Summary
Campus Crime and Security at Postsecondary Education Institutions / Chapter 4
The Campus Security Act was intended, in part, to encourage postsecondary institutions to put more emphasis on campus safety and on crime prevention services and programs. This section of the report provides information about what postsecondary institutions are doing to improve campus security, including access to rape crisis counseling, increases in lighting levels in campus areas, services and programs concerning campus safety, and types of public safety employees providing campus security.
The Campus Security Act requires notification to students of existing on- and off-campus counseling, mental health, or other student services available for victims of sex offenses. One aspect of such services is rape crisis counseling. The survey asked whether students and staff at the institution have access to rape crisis counseling through various sources. Most institutions (82 percent) indicated that students and staff had access to rape crisis counseling through a rape crisis center or hotline run by the community (table 16). A rape crisis center or hotline run by the institution was much less common, available at 10 percent of the institutions. Rape crisis counseling was available at a campus mental health or counseling center at 38 percent of the institutions, at a campus health center at 29 percent of institutions, and from some other source at 15 percent of the institutions.
The availability of rape crisis counseling through a rape crisis center or hotline run by the institution, a campus health center, and a campus mental health or counseling center varied by institutional type, percentage of students in campus housing, and institutional size, such that larger institutions, institutions with campus housing, and public 4-year institutions were particularly likely to have these resources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rape crisis Rape crisis Campus mental
Institutional characteristic center or hotline center or hotline Campus health health or Other
run by the run by the center counseling source
institution institution center
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All institutions\1 10 82 29 38 15
Type
For-profit less-than-2-year 4 84 1 5 13
Other less-than-2-year 4 69 8 20 18
Public 2-year 6 82 29 47 15
Private 2-year 7 82 20 29 14
Public 4-year 33 90 84 84 16
Private 4-year 13 81 55 68 17
Percent of students in campus
housing
No campus housing 5 81 10 19 14
Less than 25 percent 18 88 56 70 11
25 percent or more 18 85 70 78 19
Metropolitan status\2
Large city 10 77 26 33 12
Mid-size city 11 88 32 42 16
Urban fringe 9 84 28 36 18
Town or rural 9 80 31 43 14
Institutional size (enrollment)
Less than 200 5 80 8 11 15
200 to 999 4 78 21 34 15
1,000 to 2,999 15 86 51 63 13
3,000 to 9,999 16 89 56 75 16
10,000 or more 30 91 77 84 17
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1/Data are for postsecondary education institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico that participate in federal Title IV financial aid programs.
2/Analyses by metropolitan status exclude institutions in Puerto Rico, since the Bureau of the Census does not assign locale codes for Puerto Rico.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System, Survey on Campus Crime and Security at Postsecondary Education Institutions, 1996.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Institutional characteristic Within In parking lots On campus grounds
campus buildings and structures and walkways
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All institutions\1 51 66 60
Type
For-profit less-than-2-year 35 42 30
Other less-than-2-year 41 65 55
Public 2-year 69 86 82
Private 2-year 38 58 46
Public 4-year 68 91 96
Private 4-year 61 75 78
Percent of students in campus
housing
No campus housing 42 57 46
Less than 25 percent 72 82 82
25 percent or more 65 81 90
Metropolitan status\2
Large city 46 57 51
Mid-size city 54 68 61
Urban fringe 48 69 60
Town or rural 54 69 69
Institutional size (enrollment)
Less than 200 35 45 36
200 to 999 49 65 56
1,000 to 2,999 63 88 86
3,000 to 9,999 74 88 91
10,000 or more 74 91 94
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1/Data are for postsecondary education institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico that participate in federal Title IV financial aid programs.
2/Analyses by metropolitan status exclude institutions in Puerto Rico, since the Bureau of the Census does not assign locale codes for Puerto Rico.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System, Survey on Campus Crime and Security at Postsecondary Education Institutions, 1996.
