National Council on Disability

January 30, 2018

Not on the Radar:

Sexual Assault of College 

Students with Disabilities
National Council on Disability (NCD)

1331 F Street NW, Suite 850

Washington, DC 20004

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities

National Council on Disability, January 30, 2018

Celebrating 30 years as an independent federal agency

This report is also available in alternative formats. Please visit the National Council on Disability 

(NCD) website (www.ncd.gov) or contact NCD to request an alternative format using the following 

information:

ncd@ncd.gov Email

202-272-2004 Voice

202-272-2022 Fax

The views contained in this report do not necessarily represent those of the Administration, as this and 

all NCD documents are not subject to the A-19 Executive Branch review process.
Letter of Transmittal

January 30, 2018

The President

The White House

Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

On behalf of the National Council on Disability (NCD), I am pleased to submit this report titled Not 

on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities. Sexual assault is a public health 

and public safety concern with far-reaching implications, and it is well documented that this deeply 

personal violation leaves physical and emotional impacts that change the lives of victims. This 

report is the first to examine how the needs of sexual assault victims with disabilities are included 

in college policies and procedures and to make recommendations to Congress, federal agencies, 

and colleges for improvement.

Research has shown that students with disabilities are more likely than their peers without 

disabilities to experience sexual assault. Most recently, a study examining the prevalence of 

sexual assault across 27 universities and 150,000 participants found that 31.6 percent of female 

undergraduates with a disability were victims of sexual assault compared to 18.4 percent 

of undergraduate females without a disability. This means that one of every three female 

undergraduates with a disability had been sexually assaulted during their time at college.

NCD found, however, that students with disabilities are not “on the radar” of colleges in their 

sexual assault prevention efforts, policies, or procedures for response and support after an assault. 

This includes the absence of procedures to communicate with victims who are Deaf or hard of 

hearing and inaccessible support services for students with mobility disabilities. Similarly, NCD 

found that students with disabilities are invisible at the federal level in campus sexual assault 

research programs. For example, Department of Justice (DOJ) research on campus sexual assault, 

undertaken or funded by the Office on Violence Against Women, Bureau of Justice Statistics, and 

the National Institute of Justice, have not included disability as a demographic.

National Council on Disability

An independent federal agency making recommendations to the President and Congress 

to enhance the quality of life for all Americans with disabilities and their families.

1331 F Street, NW ■ Suite 850 ■ Washington, DC 20004

202-272-2004 Voice ■ 202-272-2074 TTY ■ 202-272-2022 Fax ■ www.ncd.gov
(The same letter of transmittal was sent to the President Pro Tempore of the U.S. Senate and the Speaker of the 

U.S. House of Representatives.)

NCD remains committed to advising the Administration on this issue of national significance, and 

in ensuring that federal policies, federally-funded research, and college sexual assault programs are 

inclusive of students with disabilities.

Clyde E. Terry

Chairperson

2 National Council on Disability
National Council on Disability Members and Staff

Members

Clyde E. Terry, Chairperson

Benro T. Ogunyipe, Vice Chairperson

Billy W. Altom

Rabia Belt

James T. Brett

Bob Brown

Daniel M. Gade

Wendy S. Harbour

Neil Romano

Staff

Vacant, Executive Director

Joan M. Durocher, General Counsel & Director of Policy

Amy Nicholas, Attorney Advisor

Amged Soliman, Attorney Advisor

Ana Torres-Davis, Attorney Advisor

Anne Sommers, Director of Legislative Affairs & Outreach

Phoebe Ball, Legislative Affairs Specialist

Lisa Grubb, Director of Operations and Administration

Stacey S. Brown, Staff Assistant

Keith Woods, Financial Management Analyst

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 3
4 National Council on Disability
Acknowledgments

The National Council on Disability wishes to thank Nitya Venkateswaran, Talia Shalev, and Jay

Feldman of RTI International, and Deborah Tull, of VentionWorks, LLC for the research conducted

in developing this report.

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 5
6 National Council on Disability
Contents

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  

Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  

Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Highlights of Findings and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  1

Key Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  1

Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  1

Acronym Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  1

Chapter 1: Introduction and Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  1

Chapter 2: Purpose and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2

Chapter 3: Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2

College Staff and Expert Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2

Questionnaires . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2

Literature and Policy Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2

Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2

Chapter 4: Overview of Federal Disability and Sexual Assault Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2

Disability-Related Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2

The Clery Act, Violence Against Women Act, and Campus Sexual 

Violence Elimination Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2

Title IX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2

Chapter 5: Accessibility of College Sexual Assault Programs and Services . . . . . . . .  3

Accessibility of Education Programs and Information Related to 

Sexual Assault . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3

Accessibility of Online Prevention Training Programs . . . . . . . . . . . .  3

Accessibility of In-Person Education or Prevention Programs . . . . . .  3

Accessibility of Sexual Assault Information, Policies, and 

Reporting Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 7
Accessibility of Printed Sexual Assault Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3

Access to Sexual Assault Trauma or Support Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3

Physical Access to Sexual Assault Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3

Lack of Immediate Auxiliary Aids or Disability-Related 

Supports When Accessing Sexual Assault Supports . . . . . . . . . . . .  3

Lack of Policies and Procedures Detailing Responses in Crisis 

Situations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4

Recognition of the Lack of Policies and Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4

Accommodations Provided During the Conduct Process and 

Communication with Law Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4

Access to Accessible Services Outside of Campus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4

Chapter 6: “You’ve given me a lot to think about:” Existing Gaps in Services and 

Promising Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4

Interactions Between Sexual Assault Support Services Offices and 

Disability Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4

Lack of Disability Training Among Staff and Faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5

Disability Training for Law Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5

Awareness of the Prevalence of Sexual Assault and Students with 

Disabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5

Students with Disabilities Are Not Addressed in Sexual Assault 

Educational Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5

Promising Practices for Colleges Adapted from Community Providers . .  5

Chapter 7: Sexual Assault Policy Compliance and Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5

Compliance with the Clery Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5

Compliance with Title IX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6

State Legislative Responses to Sexual Assault . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6

Federal Legislative Response to Sexual Assault . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6

Chapter 8: Policy and Practice Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6

Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6

Federal...

Colleges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6

8 National Council on Disability
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6

Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6

Department of Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6

ED Office for Civil Rights (OCR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6

The National Center on Safe and Supportive Learning 

Environments (NCSSLE) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6

The Center for Campus Public Safety (CCPS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6

The Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6

Colleges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6

Endnotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 9
10 National Council on Disability
Executive Summary

Sexual assault can be devastating to 

victims and cause long term physical, 

psychological, and emotional effects, 

including depression, post-traumatic stress, 

thoughts of suicide, flashbacks, and sleep 

disorders.1 The issue of sexual assault on college 

campuses has received increased attention since 

the 2007 publication of the federally funded 

College Sexual Assault study, which found that 

19 percent of female undergraduates were 

victims2 of sexual assault during their time in 

college. Another recent federally funded study 

surveyed 23,000 students across nine colleges 

and universities3 and found that the prevalence of 

sexual assault averaged 21 percent for females 

across the schools.4 Neither of these studies 

included disability status as a demographic 

and, as such, no data was gathered on the 

prevalence of sexual assault on students with 

disabilities. However, a recent large-scale study 

on campus sexual assault by the Association 

of American Universities revealed that college 

students with disabilities were victims of sexual 

violence at higher rates than students without 

disabilities—31.6 percent of undergraduate 

females with disabilities reported nonconsensual 

sexual contact involving physical force or 

incapacitation, compared to 18.4 percent of 

undergraduate females without a disability.5 This 

means one out of every three undergraduate 

students with a disability was a victim of sexual 

violence on campus.

As campuses across the United States work 

to prevent assaults, educate students on assault 

prevention, and provide supports for survivors, 

little is known about how colleges address the 

accessibility needs of students with disabilities 

who have suffered a sexual assault, or about the 

inclusivity of college programs, services, and 

policies to victims of assault with disabilities. 

This study set out to investigate the current state 

of campus sexual assault programs and policies 

and uncovered multiple barriers to students with 

disabilities, from reporting crime to receiving 

needed assistance afterward. The report includes 

recommendations for Congress, federal agencies, 

and colleges to improve reporting requirements, 

training, and policies and procedures to better 

serve students with disabilities who have 

experienced sexual assault on campus.

Methods

To understand how colleges respond to, prevent, 

and support survivors of sexual assault with 

disabilities and the challenges that can emerge 

when providing accessible services, 30- to 

60-minute telephone interviews were conducted 

with 34 informants, including experts on the topic 

of sexual assault on college campuses or sexual 

abuse against people with disabilities; college 

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 11
professionals and staff, such as disability services 

administrators; Title IX coordinators; and sexual 

assault services administrators. Fourteen states 

and the District of Columbia were represented 

across seven of the 10 federal regions.6 The 

National Council on Disability (NCD) also fielded 

two national questionnaires, through listservs 

and social media, and received 100 responses 

from college professionals and 34 college 

students with disabilities.

NCD offers full-length and comprehensive 

report findings and policy recommendations in 

Chapter 8. However, highlights of the report’s 

key findings and recommendations include the 

following:

Highlights of Findings and 

Recommendations

Key Findings

Federal

■ Federal-level research studies on sexual 

assault on college campuses, funded by the 

Department of Justice’s Office on Violence 

Against Women and the National Institute 

of Justice, have not included disability as a 

demographic as they have race/nationality 

and sexual orientation.

■ The 2014 White House Task Force report, 

Not Alone, did not include disability as a 

demographic in its sample campus climate 

survey, setting the tone for colleges and 

researchers to omit disability in campus 

climate studies as well.

Colleges

■ Campus assault prevention and education 

programs are not inclusive of students with 

disabilities, and college staff lack awareness 

that such programs should be accessible to 

students with disabilities, and staff are not 

trained in disability accommodations.

■ College sexual assault prevention and 

education programs are not fully accessible 

to students with disabilities.

■ College websites and printed information 

about sexual assault resources and 

information are not accessible to students 

with visual impairments and students with 

print-based disabilities (e.g., dyslexia).

Recommendations

Congress

1. Congress should amend the Clery Act 

including to:

a. Require colleges to collect the number of 

all reported sexual assaults on students 

with disabilities (not just when the 

assaults are hate crimes) and include this 

information in their annual security report.

b. Require colleges to include a statement 

regarding the disability-related 

accommodations that will be made 

available to students with disabilities 

during the reporting and disciplinary 

process, such as auxiliary communication 

aids or interpreters, and how to request 

those accommodations.

2. Congress should pass the Campus 

Accountability and Safety Act (S. 856) with 

the following additions:

a. Require grant applicants under proposed 

Section 8, part BB, to describe how they 

will serve students with disabilities in 

their description of how underserved 

populations on campus will be served.

12 National Council on Disability
b. Add a survey question to proposed 

Section 19 on whether the victim had a 

disability at the time of the assault, and 

what type of disability.

3. Congress should require that research 

funded by the Office on Violence Against 

Women on campus sexual assault include 

students with disabilities to gather data on 

the problem as it pertains to students with 

disabilities, and to develop strategies for 

preventing and reducing the risk of sexual 

assault and effectively responding to victims 

with disabilities.

Department of Education (ED)

1. ED should develop and publish a technical 

assistance document or training for 

colleges on the rights of students 

with disabilities to have necessary 

accommodations in the process of 

reporting assault, utilizing sexual assault 

support services, and in the institutional 

disciplinary process.

ED Office for Civil Rights

OCR should

1. Inform colleges that they must 

provide required Title IX information in 

accessible formats to students with 

disabilities.

2. Encourage colleges to include information 

on how students can request disabilityrelated accommodations on their Title IX 

web pages.

3. Encourage colleges to make outreach and 

educational materials regarding sexual 

assault services available in accessible 

formats, and through various outlets 

accessible to students.

National Center on Safe and Supportive 

Learning Environments

1. NCSSLE should include information on 

disability, including communicating with 

victims with disabilities who are Deaf or 

hard of hearing, in its trauma-informed 

training programs.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)

1. BJS should include students with 

disabilities as a demographic when 

conducting research on sexual assault on 

college campuses.

The Center for Campus Public Safety 

(CCPS)

1. CCPS should include information on 

disability, including communicating with 

victims with disabilities who are Deaf or 

hard of hearing, in their trauma-informed 

training programs for school officials and 

campus and local law enforcement.

The Office on Violence Against Women 

(OVW)

1. OVW should include information on 

disability, including communicating with 

victims with disabilities who are Deaf or 

hard of hearing, in its trauma-informed 

training programs for school officials and 

campus and local law enforcement.

2. OVW should require all colleges that submit 

proposals under the Grants to Reduce Sexual 

Assault, Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, 

and Stalking on Campus Program to

a. Require grantees that provide outreach 

and educational materials regarding 

sexual assault services to students to 

provide them in accessible formats and 

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 13
inform the college community that these 

are available.

3. When OVW funds research on sexual 

assault on college campuses, require 

researchers to include students with 

disabilities as a demographic. For example, 

allow students to identify if they have a 

disability in surveys/questionnaires, etc.

Colleges

Recommendations to ensure access to sexual 

assault supports and services include the 

following:

1. Include students with disabilities as a 

demographic in campus climate surveys on 

sexual assault.

2. Create crisis policies and procedures on 

how to provide sexual assault services 

to students with sensory disabilities, 

especially Deaf or hard of hearing students, 

so that students receive services within 

24 hours.

3. Guarantee that sexual assault first 

responders and support providers have 

access to emergency interpreter services 

or other communication methods 

(i.e., Communication Access RealTime Translation) so that students can 

communicate with staff immediately.

4. Create formal agreements with communitybased providers with the expertise to 

support survivors with disabilities.

Recommendations to address the unique 

needs of survivors of sexual assault with 

disabilities include the following:

5. Develop and implement sexual assault 

prevention and support service training with 

messaging campaigns that are inclusive and 

welcoming to students with disabilities on 

college campuses.

6. Provide disability-related and traumainformed practice training to prevention 

and first responder staff and campus 

security so that they understand how to 

effectively prevent and support students 

with disabilities after an incident of 

sexual assault.

7. Establish and maintain active collaborative 

relationships between Title IX, sexual assault 

services, counseling and health services, 

and disability services.

8. College Disability Service Center staff 

should be actively involved in college sexual 

assault prevention and support efforts and 

trained on Title IX procedures.

14 National Council on Disability
Acronym Glossary

ADA Americans with Disabilities Act

ASL American Sign Language

ASR campus annual security reports

CARE communication, action, response, evaluation

CART Communication Access Real-Time Translation

DSS Disability Student Services

ED U.S. Department of Education

FERPA Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act

MOU memoranda of understanding

OVW Office on Violence Against Women

SaVE Act Campus Sexual Violence Act

SUNY State University of New York

VAWA Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 15
Students with disabilities remain on the 

periphery and are not addressed regarding 

sexual assault prevention, outreach, and 

services.

16 National Council on Disability
Sexual assault is a public health and 

public safety concern with far-reaching 

implications, and it is well documented 

that this deeply personal violation leaves physical 

and emotional impacts that change the lives of 

victims across all areas of their lives.

The subject of sexual 

assault on college 

campuses has received 

increased attention over 

the past eleven years with 

the federal government 

funding research studies 

seeking to gauge the prevalence of sexual assault 

and reporting on campuses to inform intervention 

strategies. But, as described later in this section, 

these studies have not included disability as a 

demographic and provide no insight into the 

prevalence of sexual assault on campus for 

students with disabilities.

A recent Association of American Universities’ 

(AAU) study that examined the prevalence 

of sexual assault against students across 27 

universities and 150,0000 participants included 

disability as a demographic and found that 

students with disabilities were victims of sexual 

assault on campus more often than students 

without disabilities: 31.6 percent of female 

undergraduates with a disability reported 

nonconsensual sexual contact involving physical 

force or incapacitation compared to 18.4 

percent of the undergraduate females without 

a disability.7 This means that one of every three 

students with a disability has been sexually 

assaulted during their time at college.

The AAU Campus Climate Survey is notable 

because it is one of 

the largest surveys on 

sexual assault and sexual 

misconduct in terms of 

both number of schools 

and number of students 

participating. Prior studies 

of campus sexual assault and misconduct 

have been implemented for a small number of 

colleges or for a national sample of students with 

relatively small samples for any particular college. 

Also, comparisons across surveys have been 

problematic because of different methodologies 

and different definitions. The AAU was one of the 

first to implement a uniform methodology across 

multiple colleges and to produce statistically 

reliable estimates for each college.8

The title of this report makes clear that 

students with disabilities are not “on the radar” 

of colleges in regard to policies and procedures 

regarding sexual assault. Similarly, students 

with disabilities are seemingly invisible to 

the Department of Justice offices that have 

undertaken, or funded, research studies on 

Chapter 1: Introduction and Background

This means that one of every 

three students with a disability 

has been sexually assaulted 

during their time at college

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 17
campus sexual assault (Office on Violence 

Against Women, Bureau of Justice Statistics, and 

National Institute of Justice), just as they were to 

the White House Task Force in the 2014 sample 

campus climate survey.

The federally funded (National Institute of 

Justice) College Sexual Assault Study (CSA)9

was a survey conducted 

with 6,800 undergraduate 

students attending two 

large public universities 

during 2005 that examined 

the prevalence, nature, and 

reporting of sexual assault 

experienced by students 

to inform the development 

of targeted intervention 

strategies. The oft quoted 

figure from this study 

represents the experience 

of females since entering college: 19.8 percent 

of female college seniors (“1 in 5”) responded 

that they had experienced nonconsensual sexual 

contact involving force or incapacitation during 

their time in college. This study, however, did not 

include disability as a demographic and, as such, 

did not yield data on the prevalence of sexual 

assault on students with disabilities.

In 2014, White House Task Force to Protect 

Students from Sexual Assault published a report 

that offered action steps and recommendations 

to address sexual assault on college campuses.10

One was that colleges conduct “campus 

climate surveys” to help schools understand 

the magnitude and nature of sexual victimization 

experienced by students. The report included a 

sample campus climate survey. Unfortunately, 

the sample climate survey did not include 

disability as a demographic but did include 

many other categories including gender identity, 

race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation.11 Had the 

survey included disability as a demographic, 

colleges would likely have included it with the 

other categories to include in their own climate 

surveys.12

Just two years later, the Justice Department’s 

Bureau of Justice Statistics 

(BJS) released the Campus 

Climate Survey Validation 

Study (CCSVS) Final 

Technical Report, described 

as a key deliverable of the 

White House Task Force 

to Protect Students from 

Sexual Assault.13 Funded 

by the Office of Violence 

Against Women (OVW), 

BJS revised the sample 

climate survey developed 

by the White House Task Force, and pilot tested 

it at nine diverse colleges.14 BJS did not include 

disability as a demographic as it did race, 

ethnicity, sexual orientation, and gender identity.15

This is noteworthy because BJS had broad input. 

