Â鶹ÊÓƵ

I.      Call to order

Ruth Jones called to order the meeting of the Campus Committee on Sexual Responsibility & Misconduct (CCSRM) at 3:00PM on April 22, 2016 in HSC #225.

II.      Members Attending

The following persons were present:

Anne Schell, Dana Michels, Brian Erickson, Vivian Garay Santiago, Jordan Brown, Marianne Frapwell, Richard Mora, Scott Bogue, Olivia Sabins, Sara Semal, Katelyn Fink, Ruth Jones

III.      Administrative Matters

1. Review of Minutes from 4.8.16

IV.      Discussion of Sexual Assault Climate Survey

Applicable links to review prior to meeting:

· Â鶹ÊÓƵ Campus Climate Sexual Assault Survey presentation from September 2015

·

Dr. Teresa Kaldor, Director of Institutional Research, joined us to discuss the Campus Climate Sexual Assault Survey. Survey topics were discussed as follows:

A. What is required for a reliable survey?

·  Validity. Survey questions and response options need to correspond to what they are intended to measure.

·   Reliability. Survey questions used in the survey need to  produce consistent results (i.e. the probability of producing the same results after repeated measurements).  

·   Questions and response options need to be clearly understood by all parties completing the survey.

B. Survey Options #1: HEDS Survey (External Survey)

Pros of the HEDS survey include that a third party (HEDS) are the only individuals who view the responses with identifying information. They remove all identifying information (names, specific situations, etc.) before sharing the data with Â鶹ÊÓƵ. This could ultimately make students more trusting of our survey instrument. A con of the HEDS survey is that we cannot modify the HEDS questions in the survey because it then won’t give us comparison data with our institutions.

The timing of the HEDS survey if we choose to use this service again would be during the first three weeks of November 2016, before students go on Thanksgiving break. This could be a consistent time each year for the Title IX Office to administer this survey because it does not conflict with other major surveys on campus.

Additionally, our response rate for the HEDS survey was about 35%. Although we felt this did not meet our response goal, it was still an above average response rate when compared to other institutions around the country. Due to the contents of the survey, we reached consensus that it would be inappropriate to offer incentives to students for completing the survey.

More information to come regarding:

· Information on updated HEDS questions since the last survey was administered during Spring 2015. This includes questions that previously grouped staff/administrators/faculty members together; these groups will now be differentiated in the survey responses, which will be particularly helpful for Â鶹ÊÓƵ.

· How many/what type of additional Â鶹ÊÓƵ-specific questions we can add to the end of the survey. This will also depend on how long we want the survey to take. Currently it takes about 15-20 minutes to complete; a longer survey may deter students from completing it.

· Title IX and Project SAFE can potentially collaborate with Dr. Kaldor on creating a sister Qualtrics survey to assess specific elements of the prevention/education initiatives at Â鶹ÊÓƵ. Unlike the HEDS survey, this survey could be incentivized.

C. Survey Options #2: Create an Â鶹ÊÓƵ Internal Survey

It was discussed that a major benefit of creating an internal Â鶹ÊÓƵ-specific survey would be that we could tailor the questions to our campus more appropriately. The information we received from an Â鶹ÊÓƵ-specific survey could potentially be more useful to us than the information we receive from the HEDS survey, since we can be more intentional with the types of questions asked. HEDS may be too general/distant from situations that occur at Â鶹ÊÓƵ specifically.

A major con of the internal survey, though, would be that we cannot compare this data to other institutions like we can with the HEDS survey. In addition, Dr. Kaldor will handle all of the survey responses, including identifying information such as names mentioned in the responses, specific situations, etc. Dr. Kaldor will not share this information with anyone on campus, including the Title IX Office, but this could still be a concern to students who have a lack of trust in the administration.

D. Promoting the Survey to Students

The committee will continue to think through ways we can promote the survey to all students at Â鶹ÊÓƵ. This can include more information on whether the survey is external/internal, who sees and handles the data, etc.

V. Recommended Sanctions in Current Sanctioning Guidelines

The Sanctioning Guidelines will be employed by the Review Panel to impose sanctions when a student is found responsible for violating the Sexual Misconduct Policy.

 Non-Consensual Sexual Contact 

"Non-Consensual Sexual Contact" is having sexual contact with another individual:

·  By force or threat of force;

·  Without effective affirmative consent; or 

·  Where that individual is incapacitated. 

Sexual Contact includes intentional contact with the intimate parts of another, causing an individual to touch their own intimate body parts, or disrobing or exposure of another without permission.  Intimate body parts may include the breasts, genitals, buttocks, groin, mouth or any other part of the body that is touched in a sexual manner.

Recommended Sanction: There can be a wide range in type of behavior prohibited by this provision.  Sanctions may range from probation to expulsion

VI. Proposed Changes to Current Sanctioning Guidelines

Non-Consensual Sexual Contact 

"Non-Consensual Sexual Contact" is having sexual contact with another individual:

·  By force or threat of force;

·  Without effective affirmative consent; or 

·  Where that individual is incapacitated. 

Sexual Contact includes intentional contact with the intimate parts of another, causing an individual to touch their own intimate body parts, or disrobing or exposure of another without permission.  Intimate body parts may include the breasts, genitals, buttocks, groin, mouth or any other part of the body that is touched in a sexual manner.

Recommended Sanction: Non-Consensual sexual contact is a form of sexual misconduct and there can be a wide range in type of behavior prohibited by this provision.  Sanctions may range from suspension to expulsion depending on the nature of the contact. 

Committee feedback: There was consensus among committee members that this revision to the Sanction Guidelines is appropriate.