the morning, heart racing, sweaty hands, dizziness, and
poor appetite.  These items were summed to provide scales of
psychological and physical stress.  Similarly, we summed each
respondent's answers across all 10 harassment items to construct a
measure of the amount of harassment experienced.  We transformed
these stress and harassment scales into categories of none, some, and
high.\1

Figures 4.1 and 4.2 show the relationship between the amount of
harassment experienced by academy students and the two measures of
stress. 

   Figure 4.1:  Relationship
   Between Sexual Harassment and
   Psychological Stress Among
   Academy Students

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Source:  Responses to GAO questionnaire. 

   Figure 4.2:  Relationship
   Between Sexual Harassment and
   Physical Stress Among Academy
   Students

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Source:  Responses to GAO questionnaire. 

For the students at all three academies, greater exposure to
harassment was associated with higher levels of psychological and
physical stress.  For example, figure 4.1 shows that about 40 percent
of the students at the Naval Academy whose responses to the set of
harassment questions put them in the high harassment category were
also in the high psychological stress category, compared with only
about 12 percent of students in the none harassment category and 16
percent in the some harassment category.  In terms of individual
psychological stress symptoms, we found a relationship between those
students who reported experiencing a high degree of harassment and
those who reported experiencing a high degree of feelings of
self-doubt.  Regarding the individual physical stress symptoms, there
was a relationship between those students who reported experiencing a
high degree of harassment and those who reported experiencing a high
degree of tiring quickly. 

--------------------
\1 Respondents' scores were categorized as "some" if they fell within
one standard deviation above the mean and "high" if more than one
standard deviation above the mean.  The mean was "none" since men
significantly outnumber women at each academy and very few men
indicated they experienced sexual harassment. 

   STRESS MAY INCREASE ATTRITION
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 4:2

Our survey included a question aimed at assessing how often students
think about leaving the academies.  Figure 4.3 shows that those
students at each of the academies who reported experiencing a higher
degree of psychological stress tended to think more frequently about
leaving the academy.  For example, about 40 percent of the cadets at
the Military Academy whose responses to the set of psychological
stress symptoms put them in the high stress category were also those
who often or extremely often thought of leaving the Academy.\2

   Figure 4.3:  Relationship
   Between Psychological Stress
   Experienced and Frequency of
   Thoughts About Leaving the
   Academy

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Source:  Responses to GAO questionnaire. 

--------------------
\2 Respondents' scores were categorized as "low" if they were more
than one standard deviation below the mean, "average" if they fell
within one standard deviation above or below the mean, and "high" if
they were more than one standard deviation above the mean. 

   STRESS MAY DETER SOME FROM
   MAKING THE MILITARY A CAREER
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 4:3

Academy students were asked how likely they were to make the military
a career.  Figure 4.4 shows that the greater the amount of
psychological stress experienced, the less likely the students at all
three academies were to express an intent to make the military a
career. 

   Figure 4.4:  Relationship
   Between Psychological Stress
   Experienced and Likelihood of
   Not Making the Military a
   Career

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Source:  Responses to GAO questionnaire. 

The lower career intent of those who experienced greater stress is
not merely a reflection of lower career intent when they entered the
academy.  When respondents were asked whether their motivation to
make the military a career had changed since they entered the
academy, those at all three academies who experienced greater
psychological stress were more likely to indicate that their
motivation to make the military a career had decreased (see fig. 
4.5). 

   Figure 4.5:  Relationship
   Between Psychological Stress
   Experienced and Decreased
   Career Motivation

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Source:  Responses to GAO questionnaire. 

ACADEMY ACTIONS TO ERADICATE
SEXUAL HARASSMENT
============================================================ Chapter 5

The academies generally have complied with the DOD minimum criteria
for the military services to use in developing programs to eradicate
sexual harassment.  In some areas, the academies have gone beyond
these minimum criteria.  However, the academies have not routinely
gathered data on the extent of sexual harassment over time.  This has
precluded them from evaluating how well their policies and programs
have worked.  The sexual harassment prevention programs we reviewed
at other organizations offer different approaches that may help the
academies to improve their own programs. 

   ACADEMIES HAVE GENERALLY MET
   DOD'S CRITERIA FOR EFFECTIVE
   SEXUAL HARASSMENT PREVENTION
   PROGRAMS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 5:1

In his July 1991 memorandum, the Secretary of Defense directed each
DOD component to implement a sexual harassment eradication program
that would incorporate, at a minimum, the following seven elements: 

  annual policy statements that explain sexual harassment and
     reaffirm that sexual harassment will not be tolerated;

  required training programs for all personnel, with special emphasis
     on how to identify and prevent sexual harassment;

  quality control mechanisms (for example, unit climate assessments)
     to ensure that sexual harassment training is working;

  prompt, thorough investigations and resolutions of every sexual
     harassment complaint;

  procedures to hold commanders, supervisors, and managers
     accountable for providing guidance to personnel on what
     constitutes sexual harassment and how they can seek redress if
     they believe they are victims;

  designation of sexual harassment as a special interest item for
     review in appropriate Inspector General reviews; and

  accountability for compliance reflected in annual performance
     ratings and fitness reports as well as possible loss of benefits
     and imposition of penalties. 