In developing the revised survey, “a series of 

listening sessions were held with academic 

experts in campus sexual assault research, 

federal partners, and school administrators to 

obtain feedback on the survey’s content and data 

collection methodology. In addition, a web-based 

instrument to be used in the CCSVS Pilot Test 

was drafted and reviewed by representatives 

from several federal agencies.”16

Federal and state agencies have responded 

to the crisis of college sexual assault by 

enacting policies and encouraging colleges and 

universities to adopt recommendations and 

practices prescribed by research and advocacy 

[S]tudents with disabilities 

are seemingly invisible to the 

Department of Justice offices 

that have undertaken, or funded, 

research studies on campus 

sexual assault .. , just as th

were to the White House Task 

Force in the 2014 sample campus 

climate survey

18 National Council on Disability
groups. In the last 20 years, federal laws were 

enacted to require colleges and universities to 

develop policies, provide prevention activities, 

and respond to sexual assault.17 The U.S. 

Department of Justice defines sexual assault 

as “any type of sexual contact or behavior 

that occurs without the explicit consent of the 

recipient.”18 Contact or 

behavior without consent 

includes “forced touching 

of a sexual nature (i.e., 

forced kissing, touching 

of private parts, grabbing, 

fondling), oral sex, sexual 

intercourse, anal sex, and/or sexual penetration 

with a finger or object.”19

Colleges are required to collect data on the 

prevalence of sexual misconduct and assault, 

develop specific policies to address sexual 

assault, and implement prevention programs and 

support services. In its last report in 2017, the 

White House Task Force to Protect Students from 

Sexual Assault outlined a series of recommended 

practices and guidelines to reduce the number 

of assaults and support survivors. Included in 

these guidelines are specific recommendations 

for campuses to consider the needs of diverse 

groups of students, including students with 

disabilities, and that materials and services 

be accessible and comply with the Americans 

with Disabilities Act (ADA).20 The Department 

of Education, Office of Civil Rights also issued 

a Dear Colleague Letter that outlines colleges’ 

responsibilities to address disability in cases 

of sexual violence, specifically outlining issues 

campuses should consider and that colleges 

should ensure accessibility of information and 

training related to sexual assault.21

However, little is known about colleges’ 

current sexual assault practices and services to 

support survivors with 

disabilities that would 

give colleges a clear guide 

on how to translate the 

White House Task Force’s 

recommendations into 

action steps. At the time of 

publication, NCD found only four research articles 

focused on the prevalence of sexual assault 

on college students with disabilities.22 None of 

these studies focused on how colleges served 

students. If colleges are to equitably prevent and 

respond to sexual assault incidents, the lack of 

research on what types of accommodations and 

supports students with disabilities need and/or 

lack may perpetuate discrimination against these 

students.

The purpose of this study is to explore and 

raise awareness of how students with disabilities 

fare under existing college practices and services 

related to sexual assault. After examining the 

current landscape, potential policy solutions and 

action steps are proposed, which Congress, the 

Federal Government, and colleges can take to 

support survivors with disabilities and reduce 

their trauma.

BJS did not include disability 

as a demographic as it did race, 

ethnicity, sexual orientation, and 

gender identity

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 19
20 National Council on Disability
Chapter 2: Purpose and Scope

T

he purpose of this report is to raise 

awareness of sexual assault against 

students with disabilities on college 

campuses by examining college policies and 

practices that should protect students with 

disabilities who have experienced sexual 

assault, college policies 

and practices aimed 

at educating students 

on sexual assault 

prevention, and the 

availability of survivor 

services on campus 

that are physically 

and programmatically 

accessible to students 

with disabilities who are 

victims of sexual assault. 

This report also provides recommendations for 

reform.

Based upon interviews and questionnaires 

with experts, college professional staff, and 

students, as well as a review of recent research, 

policy reports, and college policies, this report 

documents the gaps and weaknesses in 

college services and outreach to students 

with disabilities who have experienced sexual 

assault. Recommendations include strategies 

to strengthen compliance with federal disability 

laws and to build capacity to meet the needs of 

students with disabilities.

Due to limited research on how colleges are 

serving students with disabilities across the 

nation, the study focuses on the provision of 

accommodations to students with physical and 

sensory disabilities. These students have the 

longest history of service provision in higher 

education, and a 

significant proportion 

of students with these 

types of disabilities are 

registered with campus 

disability services offices.23

Furthermore, many of 

the accommodations 

these students require 

can be measured in 

pragmatic and objective 

terms (e.g., whether 

sign language interpreters are available, reading 

matter is accessible to screen readers, or training 

courses are in physically accessible buildings). 

This narrowed scope limits findings because 

students with invisible disabilities, especially mental 

health disabilities, are a growing population at 

college campuses,24 and these students are often 

underserved.25 However, given the dearth of data 

on the topic, a starting point was chosen for this 

report to begin illuminating the difficulties colleges 

face in complying with federal laws and meeting the 

needs of sexual assault survivors with disabilities. 

Further research on this issue can use the findings 

Students with disabilities may also 

be accused of sexual violence, 

as well as being victims of 

such violence, and may require 

accommodations during Title IX 

hearings, judicial procedures, 

suspensions, and other procedures 

and actions on campus

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 21
in this report as a jumping off point to investigate 

the specific needs of students with cognitive or 

mental health disabilities when accessing services 

for sexual assault prevention or support.

Students with disabilities may also be accused 

of sexual violence, as well as being victims of 

such violence, and may require accommodations 

during Title IX hearings, judicial procedures, 

suspensions, and other procedures and actions 

on campus. While this is an important topic for 

further study, people with disabilities are far more 

likely to be victims of violence than instigators 

of it, and they are more likely to suffer physical 

and mental illnesses because of violence. In 

addition, students may experience mental health 

disabilities after an incident of sexual assault. 

The National Council on Disability (NCD) has 

addressed the difficulties colleges face when 

effectively supporting students with mental 

health disabilities in a recent report.26 This report 

maintains a narrower focus, prioritizing work with 

survivors and prevention efforts.

Research Questions

This study was guided by the following 

questions:

1. What is the current landscape of college 

policies and programs regarding sexual 

assault prevention and response?

2. Do colleges comply with the ADA 

and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation 

Act by ensuring that assault services 

are physically and programmatically 

accessible to students with physical and 

sensory disabilities?

3. Do colleges comply with the ADA and 

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act by 

providing reasonable accommodations 

so students with disabilities can access 

and utilize support services if they have 

experienced sexual assault?

4. Are interpreters or other disabilityrelated supports readily available to 

students who are Deaf or hard of 

hearing when making reports to campus 

law enforcement?

5. Do colleges maintain relationships with 

trauma and mental health providers in 

the community that provide similarly 

accessible services?

6. What gaps, weaknesses, and 

discriminatory policies exist in campus 

sexual assault services?

7. What are the current most promising 

and best practices and emerging trends 

(e.g., healthy sexual relationship training 

for incoming freshmen, bystander 

awareness training to teach students 

to step in to stop sexual assault, 

climate surveys, and changes in college 

disciplinary board rules)?

8. Are disability student organizations 

connected to sexual assault survivor 

groups on campus? Are campus 

disability services and resource offices 

connected to mental health services 

to ensure students with disabilities are 

getting the ongoing services they need 

after an assault (e.g., therapy)?

22 National Council on Disability
9. Have college staff and faculty received 

training to provide support for students 

with disabilities who have experienced 

sexual assault?

10. Has campus law enforcement received 

disability awareness training in taking 

reports from victims/witnesses with 

disabilities?

11. Are the policies of colleges compliant 

with the Family Educational Rights and 

Privacy Act, the Clery Act, and Title IX?

12. What are the federal and state 

legislative responses to campus sexual 

violence?

13. What policy and system reforms are 

needed in postsecondary educational 

settings?

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 23
24 National Council on Disability
Chapter 3: Methods

College Staff and Expert Interviews

T

o understand how colleges prevent 

sexual violence, support student sexual 

assault survivors with disabilities, and 

address the challenges that can emerge when 

providing accessible services, 30- to 60-minute 

telephone interviews were conducted with 9 

experts and 27 higher education professionals 

from December 2016 through July 2017. Experts 

included researchers or advocates examining 

sexual assault or violence against people 

with disabilities and college sexual assault 

prevention and compliance consultants. College 

professionals were chosen because they worked 

with sexual assault or disability services and 

could speak to college policies and procedures. 

Roles of professionals targeted for interviews 

included student program administrators who 

provide disability services and accommodations, 

ADA/504 coordinators, administrators or staff 

in sexual assault service centers, and Title IX 

coordinators or investigators. Four disabled 

student program administrators also participated 

in Title IX investigations or conducted processes, 

and one Title IX coordinator also served as an 

ADA/504 coordinator. Professionals represented 6 

two-year community colleges, 6 four-year private 

universities, 11 four-year public colleges, and 

one regional center for a public state institution. 

Fourteen states and the District of Columbia 

were represented across seven of the 10 federal 

regions (Table 1).27 Interviews were transcribed 

and audio recordings were immediately deleted 

after the study was completed. To protect the 

confidentiality of the participants, names of 

interviewees, organizations, and colleges are not 

mentioned in this report.

Questionnaires

Open-ended online questionnaires were 

administered through SurveyGizmo to college 

staff and students to supplement findings from 

college professionals and staff interviewees. 

These questionnaires were administered from 

April 2017 through June 2017. College staff 

members were also able to indicate interest 

in participating in an interview or focus group 

to further elaborate on their survey responses. 

The college professional staff questionnaires 

were distributed through three listservs for the 

Association on Higher Education and Disability, 

Title IX coordinators, and the Disabled Student 

Programs and Services of the California 

Community College Chancellor’s Office. NCD 

received 100 responses from college professional 

staff. The student questionnaire was distributed 

through social media and listservs for students 

with disabilities, such as the Disability, Rights, 

Education, Activism, and Mentoring group 

through the National Center for College Students 

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 25
with Disabilities. NCD received 34 responses 

from students.

Literature and Policy Review

Research findings and current trends from 

scientific research, policy reports, white papers, 

and articles supplemented the interview and 

questionnaire findings.

Limitations

Claims regarding existing college services for 

students with disabilities and compliance with 

federal disability laws are self-reports from 

college professionals and staff. Self-reports 

may not reflect the actual policies and practices 

at college campuses. However, researchers 

interviewed staff members who were most 

knowledgeable about the policies and practices 

and indicated the level of certainty of staff 

responses. Researchers gave college staff 

the interview questions prior to the scheduled 

interview. If unfamiliar with certain college 

policies or procedures, staff researched the 

information or recommended additional staff to 

include in the interview to accurately answer 

the questions. In addition, only barriers or 

challenges mentioned by three or more college 

professionals and/or students were reported, 

to indicate a trend across colleges. The validity 

of self-reported data was also strengthened by 

using existing research, policy, and media reports 

when possible, to elaborate on the prevalence of 

the finding.

Table 1: College Representation Among Interviewee Participants

Federal Region

Number of 

Colleges in 

Each Region

Region 1: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, 

Vermont

4

Region 2: New Jersey, New York 0

Region 3: Delaware; Maryland; Pennsylvania; Virginia; Washington, DC; West 

Virginia

4

Region 4: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, 

South Carolina, Tennessee, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islan

0

Region 5: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin 8

Region 6: Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas 2

Region 7: Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska 1

Region 8: Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming 0

Region 9: Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada 6

Region 10: Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington 1

26 National Council on Disability
Chapter 4: Overview of Federal Disability and Sexual 

Assault Laws

Disability-Related Laws

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 

197328 and the ADA29 of 1990 are civil 

rights laws that protect people with 

disabilities from discrimination.

Section 504 prohibits any program receiving 

federal financial assistance from discriminating 

against a person because of his or her disability. 

Section 504 applies to institutions of higher 

education that receive direct or indirect federal 

financial assistance,30 including institutions that 

receive no other federal financial assistance other 

than federal student financial aid.

Section 504 states that, “No qualified 

handicapped student shall, on the basis of 

handicap, be excluded from participation in, 

be denied the benefits of, or otherwise be 

subjected to discrimination under any academic, 

research, occupational training, housing, health 

insurance, counseling, financial aid, physical 

education, athletics, recreation, transportation, 

other extracurricular, or other postsecondary 

education aid, benefits, or services to which this 

subpart applies.”31 Section 504 covers qualified 

students with disabilities32 who have a physical 

or mental disability that substantially limits one 

or more major life activities; or have a record of 

such a disability; or are regarded as having such a 

disability.33

Institutions of higher education covered by 

Section 504 must provide effective auxiliary aids 

to students with disabilities (e.g., sign-language 

interpreters, captioning services, assistive 

listening devices, assistive listening systems, 

telecommunications devices).34 If an aid is 

necessary for an appropriate (nonpersonal) use, 

the institution must make it available, unless 

provision of the aid would cause undue burden. 

A student with a disability may not be required 

to pay any of the costs of the aid or service, and 

an institution may not limit what it spends for 

such aids or services or refuse to provide them 

because other providers of these services exist. 

Institutions cannot condition the provision of such 

aids on the availability of funds.35

Title II of the ADA prohibits state and local 

governments from discriminating on the basis 

of disability and, like Section 504, applies to 

public colleges, universities, and graduate and 

professional schools. Title II applies to such 

institutions whether or not they receive federal 

financial assistance, and the requirements 

regarding the provision of auxiliary aids and 

services under Section 504 are generally included 

under Title II.

Title III of the ADA prohibits discrimination 

on the basis of disability in “places of public 

accommodation,” which includes colleges and 

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 27
universities.36 Titles II and III require that new 

facilities are fully accessible to people with 

disabilities. Title II emphasizes that colleges 

are not required to make structural changes 

to existing facilities that were built prior to 

enactment of federal accessibility requirements, 

where other methods are effective in achieving 

compliance; for example, colleges may make 

modifications to programs or relocate them to 

make them accessible.37 Similarly, if buildings 

have been constructed before 1977, Section 

504 allows campuses to relocate programs or 

services to achieve accessibility.

Another foundational 

law is Section 508 of the 

Rehabilitation Act38 as 

amended by the Workforce 

Investment Act of 199839

(P.L.105-220), which 

requires federal agencies 

and other entities receiving 

federal funds to make their electronic and 

information technology accessible to people with 

disabilities. The standard applies to desktop and 

laptop computers, websites, and other Internet 

resources, videotapes and multimedia products, 

software, telecommunication products, and other 

electronic and information technology. While 

Section 508 does not apply to colleges, many 

campuses use Section 508 and Web Accessibility 

Initiative guidelines to determine definitions 

of accessibility for electronic and information 

technology.

The requirements to provide needed auxiliary 

aids and have accessible facilities under Section 

504 and Titles II and III of the ADA are important 

protections for students with disabilities who 

experience sexual assault. For example, after 

surviving a sexual assault, students who are 

wheelchair users or have limited mobility need 

physical access to victims’ services and other 

campus offices, and students who are Deaf 

or hard of hearing need interpreters or other 

auxiliary aids to communicate after such a 

trauma.

The Clery Act, Violence Against 

Women Act, and Campus Sexual 

Violence Elimination Act

The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security 

Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (Clery 

Act), a consumer protection law passed in 1990, 

requires all colleges and 

universities that receive 

federal funding to share 

information about crime 

on or around campus and 

their efforts to improve 

campus safety.40 This 

information is published 

in campus annual security reports (ASRs). 

Throughout the past 25 years, the Clery Act 

has been amended various times to increase 

reporting and college responses specific to 

sexual violence. Most recently, it was amended 

by the Violence Against Women Reauthorization 

Act of 2013 (VAWA),41 which imposed new 

obligations on colleges and universities under 

its Campus Sexual Violence Act (“SaVE Act”) 

provision, Section 304.

The Clery Act outlines how information about 

crime must be reported. Colleges are required 

to make information publicly accessible through 

ASRs that provide data regarding incidents 

of sexual assault, dating violence, domestic 

violence, stalking, and hate crimes occurring on 

campus, any building off campus that is owned 

or controlled by a student organization or by the 

The VAWA amendments added 

gender identity and national 

origin to the categories of bias 

that institutions must reflect 

within their statistics

28 National Council on Disability
college that is used in support of educational 

purposes, and public property within the campus 

area that is adjacent to the institution (such as 

sidewalks, streets, or parking facilities). The 

VAWA amendments added gender identity and 

national origin to the categories of bias that 

institutions must reflect within their statistics. 

Under the Clery Act, colleges must disseminate 

timely warnings and notification of crimes. 

College compliance with the Family Educational 

Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) does not prevent 

the institution from providing timely warnings 

about crimes. Under FERPA, in an emergency, 

crime information can be 

released without consent 

and the information is 

not protected. However, 

victims’ individual 

information must be kept 

confidential.

The Clery Act also 

requires colleges to 

describe their policies 

regarding procedures to 

follow after an incident 

of sexual assault, dating violence, domestic 

violence, or stalking. It requires colleges to 

identify their policies on how students report 

crimes and provides rights to both parties 

(the accused and the accuser) in the campus 

disciplinary process. It also identifies the rights 

and options available to survivors, including 

changes to academic transportation and living 

or work situations as well as assistance in 

notifying local law enforcement. The Campus 

SaVE Act amended the Clery Act and further 

elaborated procedures for victims and standards 

of investigation, such as requiring colleges to 

create policies addressing victims’ confidentiality 

and training of officials to ensure hearings 

are conducted in a way that protects victims. 

Regarding law enforcement, the Campus 

SaVE Act requires institutions to have a policy 

statement that describes the jurisdiction of 

security personnel and identifies any agreements 

that are in place for the investigation of alleged 

criminal offenses (such as written memoranda 

of understanding [MOU] with local law 

enforcement).

Lastly, the Clery Act requires education and 

prevention. The Campus SaVE Act mandates 

that colleges provide prevention and awareness 

programs regarding sexual 

misconduct that educate 

students on consent 

definitions, promote 

positive and healthy 

behaviors, and encourage 

safe bystander intervention. 

Campuses are to provide 

education programs to 

students and employees 

when first enrolled or hired 

and on an ongoing basis.