Institutions were asked whether they had increased lighting levels in various campus areas in the last 5 years. The 5-year time frame was used since approximately 5 years had elapsed since the passage of the campus crime legislation and the survey data collection. In that period, 66 percent of institutions had increased lighting levels in parking lots and structures, 60 percent had increased lighting levels on campus grounds and walkways, and 51 percent had increased lighting levels within campus buildings (table 17). Public and private 4-year and public 2-year institutions generally were more likely to have increased lighting levels than private 2-year and all less-than-2-year institutions. Institutions with campus housing more frequently had increased lighting levels than did institutions without campus housing, as did larger institutions compared with smaller institutions. For example, 96 percent of public 4-year institutions and 94 percent of institutions with 10,000 or more students had improved lighting on campus grounds and walkways, compared with 30 percent of for-profit less-than-2-year institutions and 36 percent of institutions with less than 200 students.
Part of the intent of the campus security legislation was to encourage postsecondary education institutions to pay more attention to the prevention of crime on campus. One way that institutions can do this is through services or programs that foster campus safety. Institutions were asked whether they offered various services or programs concerning campus safety, and whether the service or program had been instituted or improved in the last 5 years.
Most institutions with campus housing indicated that they limited access to residence halls (90 percent; table 18). About two-thirds of all institutions limited access during nights and weekends to academic buildings, had a program of publishing or posting safety reminders, and gave safety/crime prevention presentations to campus groups; about half had foot or bicycle patrols by security personnel, night-time escort services, and emergency phone systems; and a third had victim's assistance programs. Night-time shuttle bus or van services were offered by 12 percent of institutions.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service or program Offer Instituted or improved in
last 5 years\1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Foot or bicycle patrols by security personnel 46 78
Night-time escort services 48 71
Night-time shuttle bus or van services 12 77
Limited access to residence halls\2 90 66
Limited access during nights and weekends to
academic buildings 64 57
Emergency phone systems 45 77
Program of publishing or posting safety reminders 63 80
Safety/crime prevention presentations to campus
groups 64 82
Victim's assistance programs 33 72
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1/Based on institutions that offered that service or program.
2/Percent of institutions with limited access to residence halls is based on those institutions that have any campus housing.
NOTE: Data are for postsecondary education institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico that participate in federal Title IV financial aid programs.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System, Survey on Campus Crime and Security at Postsecondary Education Institutions, 1996.
The majority of institutions offering various campus safety services and programs had instituted or improved them in the last 5 years (table 18). Initiation or improvement rates ranged from 57 percent for limiting access during nights and weekends to academic buildings to 82 percent for safety or crime prevention presentations to campus groups.
The percentage of institutions offering various campus safety services or programs varied by institutional type and size, and the presence of campus housing (table 19). The general pattern was that public 4-year institutions most frequently offered the various services or programs, followed by private 4-year and public 2-year institutions. Less-than-2-year institutions tended to offer these programs and services much less frequently than other types of institutions. Institutions with campus housing (both those with less than 25 percent and those with 25 percent or more of their students in campus housing) were more likely to offer the various services or programs than were institutions without campus housing, and larger institutions were more likely than smaller ones to offer the services or programs. For example, foot or bicycle patrols by security personnel were offered by more than 93 percent of public 4-year institutions, 95 percent of institutions with 10,000 or more students, and about 80 percent of institutions with campus housing compared with 6 percent of for-profit less-than-2-year institutions, 17 percent of institutions with less than 200 students, and 29 percent of institutions without campus housing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Institutional characteristic Foot or bicycle Night-time Night-time Limited access Limited access