Annual reports are required in response to this memorandum.  The
reports are to include a record of accomplishments as well as plans
for the future. 

      ACADEMY ACTIONS TO COMPLY
      WITH DOD CRITERIA
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 5:1.1

For the most part, the three academies complied with the elements of
DOD guidance on sexual harassment prevention.  However, Inspector
General reviews have not included sexual harassment as a special
interest item. 

         ANNUAL POLICY STATEMENTS
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 5:1.1.1

The policy statements of the academies are generally the same as
those issued by their parent services.  Each academy either makes
reference to the service's language in its own statements or issues
the service policy statement with an academy transmittal memorandum. 
An examination of these policy statements revealed some common
elements but also variations in the amount of information provided. 
The common elements were references to the definition of sexual
harassment, a statement that sexual harassment will not be tolerated,
a provision concerning the responsibility of commanders and
supervisors in dealing with and eliminating sexual harassment, and
some information about ways to deal with sexual harassment. 

The policy statements varied in the information provided about formal
and informal avenues of dealing with sexual harassment, in references
to the possible consequences of sexually harassing someone, and in
references to education and training.  For example, the Navy's policy
statement, which was disseminated throughout the Naval Academy,
included a reference to an annual training requirement for all Navy
personnel.  The policy statement of the Military Academy also
contained a reference to training, but the Air Force Academy's policy
statement did not. 

         TRAINING PROGRAMS
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 5:1.1.2

Each academy provided sexual harassment prevention training to
students either as part of leadership courses or in human
relations/equal opportunity courses.  This training covered such
topics as values, prejudices, stereotypes, and discrimination.  In
addition, the Naval Academy conducted 1 day of training specifically
on sexual harassment in September 1992.  The Naval and Military
academies' training offered expanded explanations of the types of
behavior that constitute sexual harassment, while the Air Force
Academy's training provided the limited explanation contained in Air
Force Regulation 30-2, as well as language referring to quid pro quo
and hostile environment situations. 

         QUALITY CONTROL
         MECHANISMS
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 5:1.1.3

Although the academies had each taken some steps to evaluate their
equal opportunity climate, it is not clear that the results of the
evaluations were linked to the effectiveness of their training
programs.  Since August 1990, the Naval Academy has evaluated its
training program through annual command assessment reviews that are
part of its equal opportunity program.  The reviews made general
recommendations about the need to continue sexual harassment
education, emphasizing that information on the definition, examples
of behavior, and procedures to follow should be included.  In the
fall of 1992, the Naval Academy conducted sexual harassment training
that included these elements. 

In February 1992, the Military Academy submitted a report on the
integration and performance of women at West Point to the Defense
Advisory Committee on Women in the Services.  The report made
reference to the results of several years of annual surveys
administered to seniors that included questions on the integration of
women, sexual harassment, and other equal opportunity issues.  The
report also provided information on the extent of human relations
training cadets received.  However, the report did not link the
survey results to the effectiveness of training.  In addition, in the
fall of 1993, the Military Academy's Inspector General began
conducting an equal opportunity climate assessment at the Academy. 
According to Academy officials, the assessment has been expanded to
include students. 

At the Air Force Academy, there have been two efforts involving a
survey or interviews of cadets and a discussion of human relations
training.  In May 1992, the Academy submitted a report to the Defense
Advisory Committee on Women in the Services that referred to the
March 1992 survey on cadet attitudes and behaviors, including sexual
harassment (the survey results are discussed in ch.  2).  The report
noted that the type and magnitude of problems revealed by the survey
could be directly managed with creative forms of education and proper
role models.  However, while the report described the human relations
core curriculum, it did not link the survey results to the training
program. 

In early 1993, at the Academy's request, the Defense Equal
Opportunity Management Institute assessed the equal opportunity and
treatment/human relations training programs at the Academy.  The
Institute assessed the "human relations climate as good, even though
personal interviews (with cadets) revealed that sexist and racist
attitudes/behaviors and sexual harassment exist in the cadet
environment." The Institute raised concerns about the development and
presentation of the human relations training lessons.  Specifically,
it noted: 

     "All of the lessons contain biases and often focus attention on
     women and minorities.  This constant focus on minorities and
     women could create the perception that this training is
     specifically for majority members to learn about minority and
     women problems .  .  .  .  Additionally, cadets stated during
     personal interviews that human relations presentations are not
     serious and are conducted in a joking manner."

In its report to the Academy, the Institute made several specific
recommendations regarding education and training, including one to
establish a requirement for periodic reviews of lessons to keep them
current, accurate, and applicable.  These recommendations were based
on interviews with cadets and staff and a review of lesson plans. 
According to Academy officials, the introductory human relations
lesson and the instructional approach used were significantly revised
during the summer of 1993.  Through an experiential approach, the
exercise is aimed at allowing cadets to feel the effects of either
enjoying special favor or being totally disregarded, both forms of
discrimination.  The training includes viewing a video, followed by
class discussion, and presents human relations in a leadership
context.  Institute personnel have conducted training workshops on
equal opportunity policies and provided facilitator training at the
Academy. 

         COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION
         AND RESOLUTION
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 5:1.1.4

Each academy has a process for investigating and resolving formal
sexual harassment complaints, usually through the disciplinary
system.  In addition to its disciplinary system, the Air Force
Academy has a Social Actions program to deal with equal opportunity
issues.  However, the Defense Equal Opportunity Management
Institute's 1993 review at the Air Force Academy found that the
Social Actions program was not consistent with Air Force-wide social
actions programs.  The Academy's Social Actions Office is authorized
only to clarify the circumstances surrounding complaints and to make
recommendations to commanders as to whether an inquiry or
investigation should be conducted.  According to the Institute, "A
majority of the cadets interviewed perceived Social Actions as a
threat and disciplinary tool rather than a proactive agency for
helping individuals.  They said they were very hesitant to use the
program." In response to the Institute's recommendations, Academy
officials told us they plan to assign the responsibility for human
relations to the newly established Center for Character Development
in order to address the student perception.  The Center was created
to address the internalization of core values by cadets with the goal
of making human respect and dignity, moral and ethical development,
and honorable conduct standard throughout the Academy. 

         ACCOUNTABILITY OF
         COMMANDERS AND
         SUPERVISORS
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 5:1.1.5

The accountability of commanders and supervisors is discussed in the
policy statements of all three academies.  The policy statements make
reference to the role of commanders and supervisors and the
procedures for ensuring that sexual harassment is prevented and
eliminated.  The Naval and Air Force academies' policy statements
include language prohibiting commanders and supervisors from
condoning sexual harassment.  They also refer to the responsibility
of commanders and supervisors to take action to ensure that the
recipient of sexual harassment is not subsequently the victim of
reprisal or retaliation. 

         INSPECTOR GENERAL REVIEWS
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 5:1.1.6

As of September 1993, no inspector general inspections that included
sexual harassment prevention and education as a special interest item
had been conducted at any of the three academies.  The DOD Inspector
General has been conducting inspections that included sexual
harassment prevention as a special interest item since early 1992. 
However, since the DOD Inspector General generally conducts
inspections of only DOD-wide agencies, it has not conducted an
inspection of the academies.  The military service inspectors
general, which would be the appropriate agencies to inspect the
academies, have not conducted inspections of the academies that
included sexual harassment as a special interest item. 

The Naval Inspector General, by regulation, has designated sexual
harassment prevention and education as a special interest item for
command inspections.  As part of a 3-year cycle of inspecting the
three major Navy educational institutions,\1 the Inspector General
has scheduled an inspection of the Naval Academy for late 1994. 

The Army Inspector General has designated sexual harassment as an
item of interest and further described it as one of seven significant
areas of Army concern.  According to an Inspector General official,
the office has not conducted an inspection of the Military Academy
within the last 3 years. 

As of September 16, 1993, the Air Force Inspector General had
designated sexual harassment prevention and education as a special
interest item for review during inspections.  At this time, the Air
Force Inspection Agency has scheduled a management inspection of the
Air Force Academy for 1995. 

--------------------
\1 The Naval Academy, the Naval Postgraduate School, and the Naval
War College are the Navy's major educational institutions. 

         PERFORMANCE RATINGS AND
         FITNESS REPORTS
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 5:1.1.7

The military services hold their personnel accountable for compliance
with DOD sexual harassment policy in annual performance ratings and
fitness reports.  The applicable category on the personnel evaluation
form is support of equal opportunity for the Navy and the Army and
leadership skills for the Air Force.  The academies use the service
personnel evaluation forms in evaluating personnel assigned to the
academies.  Also, the academies use a form similar to the service
form to evaluate student performance. 

   THE ACADEMIES HAVE TAKEN
   ADDITIONAL STEPS TO DEAL WITH
   SEXUAL HARASSMENT, BUT PROGRAM
   EVALUATION EFFORTS LACK
   SYSTEMATIC APPROACH
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 5:2

The academies have taken a number of actions regarding their sexual
harassment prevention and education programs that go beyond the seven
minimum elements outlined in the 1991 DOD memorandum.  The additional
steps cover tracking and monitoring sexual harassment incidents,
establishing sexual harassment hotlines, providing counseling support
networks, employing lessons learned from actual sexual harassment
incidents in training situations, conducting student surveys and
discussions on sexual harassment and sexual misconduct, providing
training on fraternization, teaching students how to write a letter
to a harasser to stop the offensive behavior, offering training on
chill in the classroom\2 and date-rape, and making various other
institutional changes in dealing with human relations concerns. 
However, none of the academies has developed usable trend data to
assess the effectiveness of its sexual harassment eradication
program.  The Military and Air Force academies, in particular, have
not conducted routine, systematic program evaluations. 

--------------------
\2 The Military Academy defines a "chilly" classroom as an atmosphere
that alienates any student group from the learning process.  The
Association of American Colleges describes a chilly classroom climate
as a learning climate that subtly or overtly communicates different
expectations for women than for men. 

      ADDITIONAL STEPS ACADEMIES
      HAVE TAKEN
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 5:2.1

The disciplinary system of each academy permits the tracking and
reporting of certain categories of misconduct.  The Naval Academy's
disciplinary system allows the tracking specifically of reported
incidents of sexual harassment, whereas the Military and Air Force
academies' systems allow tracking by general offense codes, such as
conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman/gentlewoman or error in
judgment.  The cases tracked within each academy's disciplinary
system do not include all cases that originate outside the system,
such as cases initiated by another investigative entity. 