Title IX

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 

1972 is a federal civil rights law that prohibits 

discrimination on the basis of sex in any 

education program or activity that receives 

federal funding.42 Under Title IX, discrimination on 

the basis of sex can include sexual harassment, 

rape, and sexual assault.43 A college or university 

that receives federal funds may be held legally 

responsible when it knows about and ignores 

sexual harassment or assault in its programs or 

activities. As of September 22, 2017, colleges

can adopt various standards of proof in sexual 

As of September 22, 2017, 

colleges can adopt various 

standards of proof in sexual 

assault cases, from the lowest 

standard of proof (preponderance 

of evidence) to a higher standard 

of proof (clear and convincing 

evidence)

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 29
assault cases, from the lowest standard 

of proof (preponderance of evidence) to a 

higher standard of proof (clear and convincing 

evidence).44 Colleges are also required to appoint 

a Title IX coordinator who ensures that schools 

are in compliance with the law and oversees 

investigations and the disciplinary process.

Like the Clery Act, Title IX requires colleges 

to adopt and publish grievance procedures 

that outline the complaint, investigation, and 

disciplinary process. These processes must 

be prompt (but no specific time frame is 

indicated), equitable, and allow for impartial 

investigation.45 Title IX, like the Clery Act, also 

requires college employers that address sexual 

assault to have proper training and to train the 

campus community in its policies and procedures 

regarding sexual assault.

30 National Council on Disability
Chapter 5: Accessibility of College Sexual Assault 

Programs and Services

Colleges are responding in multiple 

ways to prevent and respond to sexual 

assault incidents in adherence to federal 

laws. Colleges provide educational and training 

programs to prevent sexual assault, post and 

disseminate information on sexual assault to 

encourage reporting, provide multiple sexual 

assault reporting options, and offer trauma 

or victim advocate services, mental health 

counseling, and/or support groups. Colleges also 

conduct investigations for instances of sexual 

assault to comply with Title IX.

Whether all these programs and services 

are accessible to students with disabilities is 

questionable. NCD found that many colleges 

are not fully complying with the ADA or Section 

504 and not making web materials accessible, 

and this noncompliance can prevent students 

with disabilities from accessing sexual assault 

programs, services, and information. Even if 

students with disabilities can access these 

services, they may experience a delay while they 

wait to receive disability accommodations that 

will ensure full participation.

This chapter addresses research questions 

examining college policies and practices related 

to sexual assault and whether colleges are 

in compliance with federal disability laws. 

Questions are addressed as a cohesive set 

because responses to questions by college 

professional staff overlapped.

1. What is the current landscape of college 

policies and programs regarding sexual 

assault prevention and response?

2. Do colleges comply with the ADA and 

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act by 

ensuring that assault services are physically 

and programmatically accessible to students 

with physical and sensory disabilities?

3. Do colleges comply with the ADA and 

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act by 

providing reasonable accommodations 

so students with disabilities can access 

and utilize support services if they have 

experienced sexual assault?

4. Are interpreters or other disability-related 

supports readily available to students who 

are Deaf or hard of hearing when making 

reports to campus law enforcement?

5. Do colleges maintain relationships with 

trauma and mental health providers in the 

community that provide similarly accessible 

services?

6. What gaps, weaknesses, and discriminatory 

policies exist in campus sexual assault 

services?

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 31
Accessibility of Education Programs 

and Information Related to Sexual 

Assault

Colleges are implementing a variety of 

education and prevention programs on their 

campuses and making information related to 

sexual assault readily available to students. 

Educational programs help develop students 

understanding of consent and healthy sexual 

relationships and support the prevention of 

alcohol abuse.46 Colleges use a range of online 

education prevention programs to reach all firstyear students and other 

targeted populations, 

while complying with 

federal mandates for 

sexual assault prevention 

training. Colleges also 

organize in-person 

educational events 

facilitated by experts 

and peer educators 

throughout the year.47 Research suggests that 

education is the most effective method for 

preventing sexual assaults48 and increases 

students’ awareness of reporting options and 

supports. Students are more likely to report 

and access supports for sexual assault if 

they know the college policies, how to report 

the assault and access services, and that 

they have confidential reporting options.49

Improving awareness of college policies and 

procedures among students with disabilities 

can be a promising strategy to support them, 

because students with disabilities (similar 

to current trends for the undergraduate 

population at large) report not knowing 

about available resources and that they are 

more likely not to report abuse.50 The next 

section discusses whether colleges make 

online and in-person educational programs 

and educational information related to sexual 

assault services accessible to students with 

disabilities.

Accessibility of Online Prevention 

Training Programs

College campuses often use predeveloped 

online prevention programs that address various 

aspects of effective prevention, such as alcohol 

abuse, consent and rape myths, and bystander 

education.51 Twenty-seven 

percent of interviewees 

and 24 percent of 

questionnaire responses 

indicated that some or all 

online prevention training 

programs were accessible 

to students with 

disabilities. For example, 

professionals reported that 

online videos were captioned or students were 

provided transcripts. One professional explained 

that staff members from the office of services 

for students with disabilities were included in the 

selection of online programs, and therefore, they 

should be accessible to students.

However, 5 (19 percent) college professional 

staff said in interviews, and 12 college 

professional staff (12 percent) indicated in their 

questionnaire responses that all or some of their 

online education programs were not accessible. 

Two interviewees and two questionnaire 

responses indicated that they were unsure 

that these training courses were accessible. 

Staff lamented that videos should be captioned

and two staff members explained that they 

were in the process of making the programs 

Students are more likely to report 

and access supports for sexual 

assault if they know the college 

policies, how to report the assault 

and access services, and that 

they have confidential reporting 

options

32 National Council on Disability
accessible. Two college staff members explained 

that programs purchased by their college were 

inaccessible, but they worked extensively with 

the online program provider to make these 

programs accessible. One ADA/504 coordinator 

explained, “[The online program] was not fully 

accessible, and we have worked very hard with 

the company to provide them feedback regarding 

what is accessible and what is not. We let 

them know what the accessibility challenges 

are. They’ve complied with most of it.” An 

administrator for disability services explained 

that staff members 

evaluated their college’s 

online program to ensure 

it was “accessible to many 

needs” because students 

are penalized for not 

watching the video.

Accessibility of 

In-Person Education or 

Prevention Programs

When asked about the 

accessibility of in-person 

education programs 

or events for students who are Deaf or 

hard of hearing or have visual impairments, 

7 interviewees (26 percent) and 14 questionnaire 

respondents (14 percent) explained that students 

could request accommodations for these events 

in advance and information about this process is 

given to students. A review of college disability 

services websites yielded similar results. Of the 

27 colleges with staff participating in interviews, 

11 of these colleges posted policies on their 

websites informing students about the advance 

time needed to arrange accommodations for 

activities for nonclassroom requests. Request 

periods for the 10 colleges ranged from 24 hours 

to 14 days. The one college with a 24-hour 

request period noted that accommodations 

could be arranged for tutoring, review sessions, 

or meetings with instructors. Other colleges did 

not list a time period.

Interviewees also mentioned that information 

about how to request accommodations are 

reportedly posted on event fliers or notices, 

and students contacted whomever oversees 

the event to request accommodations. For 

example, one questionnaire respondent wrote 

that all event and 

program flyers stated, 

“For accommodations 

or information, please 

contact [email address].” 

Most but not all college 

staff and students 

reported minimal issues 

for students with physical 

disabilities to access 

sexual assault training 

and resources.

While most college 

staff members indicated 

that they are complying with federal law 

regarding reasonable accommodations, seven 

staff members acknowledged challenges at 

their campuses with providing accommodations 

during in-person training. One college staff 

respondent to the questionnaire stated, “There 

is no formal process for accommodations in 

place for the in-person training.” Another staff 

member mentioned not being able to provide 

interpreters during in-person training, while 

a third staff member commented about the 

challenge of securing interpreters in a “timely” 

manner.

Of the 27 colleges with staff 

participating in interviews, 11 of 

these colleges posted policies on 

their websites informing students 

about the advance time needed 

to arrange accommodations 

for activities for nonclassroom 

requests. Request periods for the

10 colleges ranged from 24 hours 

to 14 days

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 33
Responses from four students concurred with 

responses from college professionals’ reports 

on inaccessibility. When asked if educational 

programs at their schools were accessible to 

students with disabilities, one student explained, 

“I would like to say yes for the most part, 

but the events that I have been to have often 

been in areas that are too hard to get to with 

a wheelchair, or no interpreters for [students].” 

Another student reported, “There were no 

interpreters in the freshman seminar, and the 

classroom wasn’t wheelchair accessible.”

Two college staff members reported that 

students often do not know the process 

for requesting accommodations, and two 

students agreed with this 

assessment. One of these 

students stated in the 

questionnaire that asking 

for accommodations 

was a “complicated” 

process. A disability 

services administrator 

acknowledged that this 

process places the “onus” 

on the student to request the accommodation 

in advance, which is standard procedure on 

most campuses. One student commented 

that asking for accommodations in advance 

makes students feel like an “inconvenience.” 

Another student commented that schedules 

for events were not provided early enough to 

request accommodations. Because the policy 

requires students to ask for accommodations 

in advance, students must be knowledgeable 

about events, understand the procedures for 

requesting services, and know that services will 

not be provided unless requested. This speaks 

to the importance of colleges ensuring that they 

provide information on the accommodations 

process to incoming students and all students 

in a widespread and repetitive manner, posting 

the information on college websites and 

administrative offices as well as disseminating 

the information through instructors and staff.

Accessibility of Sexual Assault 

Information, Policies, and Reporting 

Options

When asked whether sexual assault information 

was accessible to students with visual 

impairments using a computerized screen 

reader to access text and images, staff from 

five colleges replied in the negative. Staff at 

one college reported that 

campus professionals 

have limited awareness 

of accessibility standards 

for websites and online 

information at the 

campus. For example, 

two disability services 

administrators reported 

that online forms to 

report sexual assault or conduct intake for 

counseling are not screen reader accessible. 

One Title IX coordinator explained how most 

materials at the coordinator’s college, including 

websites, were not accessible to students 

with visual impairments. Another staff member 

mentioned that his or her college is beginning 

to review the Title IX website for readability and 

challenges with accessibility. This college’s Title 

IX website includes all information related to 

accessing sexual assault services, such as policy 

language, reporting options, and resources for 

students to access as well as how to contact 

various staff, including the Title IX coordinator. 

[T]wo disability services 

administrators reported that 

online forms to report sexual 

assault or conduct intake for 

counseling are not screen reader 

accessible

34 National Council on Disability
One disability services administrator was certain 

the Title IX website was accessible because 

staff from technology services regularly “spot 

check” the college websites for screen reader 

accessibility.

Website accessibility, 

not solely those websites 

related to sexual assault 

information, continues 

to be a challenge on 

college campuses across 

the nation. Complaints 

to the Office of Civil 

Rights regarding web 

accessibility for student 

with disabilities are 

growing every year.52 In 

2017, disability rights advocates have filed

lawsuits against approximately 30 colleges 

whose websites fail to meet accessibility 

standards for students with disabilities, including 

students who are Deaf or hard of hearing or 

who have visual impairments.53 In a 2015 audit, 

27 out of 58 web pages selected for review 

in the California community colleges’ online 

enrollment system were found to have distinct 

violations of the California 

accessibility standards.54

Three common violations 

were found across 

multiple websites. Critical 

violations were those that 

made content completely 

inaccessible to users, 

and significant violations 

resulted in serious barriers, making some but not 

all the content accessible. This audit found that 

the 27 web pages had 26 critical violations and 

64 serious violations.

Accessibility of Printed Sexual Assault 

Materials

Many of our interviewees commented on 

the lack of printed sexual assault information, 

such as reporting procedures or counseling 

resource options, for 

students with visual 

impairments. College 

staff from six colleges 

reported that materials 

were not available in 

braille or large print, and 

college staff members 

from seven colleges 

indicated that their 

colleges do not provide 

this accommodation in relation to sexual assault 

services. Specifically, one Title IX coordinator 

explained that accessible materials about 

sexual assault reporting procedures were not 

available. Another Title IX coordinator explained 

that neither the Title IX brochure nor materials 

about off-campus and on-campus resources for 

sexual assault were available in various formats. 

Two staff members explained that their college 

would only provide such materials when it was 

requested. One Title IX 

coordinator explained, 

“We don’t have things 

proactively in place for 

that . . . We would be 

reactive versus proactive.” 

One 504/ADA coordinator 

elaborated that access 

to information remained 

the biggest access challenge at their college: 

“There is no ease of accessing information. The 

places where we fall into things where we’re 

not compliant and potentially discriminatory are 

In 2017, disability rights advocates 

have filed lawsuits against 

approximately 30 colleges whose 

websites fail to meet accessibility 

standards for students with 

disabilities, including students 

who are Deaf or hard of hearing 

or who have visual impairments

Another Title IX coordinator 

explained that neither the Title 

IX brochure nor materials about 

off-campus and on-campus 

resources for sexual assault were 

available in various formats

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 35
mostly around the accessibility of information 

being provided.”

When asked about accessibility of print 

information for students with visual disabilities, 

three college staff members reported that their 

college is attempting to adhere to the concept of 

universal design to make sure that all materials 

are accessible to all students. The Center for 

Universal Design defines universal design as 

“the design of products and environments to 

be usable by all people, to the greatest extent 

possible, without the need for adaptation or 

specialized design.”55 For example, one college 

staff member reported that their counseling 

center provides both paper and online intake 

forms (although neither of these formats 

guarantees accessibility for people with visual or 

print-related disabilities).

Access to Sexual Assault Trauma or 

Support Services

In response to students who have experienced 

sexual assault, colleges are providing support 

and trauma services, such as making confidential 

sources available to students who may not want 

to report an assault immediately, victim advocates 

(including peer advocates) who guide students 

through accessing immediate resources after an 

incident, mental health counseling, and support 

groups. Students are also given various options 

to report sexual assault if they choose. But 

again, access to these services for students with 

disabilities at all colleges is questionable. College 

professionals and students report that buildings 

housing these services can be inaccessible. 

Furthermore, disability-related supports, such as 

interpreters, may not be available immediately 

for students who need them. This section 

reports issues with physical access and explains 

challenges with providing disability-related 

supports in a timely manner. It also explains 

how colleges lack policies and procedures for 

personnel responding to crisis situations.

Physical Access to Sexual Assault 

Services

As reported previously in the section explaining 

physical access to in-person training, most 

college staff and students note that buildings 

at their colleges are physically accessible. But 

four staff members and three students reported 

challenges with physically accessing sexual 

assault services. A Title IX coordinator remarked 

on the culture on campus to make buildings 

accessible. This person explained that because 

the college does not have a lot of students with 

physical disabilities, the “argument” made by 

others is that a lot of students “don’t need those 

36 National Council on Disability
services.” These barriers can prevent students 

from receiving services if they have experienced 

sexual assault. For example, a sexual assault 

counselor at a college mentioned that the 

student counseling center does not have an 

automatic door opener for a student with physical 

disabilities. Further, this counselor explained 

that some counseling 

center rooms “are too 

small” for someone in a 

wheelchair or someone 

using an assisted-walking 

device. A college staff 

member responded in the 

questionnaire that while 

the Women’s Center was 

“as accessible as it can 

be,” access issues remain 

because students with 

mobility issues can only 

enter through the back door. Another sexual 

assault services administrator acknowledged 

similar access difficulties to the victim services 

building, and that wheelchair users would not 

be able to access the wheelchair lift located 

on the bottom floor because the floor was 

only accessible via stairs. This coordinator also 

acknowledged that the location of the building on 

the edge of campus acted as an access barrier 

for all students, including students with physical 

disabilities or mobility issues. One student 

reported similar access challenges. This student 

explained that not only is the sexual assault 

resource center located on the third floor in the 

student health office, that office is far from “other 

parts of campus,” making the office “so difficult 

to get to, and far from counselling, so difficult for 

those with mobility disabilities.”

One sexual assault services administrator 

described an additional challenge posed by the 

college’s lack of focus on accessibility issues 

for students with disabilities when accessing 

trauma services—the process of transporting a 

student with a physical disability for immediate 

medical attention after a sexual assault. 

Although the campus has a shuttle used to 

transport students who use wheelchairs, the 

shuttle is not accessible 

in crisis situations. The 

only option to transport 

a student using a 

wheelchair would be an 

ambulance. The staff 

member bemoaned how 

transporting a student in 

an ambulance would add 

another layer of trauma 

to the survivor. Because 

the college would need to 

use an ambulance and not 

regular transport, the coordinator hypothesized 

that the student may receive substandard 

trauma care, because in that community, 

emergency medical services would be required 

to bring the student to the local hospital 

instead of a hospital specializing in treating 

survivors of assault, as preferred by the victim 

services center.

Lack of Immediate Auxiliary Aids or 

Disability-Related Supports When 

Accessing Sexual Assault Supports

In interviews, college professionals gave varied 

responses about the availability of American Sign 

Language (ASL) interpreters or other auxiliary 

aides for Deaf or hard of hearing students 

seeking crisis support, such as reporting sexual 

assault to a Title IX coordinator, confidential 

source, or campus security and accessing trauma 

or counseling services.

Another sexual assault services 

administrator acknowledged 

similar access difficulties to the 

victim services building, and that 

wheelchair users would not be 

able to access the wheelchair 

lift located on the bottom floor 

because the floor was only 

accessible via stairs

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 37
Staff members from eight colleges 

explained that their colleges had some type of 

communication support immediately available 

for students, especially for those students who 

do not know ASL, or that they could access 

an ASL interpreter within a day. Five colleges 

reported having assistive technology available to 

communicate with students if ASL interpreters 

were not available. Two colleges reported having 

Communication Access Real-Time Translation 

(CART) systems that would provide real-time 

captioning for communication, two colleges had 

UbiDuo keyboarding systems where people could 

type to each other, and one college had both an 

UbiDuo and an FM system that provides portable 

amplification of sounds. One Title IX coordinator 

explained the varied resources at hand if a 

Deaf or hard of hearing student was assaulted 

and needed immediate assistance: “We do 

have staff that can sign and in emergencies 

could access them. We do have a gatekeeper 

at student services who would use UbiDuo to 

get them situated immediately. We subscribe 

to other services . . . immediate video relay. If 

I needed something right away, we could dial 

into the relay. It’s imperfect and I prefer to have 

trained interpreters but would have alternatives 

if that occurred.” One disability services director 

explained that a sexual assault helpline was 

accessible if a student had access to a TTY (a 

typewriter that can be used to make phone calls 

via a relay service) if the counseling services 

office was closed. This assumes, however, that 

a student has access to telecommunication 

equipment.

