Introduction

Security On Campus, Inc. has been contacted by current and former members of the Saint Mary’s College of California community who allege that the institution is in violation of the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (20 USC § 1092(f)), hereinafter the Act. We have also been provided with internal documentation concerning the amount of student disciplinary cases handled by the institution.

In response to these allegations we have reviewed the institution’s most recent annual campus security report produced pursuant to the Act, and contacted the institution. Our review revealed further non-compliance issues.

Additionally, these allegations, and concerns about the institution’s failure to expel students found responsible for committing sexual assaults on campus, have both received prominent attention in the local media, including San Francisco television station KGO, and the Contra Costa Times newspaper.

Crime Statistics Not Accurately Disclosed

The most serious allegation raised is that the institution has failed to include in their annual crime statistics all forcible sex offenses known to campus security authorities, including instead only those offenses reported to the campus security department. Roger Sciutto, the former director of public safety, specifically alleges that he was asked to submit “phony numbers to the federal government” according to a report on KGO (Exhibit A).

There are also allegedly problems with how the institution discloses student disciplinary referrals. The calendar year 1999 statistics reporting 31 liquor-law, and 0 weapons possession disciplinary referrals don’t comport with the internal document (Exhibit B) provided to us which indicates there were 377, and 8 violations respectively for these categories.

The statistics included in the annual security report (Exhibit C) also fail to include a separate table for disciplinary referrals occurring in residence halls as required by 34 CFR 668.46(c)(4)(ii).

Required Policy Statements Omitted Or Incomplete

Sexual Assault Policy-

Our review of the institution’s annual security report revealed that it does not contain certain sexual assault policy statements required by 34 CFR 668.46(b)(11). Given the nature of the most serious allegations against the institution, that they have failed to properly discipline students found responsible for committing sexual assaults, and have failed to properly report sexual assault statistics, the apparent lack of certain required sexual assault policy statements is especially troubling.

i.) Instead of disclosing a “description of educational programs to promote the awareness” of sexual assault crimes the report refers to the 2000/2001 Undergraduate Student Handbook (this edition of the handbook is currently unavailable, but the 2002/2003 handbook does include the list). A reference to another publication does not satisfy this requirement.

ii.) The annual security report does not contain a statement about the “procedures students should follow if a sex offense occurs” including a statement about the “importance of preserving evidence for the proof of a criminal offense.” The handbook does contain some of these statements, but not the statement about preserving evidence. Again, a reference to another publication does not satisfy this requirement.

iii.) The annual security report does not contain a statement about “a student’s option to notify appropriate law enforcement authorities.” While this statement is found in the handbook, it omits the required policy “statement that institutional personnel will assist the student in notifying these authorities, if the student requests the assistance of these personnel.” Again, a reference to another publication does not satisfy this requirement.

iv.) The annual security report does not list “existing on- and off-campus counseling, mental health, or other student services for victims of sex offenses.” While this list is found in the handbook, there is no clear reference to that effect, and even if there were a reference to another publication does not satisfy this requirement.

v.) The annual security report omits a statement that the college will “change a victim’s academic and living situations after an alleged sex offense.” This statement is found in the handbook, but a reference to another publication does not satisfy this requirement.

vi.) The annual security report omits statements describing “procedures for campus disciplinary action” following a sexual assault referring instead to the “Student Handbook” for this disclosure. A reference to another publication does not satisfy this requirement.

A.) The handbook does contain statements that both the accused and accuser are entitled to the same, equally limited, opportunity to have an advisor, who may not be a lawyer or family member, present with them during the process.

B.) Despite a requirement that the school notify the victim of “any sanction that is imposed against” the accused, SMC’s policy (found on page 27 of the Handbook, Exhibit D) only provides that the “Dean of Student Development will inform the complainant of any sanctions that impact the complainant.” Limiting this to sanctions which only “impact” the victim doesn’t comply with the Act’s requirements.

vii.) While both the annual security report, and the Student Handbook clearly detail what sanctions may be imposed on a student found “responsible” for committing a sexual assault, including expulsion, concerns about whether or not this is in fact the institution’s actual practice have been prominently featured in KGO broadcasts.

Campus Crime Statistics Policy-

The institution’s annual security report fails to include their policies for “preparing the annual disclosure of crime statistics” as required by 34 CFR 668.46(b)(2)(ii). This disclosure was not located in the Student Handbook either. This disclosure would help the community have confidence, for example, that statistics from disciplinary proceedings are included in the annual crime statistics.

The institution’s annual security report also fails to include a statement indicating whether or not they have “any policies or procedures that allow victims or witnesses to report crimes on a voluntary, confidential basis for inclusion in the annual disclosure of crime statistics” as required by 34 CFR 668.46(b)(2)(iii). Having this type of program is strictly voluntarily, but indicating whether or not an institution has one is not voluntary, it is required.

Building Access Policy-

The annual security report does contain statements about access to student residences and other buildings, but does not address any “security considerations used in the maintenance of campus facilities” as required by 34 CFR 668.46(b)(3). The report also refers to the Student Handbook for additional information, which incidentally also fails to include the security considerations statement. A reference to the Student Handbook does not satisfy this requirement.

Failure To Distribute The Campus Security Report In Accordance With Federal Regulations

The Student Handbook indicates that on “request, the Department of Public Safety will supply campus crime statistics, in compliance with the Campus Security Act” (page 106, Exhibit E) despite the Act’s requirement that the disclosures be made automatically to current students and employees. It is not clear whether or not the annual security report is actually distributed to students and employees, or if direct notice of the report’s availability on the web is distributed to them.

Conclusion

Students, and employees, need to have accurate, complete information about campus security policies and crime statistics in order to make informed decisions about keeping themselves from harm on campus. By disclosing all of this information in one place, community members can obtain the information easily, and in a coherent fashion without having to wade through dozens of pages of unrelated information as is found in any student or employee handbook.

The allegations raised against Saint Mary’s College of California indicate that students and employees on campus may not be getting all of the information they are due, and are thus being put at undue risk.

Please initiate a program review of Saint Mary’s College of California's compliance with the Jeanne Clery Act as soon as possible. Of particular concern should be the method used by the institution to collect sexual assault statistics for their annual campus security report.

__________________________________________
S. Daniel Carter, Senior Vice President
Security On Campus, Inc.