Additionally, as part of the Command Managed Equal Opportunity
program, the Naval Academy has begun maintaining a log of all
informally resolved, in-company complaints of harassment or denial of
equal opportunity.  According to Academy officials, the logs will be
used to review the frequency and seriousness of complaints being made
that would not reach a level requiring formal conduct action. 

Two of the academies have established advice/counseling hotlines.  In
December 1992, the Navy established a toll-free sexual harassment
advice/counseling hotline.  The Naval Academy publicized the Navy
hotline in daily printed schedules of Academy events.  In 1988, the
Air Force Academy established a rape crisis hotline, staffed by a
commissioned officer.  In February 1993, the hotline was renamed the
sexual assault hotline, and it is now staffed by a nurse at the
Academy hospital.  Unlike the Navy hotline, the Air Force Academy
hotline was established to deal specifically with rape and sexual
assault, but not to provide advice or counseling regarding sexual
harassment.  The Military Academy does not have a hotline for cadets. 

A third step the academies have taken is setting up counseling
support networks.  Each academy provides counseling support through
student counseling centers and chaplains.  The centers are staffed by
trained psychologists.  Generally, students seeking such counseling
are free to schedule an appointment during a free period in their
schedules.  Counselors are able to provide the student with limited
confidentiality.  Chaplains also provide counseling support and are
able to provide full confidentiality. 

Another action involves the practice of employing lessons learned
from actual human relations incidents in training situations.  In
conducting core values training in January 1993,\3 the Naval Academy
modified the Navy version of the training and included some case
examples based on Academy incidents.  The Air Force Academy recently
initiated a similar approach in human relations education.  Drawing
from an earlier practice of using "Cadet X" letters for honor
education,\4 the Academy developed Cadet X letters for human
relations problems.  According to the 1993 report by the Ad Hoc
Committee on Respect and Dignity, "this can be an extremely useful
mechanism for educating cadets about problem behavior as well as
increasing awareness of the actual disposition of incidents."

According to Naval Academy officials, in August 1993, the Commandant
of Midshipmen met with more than 500 female students to conduct an
on-the-spot survey on sexual harassment and sexual misconduct.  He
tabulated the survey results and discussed the results with the
women.  The Commandant later met with male students to discuss the
women's survey results, solicit questions, and encourage further
discussion.  Another action taken by the Naval Academy was to conduct
training for all students on fraternization in the fall of 1993. 

The Military Academy is providing training to second class (junior)
cadets on writing a structured letter to the harasser.  Such letters
are designed to describe the incident, how the victim felt about what
happened, and what the victim wants to happen to resolve the matter. 
The Military Academy also offers two additional programs, Chill in
the Classroom and a Date-Rape Psychodrama, which Academy officials
characterized as trendsetters in the field of gender integration. 
Academy officials said they are continually being sought out by other
institutions of higher learning for advice and counsel regarding
gender integration issues. 

Air Force Academy officials said they have instituted changes in how
the Academy addresses human relations concerns.  These changes
include focus groups with nonattribution that allow for the free
cross flow of information between students and staff; informal chats
between Academy senior leadership and students; increased student
involvement in human relations education and the adjudication of
human relations concerns; teams to deal with issues identified in
past surveys and focus groups; and increased efforts to provide
timely and meaningful feedback to students on human relations issues. 

--------------------
\3 This training course is designed to teach the Navy's core values
of honor, commitment, and courage to all Navy and Marine Corps
personnel. 

\4 These letters are summaries of actual honor violations that are
used for training. 

      ACADEMIES HAVE NOT EVALUATED
      THEIR SEXUAL HARASSMENT
      ERADICATION PROGRAMS IN A
      SYSTEMATIC MANNER
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 5:2.2

As discussed previously, the academies have, to varying degrees,
evaluated their sexual harassment eradication programs.  However,
their evaluations have not been systematic and have not ensured that
data are comparable from year to year.  Without trend data, the
academies have no way of knowing whether the level of sexual
harassment is decreasing. 

Although a formal program evaluation is not part of the DOD criteria
for sexual harassment eradication programs, evaluations provide
feedback from the environment and are a basic tool for gauging
progress.\5 Evaluations may be undertaken for a variety of reasons: 
to judge the worth of ongoing programs and to estimate the usefulness
of attempts to improve them, to assess the utility of innovative
programs and initiatives, to increase the effectiveness of program
management and administration, and to meet various accountability
requirements. 

Since 1990, the Naval Academy has conducted three annual command
assessments to evaluate its equal opportunity climate (which includes
identifying and resolving equal opportunity/sexual harassment
problems and concerns).  According to Academy instructions, the
assessment is to focus on the treatment and achievements of
individuals, the overall effectiveness of the equal opportunity
program, and follow-up actions on previously identified equal
opportunity issues.  The assessments have involved the collection of
academic, military, physical education, and conduct data, including
data from surveys and interviews of students.  The assessments have
concluded with reports to the Commandant, consisting of a summary of
the findings, conclusions, and recommendations for changes in the
program.  However, the Academy has had difficulty compiling the data
needed for these assessments, and the data developed for each
assessment cannot be readily compared to analyze trends.  Comparing
the data is difficult in part because different teams have conducted
each assessment, and the team that conducted the most recent
assessment had difficulty determining the source and understanding
the significance of data collected from the previous two assessments. 