On the other hand, professionals from nine 

college campuses indicated that ASL interpreters 

were not “readily available” and a request would 

involve unknown wait times. The White House 

Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual 

Assault’s key components of sexual assault 

crisis intervention and victim services suggests 

that advocacy services should be available 

24 hours a day for immediate response, but 

whether colleges could adhere to this guideline 

was doubtful. When asked how colleges would 

respond if a student with disabilities or a Deaf 

or hard of hearing student wanted to make a 

report or access services, one disability services 

director said that, in general, “accommodations 

are not immediately available—it depends 

on what’s needed. There are no interpreters 

on campus. They must be arranged. It really 

depends.” One counselor mentioned that if a 

Deaf or hard of hearing student came to the 

center requesting services, the staff would be 

38 National Council on Disability
“scrambling” to figure out how to serve the 

student. No specific procedures were written 

about access for a Deaf or hard of hearing 

survivor of sexual assault. Instead, the counselor 

mentioned having to consult a supervisor and 

calling the disability 

services office on campus. 

This staff member 

concluded that a Deaf or 

hard of hearing student 

would have to wait much 

longer to be served than 

a student who was not 

Deaf or hard of hearing. 

At another college, one 

sexual assault services 

administrator believed no 

interpreters were available 

for therapy and students 

would need to see community providers. This 

staff member provided no response about 

how the sexual assault services center would 

accommodate a Deaf or 

hard of hearing student.

In contrast, three 

disability services 

administrators reported 

having interpreters 

on staff that could be 

used immediately in a 

crisis, such as accessing 

counseling services or 

reporting sexual assault. 

Two administrators 

suggested they would 

“pull” the staff interpreter from a current 

assignment in the case of a situation that 

needed immediate support, such as responding 

to a sexual assault incident. One administrator 

reported having done this before in crisis 

situations. A third administrator reported, 

however, that if no staff interpreters nor CART 

services were available, then the wait time for 

an interpreter would be unclear: “There would 

be no guarantee we 

would do it as fast as 

we could.” Instead, staff 

would resort to writing 

notes back and forth on a 

“pad of paper” with the 

student, if the student 

could write.56 This staff 

member acknowledged 

the unsuitability of this 

approach but had used 

it before in emergencies 

and considered it valid in 

the case of supporting 

a survivor of sexual assault. However, such 

ad hoc communication support strategies 

are not recommended by Deaf or hard of 

hearing advocates. 

This is especially true 

if the student’s first 

language is ASL, because 

interactions would occur 

in the student’s nonnative language, which 

can lead to confusion and 

frustration.57

Staff at four colleges 

also acknowledged the 

problematic nature of 

not having immediate 

disability-related supports in place for students, 

especially when relying on on-campus staff, 

because many incidents happen on nights or 

on weekends. One staff member explained, “If 

Instead, staff would resort to 

writing notes back and forth 

on a “pad of paper” with the 

student .. This staff memb

acknowledged the unsuitability 

of this approach but had used 

it before in emergencies and 

considered it valid in the case 

of ... sexual assa

One counselor mentioned that 

if a Deaf or hard of hearing 

student came to the center 

requesting services, the staff 

would be “scrambling” to figure 

out how to serve the student. No

specific procedures were written 

about access for a Deaf or hard 

of hearing survivor of sexual 

assault

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 39
[students] need accommodations immediately, 

or after hours, or [they are] reporting to police 

directly, that would be challenging.” One sexual 

assault services administrator elaborated on 

this challenge: “I think especially when it comes 

to ASL interpreters . . . How are we going to 

access them? I think traditionally, in theory, that 

if health services is open, we will contact them 

and they have a [interpreting] service we can 

use. They have a provider with interpreters for 

the [Deaf or hard of hearing population]. But the 

reality is that they are not open 24/7 and we get 

things during the time when they are not open.” 

A student elaborated on an experience with 

securing supports after business hours, saying, 

“It is not my job to figure 

out how to schedule an 

interpreter outside of the 

normal hours; it is yours.”

Even if interpreters are 

available, they may not 

have the language skills or 

preparation to interpret for 

survivors of sexual assault, 

especially in disciplinary 

proceedings, in a way that minimizes trauma 

and considers survivors’ safety. Interpreters 

who interpret for academic classes or remote 

interpreters may not be familiar with supporting 

survivors’ needs. In addition, using interpreters 

personally known to the student can compromise 

the confidentiality and objectivity of the 

interpreter.58 The Vera Center on Victimization and 

Safety names a lack of qualified interpreters as an 

additional communication access barrier faced by 

Deaf or hard of hearing survivors, in addition to 

the barriers named previously, and recommends 

that interpreters are trained in “vocabulary 

specific to domestic and sexual violence, trauma 

and communication, ethics, safety planning, and 

self-care” to support Deaf or hard of hearing 

survivors.59 Without this training, Vera Center 

on Victimization and Safety suggests supports 

may not be tailored to survivors’ needs and 

that “imprecise” communication can harm the 

accuracy of reports used in legal proceedings.60

The New York Office of the Prevention of 

Domestic Violence recommends survivor groups 

recruit and train Trauma-Informed Qualified 

Interpreters who could be shared across 

communities to provide effective communication 

for Deaf or hard of hearing survivors.61 One 

expert researching the prevalence of sexual 

assault among Deaf or hard of hearing students 

commented in interviews 

that interpreters who 

support Deaf or hard 

of hearing survivors 

should be familiar with 

the necessary language 

or procedures related to 

sexual assault services 

processes. This expert 

recommended that 

certified interpreters familiar with the legal 

process and language be available to interpret 

for sexual assault cases, similar to how federal 

courts and some state courts require these 

interpreters to have specialized training.62

Lack of Policies and Procedures 

Detailing Responses in Crisis Situations

Professionals recognized that much of their 

inability to immediately provide disabilityrelated supports was due to the lack of explicit 

procedures. Interviewees from 14 colleges 

(52 percent) reported that their colleges had 

no policies or procedures in place to support 

The Vera Center on Victimization 

and Safety names a lack of 

qualified interpreters as an 

additional communication access 

barrier faced by Deaf or hard of 

hearing survivors 

40 National Council on Disability
Professionals recognized 

that much of their inability to 

immediately provide disabilityrelated supports was due to the 

lack of explicit procedures

survivors of sexual assault who may need 

immediate disability-related accommodations. 

Instead, their responses would be determined 

“on the fly.” While the questionnaires did not 

ask specifically about crisis procedures, four 

questionnaire responses noted the lack of 

policies and procedures. 

One disability services 

administrator commented, 

“We haven’t discussed 

accommodations for those 

who have experienced 

assault.” Seventeen 

other questionnaire 

respondents indicated that the procedure for 

providing accommodations for sexual assault 

services was for students to disclose their 

disabilities or accommodation need to the Title 

IX office (which would then contact the disability 

services office) or the student would contact the 

disability services office directly. No responses 

indicated flexible accommodation processes 

with a variety of options during the sexual 

assault reporting and 

follow-up process.

Only three interviewees 

(11 percent) responded 

with specificity about their 

procedures on providing 

disability supports during 

a crisis. One Title IX 

investigator said, “We 

have a contact person 

at interpreting services. 

I haven’t needed them 

that fast yet. I haven’t had to test it, but we 

have an agreement for that to happen. [There 

is an] awareness of who to call and how to 

access.” Another disability services administrator 

mentioned that the disability manual had a policy 

specific for crisis situations but that this was not 

a college-wide policy.

The rest of the interviewee responses about 

procedures were hypothetical or adapted from 

other crisis situations when supports were 

needed immediately. 

These interviewees 

used uncertain language 

such as “what we would 

probably do” or “I assume 

that” when asked how the 

college would respond if 

a Deaf or hard of hearing 

student or student with visual impairments was 

assaulted and required immediate support. One 

Title IX coordinator explained that because the 

“situation has never come up,” his or her college 

lacks appropriate accommodations or policies 

that outline how to respond.

Interviewees transparently stated that their 

college lacked policies and procedures and 

acknowledged that these policies should be 

created. One sexual 

assault services director 

explained, “How 

do we ensure that 

students can get these 

accommodations, which 

are critical but are also 

engaged in supports 

for themselves as well? 

Some of these things 

we don’t have in place 

but it would be ideal.” A 

Title IX coordinator mentioned that although 

the college website states that students can 

request accommodations, it was insufficient to 

meaningfully support survivors with disabilities. 

Another disability services 

administrator explained the 

potential challenge if a student 

with a visual impairment was 

participating in this process, 

because there is an unchallenged 

assumption that claimants and 

witnesses must be able to see 

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 41
This coordinator explained that the college’s 

current policy is “way below standard here. We 

have tag lines that say that if you are a person 

who needs accommodations it says who to 

contact. It’s not very proactive.” One sexual 

assault services administrator mentioned that 

upon receiving the interview questions for this 

research project, it was 

clear that the college 

needed to “put some 

things in motion to 

realistically address the 

needs of students [with 

disabilities]” despite 

recognizing publicly on 

the college website that 

students with disabilities 

are a population requiring 

more attention. This staff 

member had only recognized the importance of 

students with disabilities in writing but had not 

thought about how to translate the language of 

the website into action steps.

During phone interviews, two disability 

services administrators said they recognized 

current gaps in their colleges’ policy language 

on the website. While explaining a specific 

procedure for requesting interpreters in crisis 

situations, one administrator recognized that 

crisis procedures were not mentioned on the 

college website, even though the college is 

able to secure interpreters within 24 hours (in 

contrast to the normal one-week notice needed 

for other requests). Another administrator 

reviewed the sexual assault policy page and 

noticed a lack of language pertaining to students 

requesting accommodations. The administrator 

acknowledged this misstep, saying, “I just looked 

at our new sexual assault policy again, and there 

are tons of resources, but nothing that says, ‘if 

you wish to have accommodations’ (which is my 

bad), for students or staff. Nothing here about the 

need for accommodations, which is not okay.”

Five students also commented on the 

lack of transparency and awareness about 

the accommodation process, as well as the 

inclusivity of college 

support services. Four 

of these students made 

the challenges known in 

their recommendations. 

One student mentioned, 

“Put info on what can 

be done for survivors. 

Share information on 

exactly what [disability 

services] can/would do for 

survivors [with disabilities] 

(on the website for example).” Another student 

suggested, “Advertise, clarify that access needs 

will be met, offer material in alternate formats/

interpreters/buddies/etc.” One student elaborated 

on a sentiment explained earlier in this chapter 

about the burden students may feel when 

requesting accommodations and wrote, “Provide 

examples of accommodations instead of making 

it seem like a weird edge case.”

A search for accommodation policies in crisis 

situations and contact information for disability 

services on Title IX or sexual assault resources 

websites of 27 of the colleges that participated 

in phone interviews yielded similar findings. 

First, only 1 of the 27 colleges in which staff 

were interviewed mentioned on their websites 

that information about sexual assault reporting 

or resources was provided in alternate formats. 

No policies for accommodations in crisis 

situations were posted. As mentioned in the 

[O]nly 1 of the 27 colleges in 

which staff were interviewed 

mentioned on their websites that 

information about sexual assault 

reporting or resources was 

provided in alternate formats. No

policies for accommodations in 

crisis situations were posted

42 National Council on Disability
section on “Accessibility of In-Person Education 

or Prevention Programs,” only 10 of the colleges 

posted the request period for students to request 

accommodations in advance for nonclassroom 

accommodations. The average wait time was 

5.5 days. Furthermore, only two colleges 

mentioned disability resources as a support on 

their sexual assault services or Title IX websites. 

One of these colleges mentioned this in in a 

downloadable PDF brochure, which may or may 

not be accessible by screen readers.

Recognition of the Lack of Policies and 

Procedures

Many respondents mentioned that participation 

in the NCD data collection process raised 

awareness of their colleges’ lack of policies and 

procedures related to sexual assault services 

and thus inattention to serving students with 

disabilities. With their new awareness, they could 

begin identifying policies or procedures to put in 

place. For example, one sexual assault counselor 

explained during an interview, “We need to 

revise the policy and procedures manual. It would 

depend on the type of accommodation needed 

and the need to involve the access center and 

the challenges with confidentiality. There is 

nothing that is written. There is nothing that is 

written in the procedure.” Another sexual assault 

services coordinator reported that participating 

in the interview made the coordinator more 

“conscientious” about the lack of procedures at 

the college for students with disabilities.

In interview and questionnaire responses, 

college staff members mentioned potential 

changes or modifications to their campus 

practices, based upon their increased awareness 

during participation in this study. One counseling 

center staff member explained that they would 

revise the policy and procedures manual to 

include provision of disability accommodations, 

based on existing barriers that were unearthed 

during the interview. One Title IX coordinator 

mentioned various steps that would follow:

I think first, look within sexual assault 

policy, [to include] a piece about disability 

services being offered. It needs to be 

brought up before. Put [an explanation] in 

email about those services. [We need to] 

talk with disability services and let them 

know about the email, and put together a 

protocol or memorandum of understanding 

with disability services, and working 

with disability services to help draft an 

accommodations letter for any student 

receiving accommodations through Title IX, 

and doing some training with all of campus 

or first those people who have direct 

interactions with those working directly 

with those students.

Accommodations Provided 

During the Conduct Process 

and Communication with Law 

Enforcement

Compliance with Title IX laws require colleges 

to investigate sexual assault or misconduct 

incidents. Eight interviewees reported that 

if students with disabilities go through these 

processes as claimants, the campus disability 

services office would work with the coordinator 

of the conduct process to provide the necessary 

accommodations to students. Five of these 

interviewees explained that if law enforcement 

or campus security were involved during the 

investigation phase, they would be able to provide 

needed accommodations if students disclosed 

their disability status to the Title IX coordinator at 

the start of this process. The Title IX coordinator 

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 43
would then request appropriate accommodations. 

However, no Title IX coordinator or disability 

services administrator mentioned that 

students would know how to request disability 

accommodations while also disclosing a disability 

during this process. Typically, students should 

not need to disclose their disabilities to anyone 

outside of disability services when requesting 

accommodations, because a diagnosis is 

protected health information under the Health 

Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. All 

interviewees indicated that disability services 

or an ADA coordinator would be called once 

a student disclosed a disability or need for 

accommodations. For example, one disability 

services administrator explained, “While we 

don’t have anything formal in place, our staff 

who are deans who coordinate the process 

would be contacting us and asking if they have 

accommodation needs.” However, this director 

had only participated in one process where both 

the victim and perpetrator had physical disabilities 

and could not speak to what would occur with a 

student who was Deaf or hard of hearing, but the 

director assumed that accommodations would be 

made. Another disability services administrator 

explained, “Every time a student with a disability 

identifies, Title IX thinks [the person has a 

disability], I get called to consult.”

Five disability services administrators 

reported in interviews that students were being 

given the appropriate accommodations at their 

colleges because staff participated in conduct 

management teams (Communication, Action, 

Response, Evaluation [CARE] teams) or students’ 

needs were addressed through collaboration 

between a diverse group of campus staff, 

including campus law enforcement. According 

to the National Behavioral Intervention Team 

Association, a CARE team is “a multidisciplinary 

group whose purpose is meeting regularly . . . 

track[ing] ‘red flags’ over time, detecting 

patterns, trends, and disturbances in individual 

or group behavior.” The teams are a “proactive 

way to address the growing need in the college 

and university community for a centralized, 

coordinated, caring, developmental intervention 

for those in need, prior to crisis.”63 One disability 

services administrator explained the process 

of collaboration between the disability services 

department and the student conduct office by 

saying, “The conduct manager serves on the 

CARE team. Any time one of my students goes 

through the [disciplinary] process, we consult on 

what that student might need. There is a letter 

that goes out to students—[it] indicates getting 

in touch with student conduct [department] or 

[disability services] if they need accommodations, 

and [students] can reach out during any time 

during the process for accommodations.”

Another staff member explained how the 

CARE team collaborates to support students 

who are going through this process to ensure the 

team accommodates their needs and does not 

traumatize them:

The director of disability services sits on 

our case management team for Title IX 

issues, so when names [of students] arrive, 

he could know . . . the student’s name, any 

additional challenges that the student might 

have presented. Our behavioral intervention 

manger sits in, as well. We would have a 

holistic view of a student’s needs before 

they get interviewed.

This staff member explained how these 

collaborative relationships came into play when 

supporting a student who had witnessed an 

44 National Council on Disability
incident of sexual assault and another traumatic 

incident after experiencing registering for 

disability services due to a prior incident of sexual 

assault. Because the team knew the student’s 

prior experiences, it was able to tailor its support. 

The staff member explained that the CARE team 

“knew [the student] was going to need more 

supports above what just happened. We did 

some real triage to make sure [the student] didn’t 

have to interact with new individuals.”

One interviewee reported how the conduct 

process can be problematic if the student has 

an invisible disability and has not made this 

known to the disability services office. If a 

student does not identify a medical or mental 

health condition as a disability or is not aware 

of the process for requesting accommodations 

during the conduct process, then the student 

may not receive equitable treatment. Only one 

staff member described a standard practice 

of proactively informing students about their 

right to request accommodations during the 

conduct process. At this college, the student 

conduct letter specifically mentions how to 

request accommodations, although the letter 

presumes students understand the campus 

definition of “disability” and have documented 

their disabilities with the disability services 

office. An adapted version of that statement 

follows:

You may choose to have a non-attorney 

support person attend any of the meetings. 

Please notify the college if you plan to 

have a support person attend; if you are a 

limited-English-speaking or hearing-impaired 

individual you may request an interpreter 

and it will be provided. You may also request 

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 45
other disability-related accommodations. 

We will work with the Disability Resource 

Center to guarantee equal access in 

this process. Please contact the college 

immediately if an interpreter or other 

accommodation is needed.

Three interviewees commented on the 

challenges that students with disabilities would 

face in the conduct process, specifically students 

with autism or students with visual impairments. 