patrols by escort shuttle bus to residence during nights
security services or van services halls/1 and weekends
personnel to academic buildings
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All institutions\2 46 48 12 90 64
Type
For-profit less-than-2-year 6 15 (+) (#) 32
Other less-than-2-year 23 22 2 (#) 59
Public 2-year 68 65 6 79 77
Private 2-year 42 47 12 90 63
Public 4-year 93 83 36 95 94
Private 4-year 71 71 24 92 85
Percent of students in campus housing
No campus housing 29 35 3 -- 50
Less than 25 percent 80 73 26 86 92
25 percent or more 79 74 29 93 91
Metropolitan status\3
Large city 45 50 12 91 58
Mid-size city 50 51 15 89 63
Urban fringe 44 48 9 93 64
Town or rural 44 46 10 88 69
Institutional size (enrollment)
Less than 200 17 23 4 73 39
200 to 999 37 43 6 90 67
1,000 to 2,999 79 74 16 92 86
3,000 to 9,999 83 79 24 94 88
10,000 or more 95 93 45 94 93
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Institutional characteristic Emergency Program of Safety/crime Victim's
phone publishing or prevention assistance
systems posting safety presentations to programs
reminders campus groups
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All institutions/2 45 63 64 33
Type
For-profit less-than-2-year 27 47 43 18
Other less-than-2-year 38 48 50 20
Public 2-year 50 70 74 33
Private 2-year 38 54 52 29
Public 4-year 79 88 94 70
Private 4-year 57 75 79 43
Percent of students in campus housing
No campus housing 35 52 50 22
Less than 25 percent 61 83 91 49
25 percent or more 67 83 87 56
Metropolitan status/3
Large city 40 63 59 28
Mid-size city 51 62 67 35
Urban fringe 49 64 64 37
Town or rural 38 61 64 32
Institutional size (enrollment)
Less than 200 31 48 47 22
200 to 999 36 58 58 22
1,000 to 2,999 54 73 80 45
3,000 to 9,999 71 87 88 54
10,000 or more 88 90 95 70
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(+) Less than 0.5 percent.
(#)Too few cases for a reliable estimate.
--Not applicable, based only on those institutions that have campus housing.
1/Based on those institutions that have any campus housing.
2/Data are for postsecondary education institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico that participate in federal Title IV financial aid programs.
3/Analyses by metropolitan status exclude institutions in Puerto Rico, since the Bureau of the Census does not assign locale codes for Puerto Rico.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System, Survey on Campus Crime and Security at Postsecondary Education Institutions, 1996.
Campus security can be provided by many types of public safety employees. Security may be provided by sworn officers (i.e., officers with full arrest power) who are employees of the institution or who are employees of a state or local law enforcement agency (e.g., state police who are assigned to police duties on a public college campus). Security may also be provided by security officers or guards who are not sworn officers, by contract security (firms or individuals who are not employees of the institution who provide security under contract), or by other types of security personnel. Institutions may use just one type of public safety employee or different types to serve different security functions.
About a third of the institutions used security officers or guards for campus security, 28 percent used sworn officers employed by a state or local law enforcement agency, 24 percent used contract security, and 18 percent used sworn officers employed by the institution (table 20). Eight percent of the institutions said that security was provided by city or state police when called (e.g., through the use of 911 or other local emergency numbers),[14] and 15 percent indicated that security was provided by other types of security personnel. A particularly striking finding was the very high percentage of public 4-year institutions and institutions with 10,000 or more students, compared with other institutional types and sizes, that used sworn officers employed by the institution.
Many institutions, especially less-than-2-year institutions, indicated that they used sworn officers employed by a state or local law enforcement agency. This category was intended to refer to officers that were assigned specifically to the campus, and not to city or state police who served the campus as one part of a larger patrol area. However, this was not explicit in the definitions of security personnel provided on the questionnaire, and it appears that many institutions interpreted this category to include city and state police officers serving the campus as part of a larger patrol area.