Although the Military and Air Force academies have evaluated elements
of their equal opportunity programs, their efforts have been less
focused and systematic than the approach taken by the Naval Academy. 
The efforts of the Military Academy to evaluate the effectiveness of
its equal opportunity program have largely consisted of including
several questions relating to the program in a survey administered
annually to seniors.  Beginning in 1989, the survey included
questions on sexual harassment, integration of women and minorities,
and other human relations topics.  Since then, however, some of the
sexual harassment questions in the survey have been reworded or
dropped, hindering the comparison of responses across the years. 
Also, by surveying only seniors, the Academy missed the experience of
three-quarters of the student body each year.  The Academy official
at the office responsible for administering these surveys knew of no
documented actions taken as a result of the survey responses. 

Since the spring of 1992, the Air Force Academy has taken several
steps toward evaluating its equal opportunity program.  In March
1992, the Academy administered a climate survey on attitudes and
behaviors toward sexual harassment and racial discrimination to 3,900
of its students.  In February and March 1993, the Defense Equal
Opportunity Management Institute evaluated the human relations
program at the Academy and made recommendations to improve it.  In
February 1993, prompted by a female cadet's allegations that she had
been sexually assaulted, the Superintendent established the Ad Hoc
Committee on Respect and Dignity.  Focus groups were held to discuss
the human relations climate at the Academy, and data were collected
through student and staff questionnaires.  On May 20, 1993, the
committee issued a report exploring human relations issues at the
Academy and recommending major initiatives to correct the
deficiencies it discovered.  These recent steps show that the Academy
is taking a hard look at its human relations climate.  However, these
actions appear sporadic, rather than part of a systematic evaluation
of all elements of the Academy's equal opportunity program. 

As of November 1993, Air Force Academy officials informed us that
they were considering a proposal to establish an office for
institutional assessment reporting directly to the Superintendent. 
If established, such an office would combine institutional quality
initiatives and assessment efforts into a single office. 

--------------------
\5 Department of Education regulations (34 C.F.R.  sec.  106.3),
although not applicable to the service academies, require that "Each
recipient education institution shall, within one year of the
effective date of this part .  .  .  evaluate .  .  .  its current
policies and practices and the effects thereof concerning
.  .  .  the treatment of students .  .  ."

   OTHER OPTIONS FOR SEXUAL
   HARASSMENT PREVENTION PROGRAMS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 5:3

The increased attention to the issue of sexual harassment over the
past few years has generated additional ideas from a variety of
sources on how to improve programs aimed at preventing or dealing
with harassment.  During our review, we identified approaches that
might prove effective at the academies.  Specifically, these
approaches are (1) expanding the explanation of the range of
behaviors that could be considered appropriate, questionable,
inappropriate, or sexual harassment; (2) publicizing sexual
harassment policy and procedures through student and staff handbooks
and pamphlets; (3) suggesting various personal strategies for
informal resolution, such as approaching the offender with a friend,
roommate, or adviser; and (4) experimenting with new approaches and
topics for sexual harassment training. 

Marine Corps actions provide an example of how new training
approaches can be incorporated.  In 1992, the Corps' sexual
harassment elimination training was revised to include an expanded
explanation of potentially harassing or unacceptable behaviors.  The
course contained a discussion of using a traffic light to classify
behaviors.  The green was unoffensive behavior, the red was offensive
behavior in any circumstance, and the yellow was behavior that most
people would find unacceptable and should be avoided.  Specific
examples of behaviors in each color zone were presented.  This
approach was included in a January 1993 Secretary of the Navy
instruction on Navy policy on sexual harassment. 

The American Council on Education's sexual harassment guidelines
noted that brochures describing what kinds of behavior constitute
sexual harassment and what the person who is harassed should do about
it have been used very successfully on a number of college campuses. 
Although the academies have no plans to publish such brochures, two
services plan to do so.  The Navy plans to issue pamphlets explaining
the complaint resolution system and the investigation and complaint
procedures.  The Army has plans to publish a pamphlet on sexual
harassment. 

Researchers on sexual harassment have offered various personal
strategies for dealing with sexual harassment.\6 Among these options
were the writing of a structured letter, described earlier as
outlined in the Military Academy sexual harassment training course. 
Keeping a diary was another option similar to writing the structured
letter in that both options provided documentation of the incident(s)
and the victim's feelings about it.  They had the double benefit of
allowing the victim to put the feelings down on paper (an act that
may provide some relief) and providing legal evidence if needed. 
Another option was a person a victim could consult with in confidence
without having to take any further action, if so desired.  Such a
person could act as a third party in helping the victim and the
harasser resolve the issue or in accompanying the victim when talking
with the harasser.  This option is particularly useful because it
helps people of unequal rank to save face. 