One interviewee explained that in one situation, 

a conduct process went “better than they could 

have expected” because the dean of students 

knew the student with autism. The disability 

services administrator explained the potential 

challenges that can arise if a student cannot 

understand subtle or complex questions asked 

of them during this process, or how behaviors 

could be misinterpreted by others and affect the 

outcome of the investigation, noting, “As the 

investigators, [they] are looking for that pattern 

and was this person preyed upon? It’s because 

[the decision] is based on a preponderance of 

evidence.”64

Another disability services administrator 

explained the potential challenge if a student 

with a visual impairment was participating in 

this process, because there is an unchallenged 

assumption that claimants and witnesses must 

be able to see: “Our trainers and investigators 

are trying to figure out what happened. But if you 

can’t see what happened, how do they know to 

ask questions that aren’t visual to get the info 

you need? And I think that is the critical piece, 

and looking at these different populations to get 

to the information you need. And then relying 

on witnesses. If no witnesses, then you can get 

in a tricky position.” However, none of the staff 

interviewed had provided accommodations for 

a person with visual impairments and could not 

speak to how this process would unfold during 

a conduct process. As with other scenarios, 

staff could only guess what might occur in 

hypothetical situations when no procedures or 

policies were in place to provide guidance.

Access to Accessible Services 

Outside of Campus

Staff members from seven colleges reported that 

their colleges maintain relationships with offcampus sexual assault providers. Of those seven, 

only two staff members were certain that the 

providers could offer accessible services to Deaf or 

hard of hearing students, with one staff member 

explaining that the community provider would 

experience a “lag” in securing an interpreter. 

Other college professional staff members were 

unsure about the accessibility of these services to 

students with disabilities. Maintaining relationships 

with community-based providers is critical because 

students may be wary of stigma and may not 

want to access services on campus.65 In addition, 

campus mental health services can be at capacity 

and students may not be able to receive services 

in a timely manner, if at all.66 One staff member 

did not know if local services were accessible, 

while acknowledging that many students received 

sexual assault services from a local community 

provider because of the lack of assault services 

on campus. One Title IX coordinator believed that 

the community providers are not “equipped” to 

deal with a student with visual impairments, but 

that the provider can provide supports to Deaf 

or hard of hearing students.67 These responses 

by college professional staff suggest that 

creating relationships with community providers, 

especially providers with accessible services, is an 

afterthought. 

46 National Council on Disability
Chapter 6: “You’ve given me a lot to think about:” 

Existing Gaps in Services and Promising Practices

Responses by college professional staff in 

interviews and questionnaires indicate 

that colleges do not have policies and 

procedures in place for situations in which 

victims of assault have a disability—in particular 

students who are Deaf or hard of hearing. 

Students with disabilities remain on the periphery 

and are not addressed regarding sexual assault 

prevention, outreach, and services. In many 

cases, staff members are confident they could 

address any situation 

that may arise, but their 

confidence is based on 

numerous assumptions 

about on-campus and 

off-campus providers 

as well as assumptions 

about students’ shared 

definitions of disability and ability to articulate 

disability-related needs, prior knowledge of 

campus procedures and legalities, and ability 

to calmly and rationally self-advocate while 

participating in a traumatic crisis and its 

aftermath. Chapter 5 addressed two major 

gaps: the lack of college compliance with 

federal disability laws and the lack of policies or 

procedures that outline how staff are to respond 

when serving students with disabilities. With a 

heightened awareness from participation in the 

NCD study, many staff members identified new 

procedures or language to include in their sexual 

assault policies and additional ways to make 

programs or information accessible to students 

with disabilities.

This chapter explains additional gaps in 

colleges’ programming and policies, focusing 

on educational programs and college staff 

members’ understanding of disability. This 

chapter addresses collaboration between campus 

programs to ensure access for students with 

disabilities, how data 

collection and reporting 

marginalizes students 

with disabilities, and these 

students’ experiences 

with campus violence 

and sexual assault. This 

chapter also identifies 

some promising practices that may be replicated 

or scaled up nationally and also addresses the 

following research questions:

■ What gaps, weaknesses, and discriminatory 

policies exist in campus sexual assault 

services?

■ What are the current most promising and 

best practices and emerging trends (e.g., 

healthy sexual relationship training for 

incoming freshmen, bystander awareness 

training to teach students to step in to stop 

Students with disabilities remain 

on the periphery and are not 

addressed regarding sexual 

assault prevention, outreach, and 

services

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 47
sexual assault, climate surveys, and changes 

in college disciplinary board rules)?

■ Are disability student organizations 

connected to sexual assault survivor 

groups on campus? Are campus disability 

services and resource offices connected to 

mental health services to ensure students 

with disabilities are 

getting the ongoing 

services they need 

after an assault (e.g., 

therapy)?

■ Have college staff 

and faculty received 

training to provide 

support for students 

with disabilities who 

have experienced 

sexual assault?

■ Has campus law enforcement received 

disability awareness training in taking 

reports from victims/witnesses with 

disabilities?

Interactions Between Sexual Assault 

Support Services Offices and 

Disability Services

Lack of policies or procedures to address the 

needs of students with disabilities may be 

due to what some college staff consider the 

“siloing” of disability services and sexual assault 

services offices, such as the Title IX office. 

Seven college staff members and one student 

mentioned the separation of these campus 

services when explaining why their colleges may 

not be considering students with disabilities in 

sexual assault services. For example, one staff 

member of a disability services office explained 

the effects of this separation on college practice: 

“There is no training to the staff at the women’s 

center, no discernment of disability as one of the 

[students’] identities. There is not much contact 

between our office and the sexual assault 

people and protocols.” One student explained 

that their college could “improve” the sexual 

assault supports for 

students with disabilities 

and recommended that 

the college “significantly 

improve communication 

between the Title IX 

Coordinator/staff and 

Disability Services.”

A college professional 

explained, in questionnaire 

responses, how 

interactions between 

these groups may not 

occur because it is not part of the college 

culture: “As the disability service provider, we 

have worked with student services and other 

units (e.g., counseling and the health center) 

to provide suggestions, etc. However, this is 

done when we reach out. It is not something 

they automatically consider.” Another college 

professional mirrored these sentiments: 

“The problem that I’m seeing is that there’s a 

complete disconnect between sexual assault and 

disability services. Within disability services, they 

have an understanding that they are only there to 

provide accommodations for classroom learning. 

They don’t talk to each other and also understand 

themselves in limited ways and capacities. To 

my knowledge, [they] don’t have procedures or 

policies for it.”

In contrast, some colleges report that 

intentional interactions happen between Title IX 

“... [T]here’s a comple

disconnect between sexual 

assault and disability services

Within disability services, they 

have an understanding that 

they are only there to provide 

accommodations for classroom 

learning. They don’t talk to each

other .

48 National Council on Disability
and ADA/disability services and mental health 

services, and because of this, they are better 

able to serve students with disabilities when 

and if a sexual assault incident occurs. For 

some college professionals, these intentional 

interactions occur in CARE teams that were 

explained in detail in Chapter 5 under the section 

titled “Accommodations Provided During the 

Conduct Process and Communication with 

Law Enforcement.” A greater awareness of 

students’ needs may come about because 

these teams bring together staff from these 

offices, campus law enforcement, and mental 

health service providers to support students. 

These teams provide connections where college 

professionals could ensure that students receive 

needed counseling or supports. One Title IX 

coordinator mentioned that whether or not 

disability services is involved, the Title IX process 

ensures that students who are on “either side 

of the complaint” are receiving mental health 

services either on campus or from off-campus 

providers. CARE teams with disability services 

professionals may have a heightened awareness, 

however, that students receiving mental health 

services off campus are aware of their rights to 

disability accommodations on campus, including 

services for academic courses.

These teams can also create relationships 

between the disability services office and Title 

IX, which can be utilized in future incidents. 

One Title IX coordinator elaborated, “We have a 

partnership with the office of disability services, 

and we are both housed within the office of the 

dean of students. Coming out of that, we have 

a level of trust. And having led the behavioral 

intervention team, I know that many students 

with disabilities tend to be a higher percentage 

of complainants/victims/survivors (however 

they identify). [Student disability] ranges from 

psych, medical, physical, and other impairments. 

Seeing other disability services connected 

in that way, I had access.” Another disability 

director sits on a CARE team with the conduct 

officer and reported that they “collaborate 

closely.” Although they have not had a Title IX 

“incident” yet with a student with a disability, 

the two collaborate on other conduct issues 

and providing the appropriate accommodations 

to students. For example, a disability services 

director explained, “The conduct manager serves 

on [the] CARE team. Anytime [a student with a 

disability] goes through the process, we consult 

on what that student might need . . . I sent [the 

conduct officer] something for how to keep in 

mind disability services when thinking through 

sanctions and timing for those.”

Other staff members who report closer 

connections between sexual assault and 

disability services serve on conduct boards or 

collaborate as Title IX investigators and therefore 

are part of the Title IX process. Five of those who 

served in disability services roles at their colleges 

also participated in Title IX or student conduct 

process. When explaining promising college 

practices, college staff mentioned these tighter 

collaborations. Two colleges also mentioned that 

their disability staff is trained as sexual assault 

advocates. Sexual assault advocates provide 

confidential guidance and support to students 

who have experienced sexual assault and assist 

with filing reports and obtaining medical or 

trauma care.

Unfortunately, college staff did not report 

collaboration between organizations for students 

with disabilities (i.e., ASL clubs, disability cultural 

centers) and survivor groups. Professionals 

from 11 colleges reported that they did not have 

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 49
on-campus support groups for students due to a 

lack of enough students to form the groups. Only 

staff from nine colleges reported having campus 

sexual assault support groups. One respondent 

reporting on support groups explained that the 

connection with disability services was more of 

an awareness as opposed to actual collaboration 

around support group 

programming.

Lack of Disability 

Training Among 

Staff and Faculty

Lack of policies and 

procedures for students 

with disabilities may be 

due to the lack of staff 

understanding of disability. 

College staff from 12 

colleges reported in 

interviews that the counselors, sexual assault 

advocates, faculty, or other staff that may interact 

with students after an incident of sexual assault 

are not trained in disability issues, or they have 

only a limited understanding given what would 

be necessary when supporting students with 

disabilities in a crisis. Seven questionnaire 

respondents reported that disability training 

was not provided to staff that support survivors 

(i.e., wellness center staff, counselors) on 

their campus. Only four staff indicated in the 

questionnaires that peer advocates were trained 

in understanding disability, and five college staff 

reported being unsure about the level of training. 

Considering the prevalence of colleges using 

peer educators to support prevention efforts, a 

recent report highlighted the dearth of training 

peer educators receive in general.68 If most peer 

educators surveyed only receive up to 10 hours 

of training, then whether disability is included in 

that training is up for question.69 Only staff from 

two colleges reported that the disability services 

department partnered with sexual assault service 

providers to offer disability-related training. One 

disability services administrator reported being 

“very comfortable” sending students with 

disabilities to receive 

counseling services due 

to this partnership. The 

other college’s disability 

services office provided 

training to sexual assault 

advocates but not to staff 

at the counseling center 

who may provide more 

long-term counseling to 

survivors.

Disability training was 

not provided on most 

campuses, or disability training was focused 

on compliance with the ADA and Section 

504 and the process for requesting disability 

accommodations and services. One Title IX 

coordinator said disability gets “swept under 

the rug.” A sexual assault services coordinator 

concurred, reporting that the only disability 

training that crisis center advocates received was 

probably during their credentialing programs. This 

staff member recommended that the college 

provide a disability training similar to the twohour training that staff received about supporting 

lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer 

(LGBTQ) students. Another disability services 

administrator reported that their college needed 

to shift the campus culture to be more aware of 

disability, which will come with more education 

and training across the board, to faculty, staff, 

and students.70 In commenting on the lack of 

[T]he counselors, sexual assault 

advocates, faculty, or other staff 

that may interact with students 

after an incident of sexual assault 

are not trained in disability 

issues, or they have only a 

limited understanding ... wh

supporting students with 

disabilities in a crisis

50 National Council on Disability
disability training provided to staff, the disability 

services administrator said, “I’d like a copy of 

this [questionnaire from the research study] 

so that I can bring up the training issue for the 

campus.”

When interviewees reported that college 

sexual assault services staff received training 

about disability, the training primarily focused 

on how to refer students to the disability 

services office and accommodations, instead 

of information about disability itself. The 

unique needs of students with disabilities, an 

understanding of different types of disabilities 

and how individuals may experience them, 

how students may define disability, or framing 

disability as an identity beyond a diagnosis 

were not necessarily part of training courses. 

A disability services administrator explained 

how their college needed to do more because 

training focused on “disability compliance.” 

Another interviewee concurred and explained 

that counselors or staff members think about 

disability as centered on the “diagnosis” and 

accommodations as opposed to “ongoing 

adjustments” to support a student. This 

interviewee elaborated, “Their [counselors’] 

awareness about these [disability] issues would 

just be writing up documentation. There’s a need 

for awareness in terms of the ongoing impact on 

our students and how that might interact with 

other issues regarding why students have come 

to counseling in the first place.” Such training 

courses are recommended by college staff.71

Similarly, an expert that works with survivors 

with disabilities explained that such training 

courses should include topics beyond providing 

accommodations that discuss disability in broader 

ways, especially how trauma may affect students 

with disabilities:

 [The training should develop] an 

understanding and having a good grounding 

in trauma-informed practices, interactions 

informed by what has happened not 

only physically but also neurobiologically. 

Using more basic speech to interact [with 

a student] if the student has a cognitive 

disability. . . . Our focus is working with 

someone not only to explore rights to due 

process but also looking at their healing 

process—understanding the impacts of 

them coming forward or having a sexual 

assault, and that if they live in a mandatory 

reporting state, [the process] will influence a 

lot of other people. It can be very disruptive. 

[Within the process] of investigation 

and deciding to report, survivors’ need 

for support and healing gets lost in the 

whirlwind of all the other activities. We 

need to not lose sight that [students with 

disabilities] have the same needs of healing 

and connection and support around the 

healing as any other students.

Another expert who conducts research on 

abuse among people with disabilities elaborated 

on the need for support providers to understand 

trauma and trauma-informed practices, since 

many students with disabilities have experienced 

trauma before arriving at college. This expert 

explained, “In terms of how students are 

impacted by violence, the research seems to 

be that we are talking about people that [sexual 

assault] is not their first traumatic event. What 

does this mean, a layer of trauma that is on top 

of previous experiences?”

Colleges and sexual assault services providers 

seem to have a nascent recognition of the need 

for training courses on disability related to sexual 

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 51
assault prevention and support practices. In 

interviews, college professional staff mentioned 

two training courses that were provided to 

college staff focused on understanding disability 

and sexual assault. One interviewee described a 

community college system seeking specialized 

training to understand the needs of students 

with disabilities and how to support them if 

they were survivors of sexual assault. This twoday training was provided by a sexual assault 

services director and a sexual assault support 

provider specializing in disability. The 2017 

Campus Sexual Violence Prevention Summit 

hosted by the Minnesota Department of Health 

also included a presentation titled “People with 

Disabilities on Your Campus Are Victims/Survivors 

of Sexual Violence Too: Engaging in Inclusive 

Prevention and Response, Awareness, and 

Understanding.” Reportedly, this summit focused 

on supporting diverse populations and included 

presentations reflecting the racial and gender 

diversity on college campuses. However, both 

these presenters adapted research on adults 

with disabilities and sexual abuse and were not 

reporting research or data on college students. 

As stated previously in this report, no research 

exists to inform specific prevention and support 

practices on a college campus.

Disability Training for Law 

Enforcement

College professionals report that law 

enforcement receives more specific training 

regarding working with students with disabilities 

than other staff. Seven college staff interviewees 

and five questionnaire respondents reported that 

campus law enforcement are trained in disability. 

Two disability services directors reported their 

personal involvement in training law enforcement 

about this topic. The interviewees elaborated, 

however, that training may not be inclusive of 

all types of disabilities. Two interviewees said 

the training focused on either mental health 

disabilities or autism. One disability services 

director elaborated on the nature of the 

presentation: “Our on-campus and county police 

departments have all gone through a sensitivity 

training for students with disabilities, specifically 

intellectual disabilities. Like how body language 

looks, that sort of thing. All that would interact 

with students on our campus have had that 

training.” One interviewee suggested that due 

to training, law enforcement could be more 

competent interacting with a Deaf or hard of 

hearing student, but not someone who was deafblind or someone who had a physical disability 

because the training did not focus on those 

disabilities or disability in a broader sense.

Six disability service directors reported close 

relationships with campus law enforcement 

and suggested that, despite the lack of specific 

disability training for law enforcement, law 

enforcement would be open to receiving 

advice and support on how to interact with a 

student with a disability. One disability services 

administrator referred to a specific instance in 

which a student with autism was charged with 

stalking, and campus police “worked closely” 

with the disability office “to understand [the 

student’s] communication style and behavior to 

understand if [the student] was really a threat.”

Awareness of the Prevalence of 

Sexual Assault and Students with 

Disabilities

Another reason colleges may not have prioritized 

students with disabilities in their sexual assault 

policies is the lack of awareness of the higher 

52 National Council on Disability
risk of assault that students with disabilities 

face. One college staff member regretted the 

lack of focus on students with disabilities prior 

to participating in the study: “Sorry to admit that 

this subset of students had not really been a 

focus on sexual assault awareness, but it is now 

on my radar.” Another staff member suggested 

that concern about 

students with disabilities 

has not been “raised as an 

issue.” This is problematic 

because students with 

disabilities are likely to 

underreport incidents 

of sexual assault,72 and 

lack of reporting does not mean that students 

with disabilities are not experiencing assault 

at their campuses. Yet this lack of awareness 

is not surprising when even national advocacy 

organizations such as Center for Changing 

Campus Culture,73 the Campus Prevention 

Network, and It’s on Us74 do not include college 

students with disabilities as groups at higher risk 

for sexual assault.

While many college staff members indicated 

that focusing on sexual 

assault services and 

students with disabilities 

is not on their radar, 

college staff members 

from 13 colleges reported 

that they are conducting 

climate surveys on sexual 

assault, which can be a 

first step to gain greater 

awareness about the 

prevalence of sexual assault among different 

demographics. Climate surveys are becoming a 

more common practice after the White House 

Task Force, in their 2014 report, recommended 

that colleges institute these surveys to assess 

the magnitude of sexual assault at their college 

and campus attitudes on sexual assault. Colleges 

can tailor existing climate surveys that have been 

developed over the past few years or develop 

their own,75 and college administrators can use 

the guidance of the U.S. 