Institutions were also asked to indicate which one type of public safety employee had the primary responsibility for providing campus security. Twenty-three percent of the institutions indicated that security officers or guards had primary responsibility for campus security, 19 percent used sworn officers employed by a state or local law enforcement agency, 17 percent primarily used sworn officers employed by the institution, 14 percent gave primary responsibility
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Institutional characteristic Sworn officers Sworn officers Security Contract City or state Other
employed by employed by a officer/ security police security
the state or local guard when called
institution law enforcement
agency
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All institutions\1 18 28 34 24 8 15
Type
For-profit less-than-2-year (+) 35 5 10 16 19
Other less-than-2-year 10 40 25 18 7 11
Public 2-year 30 33 48 30 5 14
Private 2-year 6 23 32 30 6 10
Public 4-year 80 26 55 23 2 18
Private 4-year 17 19 56 35 3 12
Percent of students in campus housing
No campus housing 10 32 21 21 10 15
Less than 25 percent 37 27 49 39 2 15
25 percent or more 34 20 66 25 4 15
Metropolitan status\2
Large city 17 23 29 33 4 16
Mid-size city 20 27 39 25 8 17
Urban fringe 19 33 32 18 10 16
Town or rural 18 33 36 18 11 10
Institutional size (enrollment)
Less than 200 2 34 13 12 14 14
200 to 999 8 24 32 33 6 15
1,000 to 2,999 26 26 55 33 2 14
3,000 to 9,999 48 27 58 29 4 15
10,000 or more 75 23 68 26 3 24
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(+) Less than 0.5 percent.
1/Data are for postsecondary education institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico that participate in federal Title IV financial aid programs.
2/Analyses by metropolitan status exclude institutions in Puerto Rico, since the Bureau of the Census does not assign locale codes for Puerto Rico.
NOTE: For each type ofpublic safety employee, institutions indicated whether they used that type of employee. Thus, percents across each row do not sum to 100.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System, Survey on Campus Crime and Security at Postsecondary Education Institutions, 1996.
for security to contract security, 7 percent indicated that they primarily used city or state police when called, 8 percent gave primary responsibility to other types of security, and 12 percent indicated no public safety employees (table 21). As with the overall use of various types of campus security, the most striking finding was the very high percentage of public 4-year institutions and institutions with 10,000 or more students that indicated that sworn officers employed by the institution had primary responsibility for campus security. Less-than-2-year and private 2-year institutions, institutions without campus housing, and institutions with less than 1,000 students generally were more likely to indicate that they had no public safety employees.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sworn
Sworn officers Security City or state No public
officers employed officer/ Contract police when Other safety
Institutional characteristic employed by a state quard security called security employees
by the or local law
institution enforcement
agency
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All institutions\1 17 19 23 14 7 8 12
Type
For-profit less-than-2-
year (+) 33 4 7 15 16 24
Other less-than-2-year 8 33 18 12 6 6 17
Public 2-year 27 15 29 15 4 6 4
Private 2-year 4 18 31 20 5 4 18
Public 4-year 80 7 9 4 1 0 0
Private 4-year 15 6 46 22 2 4 5
Percent of students in campus
housing
No campus housing 8 25 15 14 10 11 18
Less than 25 percent 35 10 30 22 (+) 1 0
25 percent or more 31 7 44 10 3 4 1
Metropolitan status\2
Large city 15 14 18 25 3 10 15
Mid-size city 19 17 27 12 7 8 10
Urban fringe 17 22 23 8 8 9 12
Town or rural 16 25 25 8 10 4 13
Institutional size (enrollment)
Less than 200 2 32 12 8 14 10 23
200 to 999 7 16 25 23 5 11 13
1,000 to 2,999 21 12 39 21 0 5 1
3,000 to 9,999 46 4 33 10 3 3 1
10,000 or more 73 3 20 3 1 1 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(+) Less than 0.5 percent.
1/Data are for postsecondary education institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico that participate in federal Title IV financial aid programs.
2/Analyses by metropolitan status exclude institutions in Puerto Rico, since the Bureau of the Census does not assign locale codes for Puerto Rico.
NOTE: Zeros indicate that no institution in the sample gave the indicated response. Percents are computed across each row, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Postsecondary Education Quick Information System, Survey on Campus Crime and Security at Postsecondary Education Institutions, 1996.
[14] This category was not given on the questionnaire. However, it was created from the "other, specify" category since it was mentioned frequently by institutions.
-###-