A 1992 assessment of the U.S.  Coast Guard Academy recommended that
the Academy modify its approach to training about sexual harassment
to move away from large lectures about the topic.  Instead, the
report suggested the Academy train human relations representatives to
work in small groups and use videotapes to explore case situations. 
The report recommended that, as part of the small group training
sessions, the Academy employ both men and women in role-playing
situations designed to illustrate the types of situations that are
off-limits, ambiguous, permissible under certain situations, and
permissible at all times.  In terms of the training content, the
report recommended that the Academy present the training in the
context of understanding how sexual harassment or discrimination
affects working conditions, environments, and the quality of the
leadership that future leaders will provide. 

According to Academy officials, as of the spring of 1991, the Air
Force Academy has modified its human relations training in the
direction of smaller class sizes to increase classroom participation. 
In the spring of 1993, cadet human relations training included films,
developed by the Academy, depicting scenarios for use in discussions
between students or between students and facilitators.  Academy
officials also have told us that they are bringing in speakers as
part of the leadership series to address human relations and
character development issues. 

--------------------
\6 Mary P.  Rowe, "Dealing with Sexual Harassment," Harvard Business
Review, Vol.  59, No.  3:  pp.  1-9, May-June 1981; Mary P.  Rowe,
"Helping People Help Themselves:  An ADR Option for Interpersonal
Conflict," Negotiation Journal, pp.  239-48, July 1990; Mary P. 
Rowe, "The Ombudsman's Role in a Dispute Resolution System,"
Negotiation Journal, pp.  353-61, October 1991; Susan L.  Webb, Step
Forward:  Sexual Harassment in the Workplace:  What You Need To Know! 
(Mastermedia:  New York, New York, 1991); Michele A.  Paludi, editor,
Ivory Power:  Sexual Harassment on Campus (State University of New
York Press:  Albany, New York, 1990); The National Council for
Research on Women, Sexual Harassment:  Research and Resources
(National Council for Research on Women:  New York, New York, 1991);
American Council on Education, Sexual Harassment on Campus:  A Policy
and Program of Deterrence (American Council on Education Publications
Department
SH:  Washington, District of Columbia, 1992); and the Princeton
Economic Research, Inc.'s Recommendations Related to the Culture and
Climate Assessment of the U.S.  Coast Guard Academy, July 1992. 

   CONCLUSIONS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 5:4

The data being collected by the academies is not adequate to judge
the progress they are making in eradicating sexual harassment.  For
example, the Military Academy is not gathering data from the total
population (only senior cadets) and is not asking similar questions
from year to year so that comparisons can be made.  The Air Force
Academy's recent steps focused separately on certain elements of its
program, but did not address all aspects of its program
systematically.  The Naval Academy has conducted three climate
assessments, but the data collected in these efforts cannot be
readily compared across time. 

Without trend data, the academies cannot effectively evaluate their
sexual harassment programs, including those efforts to deter the
harassment from occurring in the first place.  The principal
objective of such evaluations should be to assess the extent to which
specific academy efforts are contributing to the overall goal of
eliminating sexual harassment.  However, without knowing whether
sexual harassment has been declining, the academies will not be able
to assess the effectiveness of their programs or to decide whether to
continue existing programs, restructure them, or institute new ones. 
We believe that with little additional investment, the academies
should be able to collect and analyze relevant data. 

   RECOMMENDATIONS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 5:5

To better achieve DOD's goal of a sexual harassment-free environment,
we recommend that the academy superintendents take the following
actions: 

  Gather and analyze data, through routine reviews of case files,
     student surveys, and focus groups, on the extent of reported and
     unreported incidents of sexual harassment. 

  Evaluate, on a systematic basis, the effectiveness of sexual
     harassment eradication programs on the basis of such data. 

  If the eradication programs do not prove to be effective, institute
     and evaluate new approaches to work toward eradicating sexual
     harassment.  These approaches may include expanding the
     explanation of behaviors that could constitute sexual
     harassment, issuing sexual harassment pamphlets or brochures,
     offering lower risk confrontation options, and varying the
     methods and content of training. 

   AGENCY COMMENTS
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 5:6

In commenting on our report, DOD officials generally agreed with our
findings, conclusions, and recommendations.  They stated that DOD is
aware of continuing problems and is comprehensively addressing these
problems at each of the academies.  They also stated that the service
academies are leading institutions in establishing gender and racial
tolerant climates.  On the basis of discussions with agency
officials, we have incorporated their comments where appropriate. 

(See figure in printed edition.)Appendix I
COMMENTS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE
============================================================ Chapter 5

DESCRIPTION OF QUESTIONNAIRE
METHODOLOGY
========================================================== Appendix II

The purpose of this appendix is to describe the methodology we used
in developing our questionnaire, our sampling approach, the response
rates, the weighting of the data, the processing of completed
questionnaires, the sampling error, and other methodological issues. 

   QUESTIONNAIRE DEVELOPMENT
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1

Questionnaire items were developed to address the full scope of our
review, which included other issues besides sexual harassment.  Our
initial questionnaire was developed, on the basis of interviews and a
review of previous internal and external studies of the academies,
for administration to Naval Academy midshipmen.  In addition, two
separate questionnaires were developed for administration to academy
faculty members and to the commandant's staff, chaplains, and
counselors. 