Department of Justice 

Office of Violence Against 

Women to develop and 

use climate surveys.76 The 

National Center for College 

Students with Disabilities 

also recommends 

that colleges use campus climate surveys to 

understand the needs of college students with 

disabilities in general.77 The Association of 

American Universities found that when 

campuses administered surveys, they used 

the results to inform programming and student 

support services.78 If colleges are aware of the 

statistics around students with disabilities, they 

may be more likely to increase support and 

services for students.

However, not all climate 

surveys automatically 

include students with 

disabilities or aggregate 

findings using disability as 

a demographic. A disability 

services administrator at 

a college reported that 

the college’s first campus 

climate survey did not 

ask students to identify 

by disability. The college plans to administer a 

new survey that will include this demographic for 

further examination, including specific questions 

“Sorry to admit that this subset 

of students had not really 

been a focus on sexual assault 

awareness, but it is now on my 

radar.

... [E]ven national advoca

organizations such as Center for 

Changing Campus Culture, the 

Campus Prevention Network, and 

It’s on Us do not include college 

students with disabilities as 

groups at higher risk for sexual 

assault

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 53
about level of support, such as “whether 

[students with disabilities] are registered or not 

and level of support [students with disabilities] 

are receiving.” The administrator hopes that 

conducting this revised survey will give the 

college a sense of the gaps regarding sexual 

assault services.

One ADA/504 

coordinator explained that 

the campus institutional 

research office worked 

with the Title IX office 

to tailor a survey and 

that it was not “off the 

shelf.” Including questions 

about disability may help 

campuses understand the 

scope of under-reporting, 

because after including these questions on a 

survey, that campus found that 21 percent of 

students with disabilities on campus reported 

experiencing nonconsensual touching or 

nonconsensual intercourse. The coordinator 

explained the implications of the survey on the 

college’s sexual assault programming as “being 

able to go in and look at what education we’re 

going to do generically, but we have to look at 

subpopulations: Greek life, men, disability, etc. 

We have these breakdowns in our climate survey. 

Educational practices at some level need to be 

tailored to hit people where they live.”

Students with Disabilities Are 

Not Addressed in Sexual Assault 

Educational Programs

A failure to develop clear sexual assault policies 

and procedures to serve students with disabilities 

is a distinct weakness in higher education, and 

it is discriminatory under the ADA and Section 

504 of the Rehabilitation Act. The lack of access 

to educational and outreach programming 

for students with disabilities reflects another 

problem in services. Thirty-one college staff 

members and four students reported that 

programs at their colleges did not specifically 

address students with disabilities. Only three 

staff members reported 

educational programs 

specific to students with 

disabilities.

The National Center 

for Injury Prevention and 

Control at the Centers 

for Disease Control and 

Prevention set forth 

guidelines in their report 

titled Sexual Violence on 

Campus: Strategies for Prevention. This report 

suggests that college orientation and training 

should be tailored to different populations, 

including students with disabilities.79 Two 

prevention research experts who provide 

technical assistance to colleges suggested 

that prevention programs are only effective 

when they are developed specifically to a 

target audience, including groups representing 

specific types of geographic and demographic 

diversity. For example, the experts explained 

that programs developed at a college in one 

region of the United States may not translate 

well to a college at a different region with a more 

diverse student population, where students dress 

differently or perhaps use different terminology 

or language. These experts elaborated that to 

make training courses accessible to students 

with disabilities, campuses need to move 

beyond a focus on accommodations, such 

as captioning or interpretation, and include 

A failure to develop clear sexual 

assault policies and procedures 

to serve students with disabilities 

is a distinct weakness in higher 

education, and it is discriminatory 

under the ADA and Section 504 of 

the Rehabilitation Act

54 National Council on Disability
situations or scenarios specific to students with 

disabilities. For example, they are developing an 

educational messaging campaign that includes a 

scenario with a woman with a physical disability 

who is in an abusive relationship with a male 

partner. They also recommend such scenarios 

be included in bystander programs to increase 

awareness among students without disabilities. 

The researchers elaborated on the importance of 

including students with disabilities:

We did a series of focus groups five 

years ago for social marketing bystander 

intervention images to identify a student 

with a disability who is a victim of intimate 

partner violence. One of the challenges 

for developing prevention to develop 

awareness and skills around victimization 

of students with disabilities [is that] we 

have a very narrow view of what a disability 

is. There are multiple layers that need to 

be unpacked when you say disability—

you are not just referring to someone in 

a wheelchair or someone who is visually 

impaired, and then you’ve got to unpack 

the uneasiness that many people in general 

have in approaching people with disabilities 

and offering assistance. They think, “Is this 

my role? Do they feel singled out?”

One disability services administrator explained 

that the effectiveness of generic educational 

programs may not resonate with students with 

disabilities because scenarios or examples do not 

include situations that students with disabilities 

may face more often, such as intimate partner 

violence. This director worked with a survivor 

with a disability who expressed confusion 

about how a situation reflected nonconsensual 

interaction.

The three colleges that reported providing 

tailored programming described the training as 

reflecting some of the principles noted earlier. 

One disability services director provided students 

with disabilities a disability-only space to discuss 

and ask questions about consent and assault 

so that students would feel comfortable asking 

questions that they may not feel comfortable 

asking in broader spaces with peers without 

disabilities. Another disability services director 

focused specifically on talking with students 

with autism to explain “appropriate behavior” 

and to help them understand how others might 

perceive specific behaviors. One questionnaire 

respondent elaborated that educational programs 

were tailored specifically to address the diversity 

of the college, which included students with 

disabilities, and that the college is “intentional 

about providing education and outreach that is 

intersectional,” assuming students may have 

multiple emerging and established identities that 

interact in complex ways.

Questionnaire responses from five students 

elevate the importance of developing prevention 

programs that are inclusive of students with 

disabilities. One student reported, “They don’t 

talk about students with disabilities in the context 

of sexual assault.” Another student commented 

that the assumption at their college is that 

“[students with disabilities] don’t get raped.” A 

different student elaborated on this theme and 

included a suggestion for campuses to “improve 

sex education for [students with disabilities] that 

is relevant to us. Use examples of real-life [people 

with disabilities]. Talk about the specific ways 

that a [person with a disability] might be targeted 

for sexual assault and abuse. Sometimes not 

just one assault, but people can be hurt again 

and again by the same person.” A fourth student 

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 55
highlighted the intersectionality of identities, such 

as students with disabilities who are LGBTQ or 

people of color, and how their college’s support 

and services providers lack this perspective.

One expert in sexual assault prevention who 

works with colleges explained that the disability 

community is not considered part of cultural 

competency training and 

does not fall under the 

definition of “diversity” 

groups. This expert 

suggested that colleges are 

successful with including 

the transgendered 

community and racial and 

ethnic groups, but not 

students with disabilities. 

One Title IX coordinator 

echoed similar sentiments 

when describing the focus of the student task 

force on sexual assault. When asked whether the 

task force considered students with disabilities, 

the director explained, “not directly,” but the 

group talked about “inclusivity.” The coordinator 

further elaborated that the group has discussed 

“racial inclusivity” and 

“transgendered or other 

LGBT” groups as well as 

“parents, nontraditional, 

young, [and those] trying to 

find partner companions.” 

Another interviewee who 

is also on a campus sexual 

assault working group 

reported that students with 

disabilities have not been a 

focus of the working group’s efforts.

These findings mirror nationwide trends. 

Rider-Milkovich found that only 10 percent 

(n = 68) of colleges implementing prevention 

programs are tailoring these to students with 

disabilities. In contrast, 33 percent of colleges 

are tailoring programs to international students, 

and 26.5 percent tailor educational programs to 

LGBTQ students.80

One reason for the lack of targeted 

educational programming at colleges may be due 

to the lack of research and 

best practices on effective 

prevention programs for 

students with disabilities. 

Experts in sexual assault 

prevention research 

interviewed for this 

study (who also provide 

technical assistance to 

colleges) report that the 

development of targeted 

programs for students 

with disabilities is “totally uncharted territory.” 

Consistent with the findings in this report, 

they noted that most colleges where they 

have worked are not identifying students with 

disabilities as a population at risk and therefore 

are not developing programs to address these 

students’ needs. The 

researchers caution 

that programs should 

not assume uniformity 

of experiences within 

the broad category of 

“disability” either.

While three colleges 

reported tailoring training 

courses to students with 

disabilities, 24 college 

professionals reported that they had not even 

considered creating programs and services to 

address students with disabilities. One sexual 

assault coordinator commented, “You’ve given 

Experts in sexual assault 

prevention research interviewed 

for this study .. report th

the development of targeted 

programs for students with 

disabilities is “totally uncharted 

territory.

One expert in sexual assault 

prevention who works with 

colleges explained that the 

disability community is not 

considered part of cultural 

competency training and does 

not fall under the definition of 

“diversity” groups

56 National Council on Disability
me a lot to think about.” Another explained, “As 

far as students with disabilities are concerned, 

it’s a critical point, and I am so glad we are 

having this conversation.” These staff members 

commented on an individual or campus-wide lack 

of awareness about the importance of addressing 

students with disabilities when developing sexual 

assault programming and services. For example, 

one staff member explained, “I’m not sure it’s 

on our radar to have programming specific to 

students with disabilities, so awareness would 

be one factor.” One sexual assault advocate who 

works closely with colleges noted,

So I think that we as a movement and 

in general are not even really asking this 

question and it’s really horrible. I think we 

need to. I think that [people with disabilities 

have] not been at the forefront of the 

campus movement to end sexual violence 

and those folks are more vulnerable to 

sexual assault and less likely to be able to 

access the systems and resources that we 

have made available.

Promising Practices for Colleges 

Adapted from Community Providers

Because of the lack of research on how college 

campuses can effectively support students 

with disabilities, practices from community 

providers can be used to guide college campus 

practices. The California Coalition of Sexual 

Assault explains numerous considerations 

when supporting survivors who have various 

disabilities, such as learning disabilities or 

physical disabilities.81 The Vera Institute of Justice 

provides programmatic guidelines explaining how 

community sexual assault providers can make 

their services accessible both physically and 

programmatically for survivors with disabilities, 

such as ensuring sexual assault services have 

a budget for accessibility, making buildings 

and materials physically accessible, making 

policies and programs inclusive of people with 

disabilities, representing people with disabilities 

in their materials and information, collaborating 

with disability organizations and providers 

in the community, and providing training on 

violence against people with disabilities.82

These guidelines can be used by sexual assault 

providers at college campuses as they develop 

inclusive and accessible programs and services.

In addition to providing guidelines to sexual 

assault providers to make sexual assault services 

inclusive of students with disabilities, the Vera 

Institute of Justice includes guidelines for 

disability organizations to make their staff and 

group more aware of people with disabilities 

who have experienced sexual assault. Disability 

services offices can adapt these programmatic 

guidelines to better equip their staff to service 

survivors with disabilities.83 Adapted practices 

include sponsoring training for staff about 

sexual assault policies and procedures, training 

other college professionals about disability 

and responding to sexual assault, providing 

clear and accessible materials at the office 

that outline students’ rights and reporting 

procedures, encouraging participation of office 

staff and students with disabilities in campuswide conversations about sexual assault, and 

supporting the development of partnerships with 

community providers.

Further, while no college reported specific 

guidelines to be used in creating effective 

Title IX services or programs for students with 

disabilities, other groups are beginning to fill this 

gap. Janet Elie Faulkner, an attorney, outlined 

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 57
several recommendations for Title IX proceedings 

in a blog entry from March 2017.84 These mirror 

several recommendations or ideas from students 

and professionals in the NCD research:

■ List the disability services office as an 

available resource

■ Link to disability services in Title IX FAQs

■ Offer assistance in complaint filing 

instructions to qualified disabled students

■ Adopt language from the school’s general 

student conduct procedure stating that 

accommodations may be available in a Title 

IX grievance setting

As noted previously, however, a more 

universally designed approach may be 

appropriate. While inclusive of people with 

disabilities, these recommendations still rely on 

students’ understanding of what a “disability” 

is, identifying as a student with a disability, 

being registered at disability services, being able 

to disclose a disability using that terminology, 

and knowing how to request accommodations. 

Putting these additional burdens on sexual 

assault survivors may be unreasonable. 

Furthermore, some “accommodations” (e.g., 

help filling out forms, copies of printed materials 

in digital format so they can be downloaded 

again later) may be helpful for students without 

disabilities, as well. Consideration of what 

students with disabilities may need could 

potentially lead to more compassionate and 

accessible services for all students.

58 National Council on Disability
Chapter 7: Sexual Assault Policy Compliance and 

Responses

Colleges must also comply with federal 

sexual assault laws when developing 

inclusive sexual assault policies and 

programming. Further, the Federal Government 

and individual states continue to devise new 

legislation to combat sexual assault on college 

campuses that can further colleges’ supports 

for students with disabilities. This chapter 

addresses the research questions related to 

policy compliance and 

response. Because many 

groups and advocates 

are currently working on 

addressing compliance 

to federal policies on 

sexual assault and making 

recommendations to 

improve services and 

compliance at the state 

and federal level, the 

broad themes will be reviewed and how students 

with disabilities are considered will be explored. 

This chapter addresses the following research 

questions:

■ Are college policies compliant with the 

Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, 

the Clery Act, and Title IX?

■ What are the federal and state 

legislative responses to campus sexual 

violence?

Compliance with the Clery Act

Several existing reports or audits suggest 

that campuses are struggling with Clery Act 

compliance. Missing policy statements or 

procedures are the main violation reported across 

the audits. For example, a review of 105 college 

websites in Ohio found that only 66 percent 

of colleges posted their sexual assault policies 

online.85 None of the six California colleges under 

review (two community 

colleges and four 4-year 

colleges) disclosed all 

campus policies in the 

2014 ASR. In those 

reports, VAWA policy 

statements were the most 

frequently incomplete 

or missing documents. 

Similarly, a 2013 audit of 

State University of New 

York (SUNY) colleges found that 19 of the 29 

colleges published ASRs with missing and/or 

incomplete policy and procedure statements. A 

review of six California colleges found that all six 

colleges were out of compliance with the Clery 

Act. As noted in Chapter 5, policy statements 

need to be available to all students, clearly 

outlining the campus response to sexual assault 

and encouraging awareness of the procedures 

for reporting sexual assaults. And as noted 

Several existing reports or 

audits suggest that campuses 

are struggling with Clery Act 

compliance. Missing policy

statements or procedures are the 

main violation reported across 

the audits

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 59
by interviewees, policy statements should be 

accessible to students with disabilities, including 

any online statements.

Colleges violate the Clery Act when they do 

not report accurate crime statistics. However, 

the Clery Act does not require that the crimes 

be identified as crimes against students with 

disabilities. Five of the six 

California colleges reported 

inaccurate crime statistics 

in 2013. Thirteen of the 

29 SUNY colleges also 

improperly reported crime 

statistics.86 A 2014 audit 

of 10 Minnesota colleges 

found that they violated 

many aspects of the 

Clery Act. Six institutions 

did not properly identify “Clery Geography,” all 

colleges failed to obtain complete crime data 

from law enforcement agencies, half did not 

maintain and allow access to crime or fire logs, 

four did not address new requirements related to 

VAWA legislation, nine ASRs were missing policy 

statements, and seven did not provide sufficient 

information about the availability of the report to 

students and employees.87 The U.S. Department 

of Education levies fines on campuses that 

violate any aspect of the Clery Act.88

Compliance with Title IX

Numerous colleges were found in violation of 

Title IX between 2011 and September 2017, 

according to the previous guidance on how 

sexual violence and harassment are covered 

under Title IX.89 In January 2017, the U.S. 

Department of Justice released a list of 304 

colleges and universities that were under 

investigation for violating Title IX by incorrectly 

handling sexual misconduct or assault issues.90

For example, the Office of Civil Rights found 

Harvard Law School in violation of Title IX 

because of the college’s failure to appropriately 

respond to two students who made complaints 

about sexual assault.91 Princeton University was 

also found in violation of Title IX because of 

failure to provide prompt responses to sexual 

assault.92

An audit conducted 

in 2014 of four California 

colleges and universities 

did not examine violations 

due to the investigation 

process but did investigate 

other violations of Title IX 

law. This audit found that 

all four colleges were not 

complying with Title IX.93

Specifically, these colleges did not ensure that 

faculty and staff (including coaches and resident 

advisors) were trained to respond and report on 

incidents of sexual harassment or sexual assault. 

While these four campuses seemed to comply 

with the prevention and education component of 

Title IX, the audit found inconsistencies. Students 

were supposed to receive information about 

reporting procedures and services as incoming 

students, but the audit found that content of the 

education did not align with updated policies. 

Similarly, reporting policies and resources were 

made available to students in brochures and listed 

online. However, a student survey conducted 

through the auditing process found that students 

were still unaware of the policies and resources 

available. Of the 208 students surveyed, 22 

percent indicated that they were not aware of 

resources on campus if they experienced sexual 

assault.94 Of these students, 35 percent (n = 208) 

reported experiencing 85 incidents of sexual 

assault or harassment by a person of the campus 

In January 2017, the U.

Department of Justice released 

a list of 304 colleges and 

universities that were under 

investigation for violating Title 

IX by incorrectly handling sexual 

misconduct or assault issues

60 National Council on Disability
community, but only filed Title IX complaints for 

13 percent of these incidents.

This examination did not disaggregate the data 

on different demographics of students to examine 

whether different groups, such as students with 

disabilities, and the degree of understanding 

of policies and procedures differed. However, 

these audit findings 

suggest that even when 

colleges provide education 

programs, those programs 

may not be effectively 

educating students about 

the resources and process 

available at their colleges. The findings indicate 

that colleges should tailor informational campaigns 

and education programs using research about 

effective prevention and supports, and make sure 

they are accessible to all, including students with 

disabilities.

State Legislative Responses to 

Sexual Assault

Various states have responded to campus sexual 

violence by adding specific policies in tandem 

with federal laws. None 

of these laws specifically 

address students with 

disabilities, but some may 

have implications for how 

students with disabilities 

fare on college campuses. 

More specifically, states’ 

responses to campus 

sexual assaults center on 

four policy areas: defining affirmative consent 

(i.e., “yes means yes”), describing the role of 

law enforcement, noting violations of student 

conduct on student transcripts, and addressing 

the role of counsel in the legal process.95 During 

legislative sessions from 2013 to 2015, 23 states 

introduced or enacted legislation concerning 

campus sexual violence.96 Of the 16 states that 

introduced policies around affirmative consent, 

policies were enacted in 4 states: California, 

Hawaii, Illinois, and New York. California and 

New York have the highest state standards for 

consent, in which consent 

not only has to be given 

voluntarily and freely but 

also consciously. These 

consent laws outline four 

specific circumstances 

under which consent 

cannot be given, and people incapacitated by 

mental health disabilities are included as such 

a circumstance. This was the only place where 

disability was mentioned, and the effects of 

this wording on the sexual behavior of college 

students with mental health disabilities are 

unknown at this time.

