DOI: 10.3886/icpsr37458
title: Responding to Sexual Assault on Campus: A National Assessment and Systematic Classification of the Scope and Challenges for Investigation and Adjudication, [United States], 2014-2019
title: Archival Version

description: This study, Responding to Sexual Assault on Campus: A National Assessment and Systematic Classification of the Scope and Challenges for Investigation and Adjudication, documents the current landscape (the breadth and differences) of campus approaches to investigations and adjudication of sexual assault. Data were gathered from a national sample of 969 colleges and universities in conjunction with interviews with key informants in 47 universities. Informed by a victim-centered focus, researchers developed a typology/matrix of approaches based on documented features of Institutes of Higher Education (IHE) policies related to sexual assault. In addition to the typology/matrix development, interviews and surveys of campus stakeholders and key informants were conducted to identify implementation strategies and challenges associated with each type of response model. The project ultimately produced guidelines that may assist colleges with assessing their capacity and preparedness to meet new and existing demands for sexual assault response models.
description: The purpose of this study was threefold: To identify the range and scope of policies and practices related to the investigation and adjudication of sexual assaults on college campuses in the United States by documenting and classifying the current landscape (the breadth and differences) of campus approaches to investigations and adjudication of sexual assault.; To develop a clear understanding of the challenges and successes of the current policies.; To create accessible resources for those on IHE campuses regarding current and some promising practices to respond to sexual assault reports in a fair and equitable manner and thus inform their ongoing work.;
description: Phase one: Web Scan: This phase collected information from a web-based search on a sample of 1,000 colleges and universities on policies and practices for investigation and adjudication of sexual assault reports. This web scan was designed as a systematic broad-based environmental scan to document the policies and procedures for responding to sexual assault as they were promulgated to the public and, most importantly, made available to students by these IHEs. Data were collected from the websites of 969 four-year colleges and universities across the United States. An environmental scan of websites was undertaken because college and university websites are a key resource that many students use to seek information or guidance. The information to which a victim has access when considering if, how, or when to report a sexual assault incident may influence the decision whether to report to campus authorities at all, and how to connect with other resources or to seek services. The scan was a content analysis of each IHE's website information related to reporting, investigation, and adjudication of sexual assault. The scan and its results were informed by the knowledge of what is required to be made public about Campus Sexual Assault from key legislation and documents (e.g., Clery Act, Campus SaVE Act, Office for Civil Rights (OCR) 2011 Dear Colleague Letter, OCR 2014, Title IX Q+A, Department of Justice Findings Letters). Data were collected from the IHE's websites by trained undergraduate students who entered data directly into a secure online survey platform. Part two: Interview with Title IX coordinators This phase involved conducting interviews with Title IX coordinators regarding successes and challenges associated with implementing policies for investigation and adjudication of sexual assault. In 2017, a series of key informant pre-test interviews were conducted and revised the methodology and the planned interview to accommodate the changes in the Title IX guidance that was being rolled out by the U.S. Department of Education. In 2018, participants were recruited for interviews with 47 Title IX coordinators. These were key informants from a sub-sample of colleges and universities. Based on input from an advisory board, interviewees were recruited to participate in a confidential 30 minute telephone interview during which notes were taken but no audio recording occurred. Three or more email messages were sent from the team at Wellesley Centers for Women at Wellesley College that had links to a website with letters of support from the funder, a list of advisory board members, and letters from relevant experts in the field. Individuals were informed that the study was a National Institute of Justice-sponsored research project "Responding to Sexual Assault on Campus" and the researchers planned to interview key campus stakeholders with knowledge of investigation and adjudication of campus sexual assault. A study team member explained that the interviews would focus on challenges confronted and innovations available for responding to reports of college student on student sexual assault. A confidential phone interview was arranged stressing that their participation would make an important contribution. The interview was focused on the approaches used to investigate and adjudicate reports of sexual assault at their institution and the successes and challenges associated with these cases. The study team conducted the interviews until saturation was reached and had reached a point that sampling more data would not lead to more information related to the questions.
description: Part one: Web Scan The web scan included information from public access websites of each IHE on sexual assault investigation and adjudication policies. Researchers conducted an exploratory cluster analysis to determine if any clear investigation policy and adjudication policy models emerged from the web scan data. Investigation model variables included: Is there information on who is involved in the investigation of sexual assault complaints?; Who is involved in the investigation of sexual assault complaints?; Is there training for investigative unit or office?; How are concurrent investigations with law enforcement handled?; Is there a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with local law enforcement?; Are there time frames associated with making a report and when accused gets notification?; Are student victim reporters, third party reporters, and witnesses protected from retaliation for participating in proceedings?; Are victims and accused students entitled to lawyers/advisors in proceedings?; Are there interim measures available to victims during the investigation?; Is victim required to participate in the investigation after a report?; Information on time frame for completing the investigation after a report?; Website offers guidance on how to obtain interim measures?; Interim measures for victim not wishing to participate in investigation?; Adjudication model variables included: Who is involved in the responsible decision and sanctioning decisions?; Does the policy mention that prior sexual behavior of victim and alleged perpetrator will not be considered in the adjudication proceedings?; Does the policy mention if victims and alleged perpetrators are allowed to question each other?; Does the policy mention if victims and alleged perpetrators are allowed to present witness at hearings, meetings or conferences?; Is there an appeals process?; Is there a restorative justice/reintegration option for alleged perpetrators who accept responsibility for violation before adjudication?; Does the alleged perpetrator have an adjudication format choice?; Do victims have option not to participate in proceedings?; What are sanctioning options?; What is the standard of proof in determining responsibility for violation?; Part two: Interview with Title IX coordinators Respondents gave background information and their perspectives on the sexual assault case process, including coordination of the overall process, initial review of cases, investigation (including the role of the police), adjudication, sanctioning, appeals, and advisor for victims and accused.
description: Presence of Common Scales: None.
description: Response Rates: 96.9% were valid web sites and included in the web scan. 47 interviews with Title IX coordinators conducted.
description: Datasets: DS0: Study-Level Files DS1: Web Scan Data Collection Dataset DS2: Interview Dataset
description: mixed mode
description: telephone interview
description: Colleges and universities subject to Title IX in the United States Smallest Geographic Unit: State
description: National sample of 969 four-year accredited degree granting IHE selected from the 2013 data from the Integrated Post-Secondary Education Data Center (IPEDS) housed at the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). Schools were not selected for the sample if more than 90% of the students were enrolled only online, if the school was only located outside of the 50 states, or it was an all-male theological school or seminary. Schools were dropped from the data collection sample if their website had no internal search mechanism or between the time that the sample was selected or if the school had merged with another school or closed. This resulted in a final sample of 969 schools. Interviewees were recruited from this sample. Researchers did not recruit participants from: 18 institutions which had closed in the time that elapsed since the web scan; 49 IHEs with ongoing OCR investigations; and 50 for profit institutions.