We pretested the Naval Academy questionnaire with a diverse group of
midshipmen, representing different classes, genders, and race.  The
questionnaires then went through extensive reviews, including reviews
by (1) internal Naval Academy research personnel, (2) the research
staff of the Navy's study group on the treatment of women, (3) the
Defense Advisory Commission on Women in the Services, and (4) our
consultants familiar with the academies. 

The Naval Academy questionnaires were subsequently modified to apply
to the Military Academy and the Air Force Academy.  Questionnaire
items were reviewed by the institutional research and commandant's
staffs at each academy to modify the terminology to apply to their
academy, eliminate questions or response items that did not apply,
and add questions or response items to address issues unique to their
academy.  The modified questionnaires were pretested at the Military
and Air Force academies among groups of six to eight cadets,
including women and minorities, and members from all four classes. 
We used the same pretest procedures as we had at the Naval Academy. 

   SAMPLING METHODOLOGY
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:2

To ensure an adequate number of women and minorities would be
included, we used a stratified random sample design that would allow
us to oversample those two groups.  Randomization was accomplished by
using the last digit of the social security number for selection.\1
We selected one final digit for all cadets and midshipmen and an
additional final digit for women and minority males, aimed at
producing a sample of about 10 percent of white males, 20 percent of
females, and 20 percent of minority males. 

For faculty members, we used a simple random sample design, using the
last digit of the social security number to select a target sample of
about 20 percent at each academy. 

Because of their limited numbers, we targeted the entire population
of the commandant's staff officers overseeing the student units,
chaplains, and counselors at each academy rather than sampling. 

--------------------
\1 The last four digits of social security numbers are essentially a
random field based on the order in which individual social security
offices process the applications they receive.  Selecting one final
digit could be expected to yield a sample of about 10 percent. 

   QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE RATES
   AND WEIGHTING OF DATA
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:3

The questionnaires were administered to Naval Academy midshipmen in
December 1990 and to cadets at the Military and Air Force academies
in March 1991.  Those selected for the sample were notified through
academy channels to report to rooms designated for the questionnaire
administration.  The questionnaires were administered by our staff
during what would otherwise be free time for the respondents. 
Respondents were assured of anonymity and attendance was not taken at
the survey administration. 

Completed questionnaires were received from 527 Naval Academy
midshipmen (a response rate of about 84 percent), 469 Military
Academy cadets (a response rate of about 86 percent), and 493 Air
Force Academy cadets (a response rate of about 91 percent). 

Since we oversampled females and minorities, we needed to apply
weights to the responses to obtain population estimates.  Raw weights
were computed by dividing the number of subgroup responses into the
subgroup population.  However, applying raw weights would
artificially increase the number of cases and inflate tests of
statistical significance.  To avoid inflated tests of significance,
we used the raw weights to compute constrained weights, which when
applied to the data make the number of weighted cases equal the
number of unweighted cases.\2 Weights applied in this manner yield
data that represent the total population without distorting
significance tests. 

For the faculty, the questionnaires were administered in person by
our staff at the Naval and Military academies and through the mail at
the Air Force Academy.  Questionnaires were completed by 122 faculty
members (19 percent of the population) at the Naval Academy, 132 (26
percent of the population) at the Military Academy, and 154 (27
percent of the population) at the Air Force Academy. 

For the Commandant's staff, the questionnaires were administered in
person by our staff at the Naval and Military academies and through
the mail at the Air Force Academy.  Questionnaires were completed by
49 staff members (94 percent of the population) at the Naval Academy,
61 (95 percent of the population) at the Military Academy, and 65 (86
percent of the population) at the Air Force Academy. 

--------------------
\2 SPSS-X User's Guide, 3rd edition, Chicago, IL:  SPSS, Inc., 1988. 

   PROCESSING OF COMPLETED
   QUESTIONNAIRES
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:4

We reviewed and verified each returned questionnaire.  Responses were
double-keyed, creating two files for each completed questionnaire. 
The two files were then compared for consistency and corrections made
as necessary.  We then checked the overall accuracy of the keyed data
by verifying every tenth record back to the responses in the
completed questionnaire.  None of the nine sets of questionnaires
reached an error level of 1 percent. 

   SAMPLING ERROR
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5

Since we surveyed samples of cadets, midshipmen, and faculty rather
than the entire populations, the results we obtained are subject to
some degree of uncertainty, or sampling error.  Sampling errors
represent the expected difference between our sample results and the
results we would have obtained had we surveyed the entire
populations. 

On the basis of our response rates, we estimate that our results can
be generalized to the cadet and midshipman populations at the
95-percent confidence level with a maximum sampling error of plus or
minus 4.3 percent at the Air Force Academy, 4.4 percent at the
Military Academy, and 4.1 percent at the Naval Academy. 

For the academy faculties, we estimate that the results can be
generalized to the faculty populations at the 95-percent confidence
level with a maximum sampling error of plus or minus 7 percent at the
Air Force Academy, 7.8 percent at the Military Academy, and 8.4
percent at the Naval Academy. 

The sampling errors for various subgroups for which data are cited in
this report appear in table II.1.  The decimal figures in the table
show the sampling errors that correspond to various percentages of
respondents selecting a particular response alternative.  For
example, if we state that 10 percent of Naval Academy midshipmen
responded in a given way, the table shows a sampling error of 2.7
percent corresponding to "all midshipmen" and a 10 to 90 percent
response split.  This means that we can be 95-percent confident that
the percentage of midshipmen responding that way in the population
would be within 10 percent plus or minus 2.7 percent, or between 7.3
and 12.7 percent. 