Other laws may impact the experiences of 

students with disabilities in the sexual assault 

process. For example, four state policies focus 

on the role of law enforcement in sexual assault 

proceedings, such as 

informing survivors of 

their right to report to 

local law enforcement, 

entering in MOUs with law 

enforcement or requiring 

that law enforcement is 

informed, and/or giving 

rights to survivors to 

decide whether to refer to 

law enforcement. Whether local law enforcement 

is trained in disability may matter in how students 

experience these interactions and the extent to 

which students trust law enforcement.

During legislative sessions from 

2013 to 2015, 23 states introduced 

or enacted legislation concerning 

campus sexual violence

Whether local law enforcement 

is trained in disability may matter 

in how students experience 

these interactions and the extent 

to which students trust law 

enforcement

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 61
California laws enact additional policies that 

require colleges to take specific actions to 

prevent sexual assault, not solely directing how 

colleges respond. California state universities 

are required to provide orientation programs that 

educate students and prevent sexual assault.97

California state laws also require colleges to 

adopt “victim-centered” 

protocols when addressing 

sexual violence that go 

beyond federal laws.98

Victim-centered protocols 

are those that elevate 

safety and concern for 

the victim and ensure 

compassionate delivery of 

services.99 This approach 

differs from most state 

responses, which one 

researcher believes do not “reflect the needs 

of survivors of sexual violence or the best 

interests of survivors of sexual violence.”100

Two interviewees mentioned that California is 

one of the exemplars of state policy in regard 

to sexual assault consent and related policies, 

and other colleges are attempting to model their 

policies after California. However, none of these 

campuses have specifically addressed the needs 

of people with disabilities in regard to services or 

due process.

In 2016, two other states also introduced and 

passed specific policies on college supports. 

Illinois passed a bill that mandates not only that 

colleges develop clear sexual assault policies but 

also that colleges provide confidential advisors 

that can guide survivors through the process 

of reporting and seeking assistance. Another 

promising law that may prevent sexual assault 

was passed in Maryland. This law requires 

colleges to conduct climate surveys on sexual 

assault. As mentioned in Chapter 6, conducting 

climate surveys seems to be a promising 

practice. However, disability should be included 

as a demographic characteristic in these climate 

surveys for college campuses to understand the 

increased risk for students with disabilities.

Federal Legislative 

Response to Sexual 

Assault

Since amending the Clery 

Act with the Campus 

SaVE Act in 2013, the 

Federal Government has 

not passed any additional 

legislation or amendments 

to direct campus sexual 

assault responses, but 

has made recommendations to colleges about 

prevention and supports. In January 2017, the 

White House Task Force to Protect Students 

from Sexual Assault recommended six areas 

for college administrators to consider when 

preventing and addressing sexual misconduct 

on their campuses: 1. Coordinated Campus 

and Community Response; 2. Prevention 

and Education; 3. Policy Development and 

Implementation; 4. Reporting Options, Advocacy, 

and Support Services; 5. Climate Surveys, 

Performance Measurement, and Evaluation; 6. 

Transparency. Only a few of these areas mention 

students with disabilities.

Congress is currently considering one 

bill that addresses campus sexual assault. 

Senators reintroduced the bipartisan Campus 

Accountability and Safety Act101 Senate Bill 856 

in April 2017,102 which mirrors policies already 

passed at the state level, such as mandating 

In January 2017, the White 

House Task Force to Protect 

Students from Sexual Assault 

recommended six areas for 

college administrators to 

consider when preventing and 

addressing sexual misconduct on 

their campuses

62 National Council on Disability
confidential advisors for students and campus 

climate surveys. As of August 2017, the bill has 

been in the Committee on Health, Education, 

Labor and Pensions from April 5, 2017.103 This 

Bill has the potential to increase supports to 

survivors with disabilities if passed. This report 

makes several recommendations to that end and 

encourages passage of 

the Bill with the suggested 

language.

State laws, as well 

as federal laws and 

recommendations, 

are addressing various 

prevention and support 

strategies highlighted as 

best practices in current 

research and advocacy organizations, such as 

increasing confidential reporting options and 

encouraging educational programs. However, 

states’ responses to sexual assault are still 

limited in their approach to actively prevent sexual 

assault. In addition, students with disabilities are 

not addressed in state laws and are tangentially 

addressed in federal recommendations. Taking 

a victim- or survivor-centered approach is a first 

step to address the needs of students with 

disabilities because this elevates the needs of 

the students first. However, first responders and 

other college staff have limited awareness of 

the disability and the specific needs of students 

with disabilities who 

have encountered sexual 

assault. Therefore, policies 

or recommendations 

that outline resources 

for students, such as 

availability of legal 

counsel or creating 

MOUs with local rape 

crisis centers, should 

also consider the support and training needed 

to ensure students with disabilities are equitably 

served. People with disabilities and/or disability 

advocacy organizations should be included in the 

application of these policies at colleges to ensure 

that programs are accessible and the language 

addresses the needs of people with disabilities.

Taking a victim- or survivorcentered approach is a first step 

to address the needs of students 

with disabilities because this 

elevates the needs of the students 

first

Recommendations from the White House Task Force to Protect Students 

from Sexual Assault (January 2017)

1. The task force recommends that campuses use a framework that outlines coordinated 

campus and community responses to sexual assault, designate a fully accessible Title 

IX coordinator, include relevant stakeholders in these efforts, establish a task force 

to monitor the campus approach, support student groups that engage in education 

prevention programs, and establish MOUs with community providers, such as rape crisis 

centers. This section does not mention students with disabilities.

2. The task force recommends that campuses provide education programs to students 

that consider the needs of diverse populations, including students with disabilities; 

reinforce positive behaviors and messages throughout the campus; make information 

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 63
about resources widely available to all students (including web accessibility); provide 

annual training courses to all staff at the college on sexual misconduct policies; offer 

training courses on how to respond when friends or family members disclose an incident 

of sexual assault; implement awareness campaigns and development; and implement 

a campus-wide communication plan addressed to all stakeholders about the college’s 

sexual assault programs.

3. The task force recommends that colleges develop a comprehensive grievance policy that 

defines the process for investigation and resolutions, defines remedies and sanctions, 

and keeps complainants and respondents abreast of the process in a timely manner. 

No mention of ensuring accommodations for students with disabilities is made in this 

section.

4. The task force recommends that colleges encourage reporting, including making options 

clear and accessible; consider implementing an online reporting system; designate fulltime victim advocates; provide or refer students to a range of support services; institute 

or have relationships with hospitals that have a sexual assault nurse examiner; and ensure 

that services and accommodations are responsive to diverse populations, including 

students with disabilities.

5. The task force recommends that colleges administer sexual misconduct climate surveys 

and maintain accurate statistics on sexual misconduct incidents, communicate findings 

from the climate survey, evaluate the college’s practices using a third-party evaluator, 

revise and adapt campus policy and procedures, and understand survivors’ experiences 

participating in the grievance process. No mention is made of demographics or including 

students with disabilities.

6. The task force calls for colleges to maintain accessible websites with college and 

community sexual assault supports, publish evaluations on the college’s policies and 

practices, comply with ADA by ensuring policies and procedures are available in multiple 

formats with easy accessibility, and provide information on the policies and practices and 

publish data relevant to sexual misconduct on the college’s website, including the ASR 

that is required by Clery.

64 National Council on Disability
Chapter 8: Policy and Practice Recommendations

T

his report highlights that federally funded 

research on sexual assault on college 

campuses has ignored students with 

disabilities while examining other demographics 

such as race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, and 

gender identity. It also finds that colleges are 

struggling to provide accessible and inclusive 

sexual assault programming and services 

to students with disabilities. Students with 

disabilities are not on the radar of many colleges’ 

sexual assault services and programs, and 

inclusion of training on sexual assault services 

is not on the radar of many disability services 

offices. Many college staff members seem 

unaware of the gaps or disconnects in services 

and reported that this study illuminated those 

problems simply by asking questions they 

had never asked. Staff seem to be making 

assumptions about how their college would 

respond when a student with a disability 

attempts to access sexual assault services, 

instead of operating from a place of certainty. 

Cobbling together attempts at the last minute to 

provide accessible services may delay students 

from receiving critical services in a timely 

manner. Further, by not considering students 

with disabilities more centrally in sexual assault 

prevention programming, colleges are ignoring 

a key student population that may be more at 

risk. The policy and practice recommendations 

that follow capitalize on existing laws and 

recommendations by including disability, 

considering universal design, and incorporating 

recommendations to ensure federal compliance 

as a minimum for all programming.

This chapter addresses the final research 

question for this report through its listings of 

research findings and policy recommendations:

■ What policy and system reforms are needed 

in postsecondary educational settings?

Findings

Federal

■ Federal-level research studies on sexual 

assault on college campuses, funded by the 

Department of Justice’s Office on Violence 

Against Women and the National Institute 

of Justice, have not included disability as a 

demographic as they have race/nationality, 

and sexual orientation. This includes 

the Justice Department’s 2016 Campus 

Climate Survey Validation Study—funded 

by the Office of Violence Against Women 

and conducted by the Bureau of Justice 

Statistics, which did not include disability 

as a demographic, missing the opportunity 

to gather data on the prevalence of sexual 

assault on students with disabilities.

■ The 2014 White House Task Force report, 

Not Alone, did not include disability as a 

demographic in its sample campus climate 

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 65
survey, setting the tone for colleges and 

researchers to omit disability in campus 

climate studies as well.

Colleges

■ Colleges lack policies and procedures to 

ensure disability-related supports are readily 

available to students to communicate 

with sexual assault first responders. 

This includes informing students that 

disability-related accommodations are 

available and providing appropriate contact 

information for students or staff to request 

accommodations.

■ College sexual assault prevention and 

education programs are not fully accessible 

to students with disabilities. Online training 

courses may not be captioned, and inperson training courses may be held in 

college buildings that are not physically 

accessible to students.

■ College websites and printed information 

about sexual assault resources and 

information are not accessible to students 

with visual impairments and students with 

print-based disabilities (e.g., dyslexia). Some 

websites and online forms are not screen 

reader accessible, and do not adhere to 

guidelines of web accessibility (i.e., not 

accessible to people with limited vision or 

blindness).

■ Campus assault prevention and education 

programs are not inclusive of students with 

disabilities, and college staff lack awareness 

that such programs should be accessible to 

students with disabilities, and staff are not 

trained in disability accommodations.

Recommendations

Congress

1. Congress should amend the Clery Act as 

follows:

a. Require colleges to collect the number of 

all reported sexual assaults on students 

with disabilities (not just when the 

assaults are hate crimes) and include 

this information in their annual security 

report.

b. Require colleges to include a description 

of the disability-related accommodations 

available to students with disabilities who 

have experienced sexual assault in their 

description of the procedures that they 

will follow once an incident of domestic 

violence, dating violence, sexual assault, 

or stalking occurs.

c. Require colleges to include a statement 

regarding the disability-related 

accommodations that will be made 

available to students with disabilities 

during the reporting and disciplinary 

process, such as auxiliary communication 

aids or interpreters, and how to request 

those accommodations.

d. Require memoranda of understanding 

(MOUs) between colleges and local 

law enforcement to include protocols 

for communicating with students who 

are Deaf.

e. Require college websites to 

include information on services and 

accommodations for victims of sexual 

assault with disabilities, including who to 

contact to request accommodations.

66 National Council on Disability
2. Congress should pass the Campus 

Accountability and Safety Act (S. 856) with 

the following additions:

a. Require grant applicants under 

proposed Section 8, part BB, to 

describe how they will serve students 

with disabilities in their description 

of how underserved populations on 

campus will be served.

b. Add a survey question to proposed 

Section 19 on whether the victim had a 

disability at the time of the assault, and 

what type of disability.

c. Require colleges to provide information 

on how to request disability-related 

reasonable accommodations in their 

Written Notice of Institutional Disciplinary 

Process.

3. Congress should require that research 

funded by the Office on Violence Against 

Women on campus sexual assault include 

students with disabilities to gather data on 

the problem as it pertains to students with 

disabilities, and to develop strategies for 

preventing and reducing the risk of sexual 

assault and effectively responding to victims 

with disabilities.

Department of Education

1. The ED should develop and publish a 

technical assistance document or training 

for colleges on the rights of students 

with disabilities to have necessary 

accommodations in the process of 

reporting assault, utilizing sexual assault 

support services, and in the institutional 

disciplinary process. This training should 

include information on various types of 

disability-related accommodations, including 

captioning services and sign-language 

interpreter services.

ED Office for Civil Rights (OCR)

1. OCR should

a. Inform colleges that they must provide 

required Title IX information in accessible 

formats to students with disabilities, 

specifically information on their rights 

under Title IX, the contact information 

for the Title IX coordinator, how to file 

a complaint alleging a violation of Title 

IX, and how to request disability-related 

accommodations.

b. Encourage colleges to reach out to 

students with disabilities about sexual 

assault educational programs, available 

support services, and available disabilityrelated accommodations available to 

access them.

c. Encourage colleges to provide disabilityawareness training for campus security 

first responders.

d. Encourage colleges to include 

information on how to request disabilityrelated accommodations on their Title IX 

web pages.

e. Encourage colleges to make outreach 

and educational materials regarding 

sexual assault services available in 

accessible formats, and through various 

outlets accessible to students.

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 67
The National Center on Safe and 

Supportive Learning Environments 

(NCSSLE)

1. NCSSLE should include information on 

disability, including communicating with 

victims with disabilities who are Deaf or 

hard of hearing, in its trauma-informed 

training programs.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)

1. BJS should include students with disabilities 

as a demographic when conducting research 

on sexual assault on college campuses.

The Center for Campus Public Safety 

(CCPS)

1. CCPS should include information on 

disability, including communicating with 

victims with disabilities who are Deaf or 

hard of hearing, in their trauma-informed 

training programs for school officials and 

campus and local law enforcement.

The Office on Violence Against 

Women (OVW)

1. OVW should include information on 

disability, including communicating with 

victims with disabilities who are Deaf or 

hard of hearing, in its trauma-informed 

training programs for school officials and 

campus and local law enforcement.

2. OVW should require all colleges that submit 

proposals under the Grants to Reduce Sexual 

Assault, Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, 

and Stalking on Campus Program to

a. Require grantees that provide outreach 

and educational materials regarding 

sexual assault services to students, to 

provide them in accessible formats and 

inform the college community that these 

are available.

b. When OVW funds research on sexual 

assault on college campuses, require 

researchers to include students with 

disabilities as a demographic. For 

example, allow students to identify 

if they have a disability in surveys/

questionnaires, etc.

Colleges

To ensure access to sexual assault supports and 

services, colleges should:

1. Include students with disabilities as a 

demographic in campus climate surveys on 

sexual assault.

2. Create crisis policies and procedures on 

how to provide sexual assault services 

to students with sensory disabilities, 

especially Deaf or hard of hearing students, 

so that students receive services within 

24 hours.

3. Guarantee that sexual assault first 

responders and support providers have 

access to emergency interpreter services 

or other communication methods 

(i.e., Communication Access RealTime Translation) so that students can 

communicate with staff immediately.

4. Ensure that sexual assault information (i.e., 

fliers, posters, websites) are accessible to 

students with visual disabilities, learning 

disabilities, and cognitive deficits.

5. Ensure that students can access sexual 

assault reporting or connect with crisis 

counseling or other supports through 

various modes of communication (i.e., 

online, text messages, or phone).

68 National Council on Disability
6. Create formal agreements with communitybased providers with the expertise to 

support survivors with disabilities.

7. Include information about disability and 

accommodations on the Title IX web page 

and related information.

8. Include contact information in Title 

IX policies and related materials for 

anyone to request disability services and 

accommodations.

To address the unique needs of survivors of 

sexual assault with disabilities, colleges should:

1. Develop and implement sexual assault 

prevention and support service training with 

messaging campaigns that are inclusive and 

welcoming to students with disabilities on 

college campuses.

2. Provide disability-related and traumainformed practice training to prevention 

and first responder staff (i.e., advocates, 

crisis counselors, peer advocates, sexual 

assault nurse examiners) and campus 

security so that they understand how to 

effectively prevent and support students 

with disabilities after an incident of sexual 

assault.

3. Establish and maintain active collaborative 

relationships between Title IX, sexual assault 

services, counseling and health services, 

and disability services.

4. College Disability Service Center staff 

should be actively involved in college sexual 

assault prevention and support efforts and 

trained on Title IX procedures.

5. If colleges are using White House Task 

Force guidelines to enhance services and 

programs, ensure that disability services, 

organizations for student with disabilities, 

and academic fields related to disability 

(e.g., disability studies, Deaf studies, 

and American Sign Language programs) 

are included in discussions and the 

development of recommendations.

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 69
70 National Council on Disability
Endnotes

1 RAINN, Effects of Sexual Violence, accessed November 18, 2017, https://www.rainn.org/effects-sexual-violence.

2 Although many advocates prefer to use the term survivor to describe an individual who has been sexually 

assaulted, the term victim is also widely used. These terms are used interchangeably throughout this 

document.

3 This report focuses on sexual assault at postsecondary institutions—such as colleges, universities, 

community colleges, graduate and professional schools, and trade schools—we use the term colleges to refer 

to these institutions.

4 Christopher Krebs et al., Campus Climate Survey Validation Study Final Technical Report (Washington, DC: 

Bureau of Justice Statistics. January 20, 2016).

5 David Cantor et al., Report on the AAU Campus Climate Survey on Sexual Assault and Sexual Misconduct

(University of Pennsylvania, 2015) at 35,102.

6 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD’s Regions, accessed November 9, 2017, 

https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/localoffices/regions.

7 David Cantor et al., at 35, 102. See also AAU Campus Climate Survey on Sexual Assault and Sexual 

Misconduct Fact Sheet, https://www.aau.edu/sites/default/files/%40%20Files/Climate%20Survey/Fact%20

Sheet%20for%20AAU%20Climate%20Survey%209-21-15_0.pdf, accessed November 17, 2017.

8 Id. at III.

9 Christopher Krebs et al., The Campus Sexual Assault (CSA) Study: Final Report (Washington, DC: National 

Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice, 2007).