                                              Table II.1
                               
                                 Sampling Errors for Various Academy
                                              Subgroups

                Populati           05/   10/   15/   20/                                   45/   50/
Subgroup              on  Sample    95    90    85    80   25/75   30/70   35/65   40/60    55    50
--------------  --------  ------  ----  ----  ----  ----  ------  ------  ------  ------  ----  ----
Naval Academy
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All midshipmen     4,391     527   2.2   2.7   3.0   3.3     3.6     3.8     3.9     4.0   4.1   4.1
Men                3,980     434   2.4   3.0   3.3   3.7     4.0     4.2     4.4     4.5   4.5   4.6
Women                411      93   5.9   6.9   7.8   8.5     8.8     8.8     9.1     9.3   9.5   9.5
Faculty              630     122   5.2   6.0   6.8   7.3     7.8     7.8     8.1     8.3   8.4   8.4

Military Academy
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All cadets         4,296     469   2.3   2.9   3.2   3.5     3.8     4.0     4.2     4.3   4.4   4.4
Men                3,842     393   2.5   3.2   3.7   3.9     4.2     4.4     4.6     4.7   4.8   4.8
Women                454      76   7.0   8.4   9.1   9.8    10.3    10.6    10.5    10.8  10.9  11.0
Faculty              512     132   4.6   5.5   6.3   6.7     7.1     7.2     7.4     7.6   7.7   7.8

Air Force Academy
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All cadets         4,354     493   2.2   2.8   3.1   3.4     3.7     3.9     4.1     4.2   4.2   4.3
Men                3,804     379   2.6   3.3   3.8   4.0     4.3     4.5     4.7     4.8   4.9   4.9
Women                550     114   5.2   6.2   7.0   7.6     8.0     8.3     8.3     8.5   8.6   8.6
Faculty              565     154   4.0   5.0   5.6   6.0     6.4     6.4     6.7     6.9   7.0   7.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6

      SCALE DEVELOPMENT
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:6.1

Our questionnaire included a set of 10 items aimed at determining the
extent to which cadets and midshipmen personally experienced various
types of harassment.  These items were developed based on a review of
previous studies of harassment in other environments such as civil
service and the military, as well as discussions with academy
students and officials.  A scale measuring the extent of harassment
experience was created by summing cadet and midshipmen responses
across all 10 forms of treatment.  This scale was highly skewed since
most males reported no exposure to any of the 10 forms.  The
reliability of the scale was tested using Cronbach's coefficient
alpha, which ranged from 0.86 to 0.89 for the three academies. 

Our questionnaire also included items aimed at assessing how often
respondents experienced various physical and psychological symptoms
of stress.  These items were adapted from sets of somatic complaint
and similar items used in various studies as indicators of stress and
mental health.\3 We constructed scales of physical and psychological
stress by summing, respectively, the responses to 15 physical symptom
items and 8 psychological symptom items.  These summed stress scales
had high internal consistency (coefficient alpha ranging from 0.83 to
0.85 for the physical stress symptom scale and was 0.88 for the
psychological stress symptom scale at the three academies).  Both
scales approximated a normal distribution. 

We transformed these stress scale scores into categories of low,
average, and high.  The transformation assigned respondents scoring
between one standard deviation above and below the mean to the
category of "average." In a normal distribution, this typically
accounts for slightly over two-thirds of the cases.  Scores more than
one standard deviation below the mean were assigned to the "low"
category, and those more than one standard deviation above the mean
were assigned to the "high" category. 

--------------------
\3 G.  Gurin, J.  Veroff, and S.  Feld, Americans View Their Mental
Health (New York:  Basic Books, Inc., 1960); T.S.  Langner,"A
Twenty-two Item Screening Score of Psychiatric Symptoms Indicating
Impairment," Journal of Health and Human Behavior, Vol.3 (1962) pp. 
269-276; S.M.  Hunt Jr., K.  Singer, and S.  Cobb, "Components of
depression identified from a self-rating depression inventory for
survey use," Archives of General Psychiatry, Vol.  16 (1967) pp. 
441-447; R.D.  Caplan, S.  Cobb, J.R.P.  French Jr., R.V.  Harrison,
and S.R.  Pinneau Jr., Job Demands and Worker Health:  Main Effects
and Occupational Differences (Washington, DC:  U.S.  Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare, 1975). 

MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS REPORT
========================================================= Appendix III

   NATIONAL SECURITY AND
   INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS DIVISION,
   WASHINGTON, D.C. 
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix III:1

William E.  Beusse, Assistant Director
Martha J.  Dey, Evaluator in Charge

   DENVER REGIONAL OFFICE
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix III:2

Rudolfo G.  Payan, Regional Assignment Manager
Richard Y.  Horiuchi, Evaluator
Douglas C.  Hsu, Evaluator

   NEW YORK REGIONAL OFFICE
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix III:3

Ruth R.  Levy, Regional Assignment Manager
Mari M.  Matsumoto, Evaluator

```