10 Not Alone, The First Report of the White House Task Force (Washington, DC: The white House, 2014), 

https://www.justice.gov/ovw/page/file/905942/download.

11 Id. at 21.

12 The Task Force report also charged the Justice Department, through both its Center for Campus Public Safety 

and its Office on Violence Against Women, to develop trauma-informed training programs for school officials 

and campus and local law enforcement, and charged the Department of Education’s National Center on Safe 

and Supportive Learning with the same task for campus health centers. NCD has not been able to access 

these trainings to see if they include information on assisting sexual assault survivors with disabilities.

13 Christopher Krebs et al. (2016).

14 Understanding the Campus Climate Validation Study Final Technical Report, accessed November 18, 2017, 

https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/blog/understanding-campus-climate-survey-validation-study-finaltechnical-report.

15 Christopher Krebs et al., at 177.

16 Christopher Krebs et al., at ES-2.

17 Office for Civil Rights, Revised Sexual Harassment Guidance (66 Fed. Reg. 5512, Jan. 19, 2001), accessed 

November 1, 2017, https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/shguide.pdf. See also 20 U.S.C. § 1092(f).

18 U.S. Department of Justice, “Sexual Assault,” accessed August 10, 2017, https://www.justice.gov/ovw/

sexual-assault#sa.

19 Christopher P. Krebs et al. (2007).

20 White House Task Force to Prevent Sexual Assault, Preventing and Addressing Campus Sexual Misconduct: A 

Guide for University and College Presidents, Chancellors, and Senior Administrators (Washington, DC: White 

House Task Force to Prevent Sexual Assault, 2017).

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 71
21 Catherine Lahmon, Questions and Answers on Title IX and Sexual Violence (Washington, DC: U.S. 

Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights, 2014), accessed August 10, 2017, https://www2.ed.gov/about/

offices/list/ocr/docs/qa-201404-title-ix.pdf.

22 J. Porter and L. M. Williams, “Intimate Violence among Underrepresented Groups on a College Campus,” 

Journal of Interpersonal Violence 26, no.16 (2011): 3210–3224. Finding statistically significant associations 

between Deaf and Hard of Hearing students and psychological abuse and physical abuse; J. L. Porter and L. 

M. Williams, “Dual Marginality: The Impact of Auditory Status and Sexual Orientation on Abuse in a College 

Sample of Women and Men,” Journal of Aggression Maltreatment & Trauma 22, no. 6 (2013): 577–589. 

Finding that gay, lesbian, and bisexual students who also were Deaf or hard of hearing were more likely 

to experience sexual, physical, and psychological abuse than those in mainstream majority groups; R. A. 

Elliott Smith and L. H. Pick, “Sexual Assault Experienced by Deaf Female Undergraduates: Prevalence 

and Characteristics,” Violence and Victims 30, no. 6 (2015): 948–959. Finding that more than two-thirds of 

the participants (69%) reported experiencing at least one assault and more than half (56%) experienced 

multiple types of assault; B. W. Reyns and H. Scherer, “Stalking Victimization Among College Students: The 

Role of Disability Within a Lifestyle-Routine Activity Framework,” Crime & Delinquency (2017). Finding that 

disability was a significant risk factor for victimization; over 10 percent of students with disabilities reported 

experiencing a stalking victimization compared with only 5 percent of students without disabilities.

23 Joseph W. Madaus, “The History of Disability Services in Higher Education,” New Directions for Higher 

Education, no. 154 (2011): 5–15.

24 Thomas D. Snyder, Cristobal de Brey, and Sally A. Dillow, “Table 311.1. Number and Percentage Distribution 

of Students Enrolled in Postsecondary Institutions, by Level, Disability Status, and Selected Student 

Characteristics: 2007–08 and 2011–12,” in Digest of Education Statistics 2014 (NCES 2016-006) (Washington, 

DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, 

2016), accessed on September 1, 2017, https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_311.10.asp; 

Robert Gallagher, National Survey of College Counseling Centers 2014 (Alexandria, VA: The International 

Association of Counseling Services, 2015).

25 National Council on Disability, Mental Health on College Campuses: Investments, Accommodations Needed 

to Address Student Needs (Washington, DC: National Council on Disability, 2017), accessed September 1, 

2017, https://www.ncd.gov/sites/default/files/NCD_Mental_Health_Report_508.pdf.

26 Ibid.

27 “HUD’s Regions,” accessed September 1, 2017, https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/localoffices/

regions.

28 Pub. L. 93-112, 87 Stat. 394 (29 U.S.C. 794), as amended.

29 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101–12300.

30 34 C.F.R.§ 104.3 (k)(2)(i).

31 34 C.F.R. § 104.43 (a).

32 At the postsecondary educational level, a qualified student with a disability is a student with a disability 

who meets the academic and technical standards requisite for admission or participation in the institution’s 

educational program or activity. 34 C.F.R. § 104.3(l)(2).

33 34 C.F.R. 104.3(j)(2)(i) defines a physical or mental impairment as any physiological disorder or condition, 

cosmetic disfigurement, or anatomical loss affecting one or more of the following body systems: neurological; 

musculoskeletal; special sense organs; respiratory, including speech organs; cardiovascular; reproductive; 

digestive; genito-urinary; hemic and lymphatic; skin; and endocrine; or any mental or psychological disorder, 

such as mental retardation, organic brain syndrome, emotional or mental illness, and specific learning 

disabilities.

34 U.S. Department of Education, “Auxiliary Aids and Services for Postsecondary Students with Disabilities,” 

accessed October 31, 2017, https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/auxaids.html.

35 U.S. Dept. of Education, “Auxiliary Aids,” https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/auxaids.html.

72 National Council on Disability
36 42 U.S.C. §12181(7)(j); 28 C.F.R. Part 36.

37 28 C.F.R.§ 35.150(b).

38 29 U.S.C. §794(d).

39 Pub.L.105-220, 112 Stat. 936 (August 7, 1998).

40 20 U.S.C. § 1092(f).

41 Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act Of 2013, Pub. L. 113-4 (March 7, 2013.)

42 20 U.S.C. §1681 et seq.

43 U.S. Department of Labor, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management, “Title IX, 

Education Amendments of 1972,” accessed July 24, 2017, https://www.dol.gov/oasam/regs/statutes/titleix.

htm.

44 Office for Civil Rights, Revised Sexual Harassment Guidance (66 Fed. Reg. 5512, Jan. 19, 2001), accessed 

November 1, 2017, https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/shguide.pdf. See also OCR’s September 

2017 Q&A documents, accessed November 9, 2017, https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/qatitle-ix-201709.pdf.

45 34 C.F.R. § 106.8(b)

46 Association of American Universities, AAU Campus Activities Report: Combating Sexual Assault and 

Misconduct (Washington, DC: Association of American Universities, 2017), accessed July 24, 2017, https://

www.aau.edu/sites/default/files/AAU-Images/Key-Issues/Campus-Safety/AAU%20Climate%20Activities%20

Full%20Report.pdf.

47 Holly Rider-Milkovich, Charting the Path Forward: National Data Highlights on Promising Trends and 

Continuing Challenges in Campus Sexual Assault Prevention (Campus Prevention Network, It’s on Us, 2017),

accessed July 26, 2017, http://vawnet.org/material/charting-path-forward-national-data-highlights-promisingtrends-and-continuing-challenges.

48 Victoria L. Banyard, “Improving College Campus–Based Prevention of Violence Against Women: A Strategic 

Plan for Research Built on Multipronged Practices and Policies,” Trauma, Violence, & Abuse 15, no. 4 (2014): 

339–351.

49 Jane E. Palmer and Erik Alda, “Examining the Impact of Federal Grants to Reduce Violent Crimes Against 

Women on Campus,” The Review of Higher Education 40, no. 1 (2016): 63–89.

50 Patricia A. Findley, Sara-Beth Plummer, and Sarah McMahon, “Exploring the Experiences of Abuse of College 

Students with Disabilities,” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 31, no. 17 (2015): 2801–2823.

51 Colleges can select a range of online education programs to provide mandated prevention educational 

programs. A list of potential programs can be found at https://cultureofrespect.org/colleges-universities/

programs, accessed July 26, 2017.

52 U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, Delivering Justice: Report to the President and 

Secretary of Education Under Section 203(b)(1) of the Department of Education Organization Act, FY 2015

(Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2016).

53 Peter Schmidt, “One Activist Has Hundreds of Colleges under the Gun to Fix Their Websites,” 

Chronicle of Higher Education (July 2017), accessed August 10, 2017, http://www.chronicle.com/article/

One-Activist-Has-Hundreds-of/240551.

54 California State Auditor, California State Government Websites: Departments Must Improve Website 

Accessibility So That Persons with Disabilities Have Comparable Access to State Services Online

(Sacramento, CA: California State Auditor, 2015), accessed August 5, 2017, http://www.auditor.ca.gov/pdfs/

reports/2014-131.pdf.

55 North Carolina State University, “The Principles of Universal Design,” accessed July 9, 2017, 

https://www.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/about_ud/udprinciplestext.htm.

56 This staff member did not report how they dealt with the transcript of the conversation.

57 Nancy Smith and Charity Hope, Culture, Language, and Access: Key Considerations for Serving Deaf 

Survivors of Domestic and Sexual Violence (New York, NY: Vera Institute of Justice, 2015), accessed 

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 73
August 15, 2017, https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/Publications/culture-languageand-access-key-considerations-for-serving-deaf-survivors-of-domestic-and-sexual-violence/legacy_downloads/

serving-deaf-survivors-domestic-sexual-violence.pdf.

58 Kelly Stewart, Anna Witter-Merithew, and Margaret Cobb, Best Practices: American Sign Language and 

English Interpretation within Legal Settings (The National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers, 

2009), accessed August 15, 2017, http://www.interpretereducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/

LegalBestPractices_NCIEC2009.pdf.

59 Stewart et al., Best Practices, 17.

60 Stewart et al., Best Practices, 16.

61 Office for the Prevention of Domestic Violence, “Bulletins – Summer 2013 OPDV Bulletin,” accessed 

August 15, 2017, http://www.opdv.ny.gov/public_awareness/bulletins/summer2013/deafdvsurvivors.html.

62 Stewart et al., Best Practices. Supra at 43.

63 The National Behavioral Intervention Team Association, “Behavioral Intervention Teams,” accessed July 20, 

2017, https://nabita.org/behavioral-intervention-teams.

64 Data collection for this study was completed prior to the Department of Education’s rescinding of the Obama 

administration’s guidelines on the standard of proof.

65 Chiara Sabina and Lavina Y. Ho, “Campus and College Victim Responses to Sexual Assault and Dating 

Violence: Disclosure, Service Utilization, and Service Provision,” Trauma, Violence, & Abuse 15, no. 3 (2014): 

201–226.

66 National Council on Disability, Mental Health on College Campuses. Supra at 16.

67 None of these respondents were asked for or provided information on how students’ insurance plans would 

cover such services.

68 Rider-Milkovich, Charting the Path Forward. Supra at 32.

69 Rider-Milkovich, Charting the Path Forward, 11. Supra at 32.

70 Wendy Harbour and Daniel Greenberg, “Campus Climate and Students with Disabilities,” National Center 

for College Students with Disabilities 1, no. 2 (2017), accessed August 11, 2017, http://www.nccsdonline.org/

research-briefs.html.

71 Lauren Shallish, “A Different Diversity? Challenging the Exclusion of Disability Studies from Higher Education 

Research and Practice,” in Disability as Diversity in Higher Education: Policies and Practices to Enhance 

Student Success, ed. Eunyoung Kim and Katherine C. Aquino (New York, NY: Routledge, 2017), 19–30.

72 Findley et al., Exploring the Experiences of Abuse. Supra at 35.

73 Center for Changing our Campus Culture, Addressing Gender-Based Violence on College Campuses: Guide to 

a Comprehensive Model (Center for Changing our Campus Culture, 2017).

74 Rider-Milkovich, Charting the Path Forward.

75 Jake New, “Creating the Right Climate Survey,” Inside Higher Ed (July 29, 2016), accessed June 17, 2017, 

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/07/29/campus-climate-surveys-abound-does-disagreement-overwhat-works-best?width=775&height=500&iframe=true.

76 U.S. Department of Justice, Administrator Information Packet on Campus Climate Surveys (Washington, DC: 

U.S. Department of Justice, 2017), accessed June 16, 2017, https://www.justice.gov/ovw/page/file/929846/

download.

77 Harbour, “Campus Climate.” Supra at 54.

78 Association of American Universities, AAU Campus Activities Report. Supra at 31.

79 Jenny Dills, Dawn Fowler, and Gayle Payne, Sexual Violence on Campus: Strategies for Prevention (Atlanta, 

GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2016).

80 Holly Rider-Milkovich, “Are We in Oz?: The 2017 State of Sexual Assault on College Campuses” (webinar 

presentation, July 20, 2017), accessed July 8, 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CWzt-nkPGI&

feature=youtu.be.

74 National Council on Disability
81 California Coalition Against Sexual Assault, Creating Access: Supporting Survivors of Sexual Assault with 

Disabilities (Sacramento, CA: California Coalition Against Sexual Assault, 2010), accessed July 20, 2017, 

http://www.calcasa.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Disabilities-Info-Packet-Final-Upload-12.29.10.pdf.

82 Nancy Smith, Sandra Harrell, Jaclyn Smith, and Ashley Demyan, Measuring Capacity to Serve Sexual Assault 

Survivors with Disabilities: Rape Crisis Centers (New York, NY: Vera Institute of Justice, 2015), accessed 

November 9, 2017, https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/Publications/measuringcapacity-to-serve-survivors-with-disabilities/legacy_downloads/Rape-Crisis-Center-Implementation-Guide.pdf.

83 Nancy Smith, Sandra Harrell, Jaclyn Smith, and Ashley Demyan, Measuring Capacity to Serve Domestic 

Violence and Sexual Assault Survivors with Disabilities: Disability Organizations, (New York, NY: Vera Institute 

of Justice, 2015), accessed July 20, 2017, https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/

Publications/measuring-capacity-to-serve-survivors-with-disabilities/legacy_downloads/Disability-OrganizationImplementation-Guide.pdf.

84 Janet Elie Faulkner, “Accommodating Students with Disabilities in the Title IX Process,” EduRisk (blog) 

(March 2017), accessed August 1, 2017, https://www.edurisksolutions.org/Templates/template-blogs.

aspx?pageid=47&id=3277&blogid=100.

85 Mira S. Krivoshey et al., “Sexual Assault Reporting Procedures at Ohio Colleges,” Journal of American College 

Health 61 (2013): 142–47.

86 Office of the New York State Comptroller, State University of New York: Compliance with the Clery Act (New 

York, NY: Office of the New York State Comptroller, 2013), accessed August 7, 2017, http://osc.state.ny.us/

audits/allaudits/093009/07s121.pdf.

87 Minnesota State Colleges and Universities, Office of Internal Auditing, Clery Act: Internal Control and 

Compliance Audit (St Paul, MN: Minnesota State Colleges and Universities, Office of Internal Auditing, 2015).

88 Zach Winn, “Clery Act Fines Increase Per Violation,” Campus Safety Magazine (June 14, 2017), accessed 

July 5, 2017, http://www.campussafetymagazine.com/clery/clery_act_fines_increase_violations_colleges.

89 Under President Obama’s Title IX guidance outlined in the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter, investigations could 

take no more than 60 calendar days but policy allowed complex cases to be addressed within a reasonable 

time frame. The amount of Title IX violations that may reduce due to the current administration reverting 

to the 2001 Office for Civil Rights, Revised Sexual Harassment Guidance that does not define “prompt” is 

unclear.

90 Nick Anderson, “At First, 55 Schools Faced Sexual Violence Investigations. Now the List Has Quadrupled,” The 

Washington Post (January 18, 2017), accessed July 21, 2017, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/gradepoint/wp/2017/01/18/at-first-55-schools-faced-sexual-violence-investigations-now-the-list-has-quadrupled/?utm_

term=.f780cd8bc08f.

91 U.S. Department of Education, Delivering Justice, 2016. Supra at 15.

92 U.S. Department of Education, Delivering Justice, 2016.

93 California State Auditor, Sexual Harassment and Sexual Violence: California Universities Must Better Protect 

Students by Doing More to Prevent, Respond to, and Resolve Incidents, (Sacramento, CA: California State 

Auditor, 2014), accessed July 8, 2017, https://www.auditor.ca.gov/pdfs/reports/2013-124.pdf.

94 California State Auditor, Sexual Harassment and Sexual Violence.

95 Andrew Morse, Brian A. Sponsler, and Mary Fulton, State Legislative Developments on Campus Sexual 

Violence: Issues in the Context of Safety (Washington, DC: NASPA–Student Affairs Administrators in Higher 

Education, 2015).

96 Morse et al., State Legislative Developments on Campus Sexual Violence.

97 California State Auditor, Sexual Harassment and Sexual Violence. Supra at 76.

98 Emily Austin, Legal Intersections: An Outline of Federal Laws, Guidelines, and California State Law on 

Campus Sexual Assault (Sacramento, CA: California Coalition Against Sexual Assault, 2016).

99 Human Rights Watch, Improving Police Response to Sexual Assault (New York, NY: Human Rights Watch, 

2013), accessed August 10, 2017, https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/improvingSAInvest_0.pdf.

Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities 75
100 Haley Glatter, “How Do States Handle Sexual Assault on Campus?” The Atlantic (January 29, 2017), 

accessed August 10, 2017, https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/01/how-do-states-handlesexual-assault-on-campus/514811.

101 Claire McCaskill, The Bipartisan Campus Accountability and Safety Act (2017), accessed September 10, 2017, 

https://www.mccaskill.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/CampusAccountabilityAndSafetyAct.pdf.

102 Claire McCaskill, Bipartisan Coalition of Senators Renew Legislation to Combat Sexual Assault on College & 

University Campuses (2017), accessed September 10, 2017, https://www.mccaskill.senate.gov/media-center/

news-releases/bipartisan-coalition-of-senators-renew-legislation-to-combat-sexual-assault-on-college-anduniversity-campuses.

103 U.S. Congress, S. 856 - Campus Accountability and Safety Act, 115th Congress (2017-2018), accessed 

September 10, 2017, https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/856/all-actions?overview=

closed#tabs.

76 National Council on Disability
National Council on Disability

1331 F Street, NW, Suite 850

Washington, DC 20004