A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

Statement of David A. Longanecker
Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education

Testimony on Campus Security Issues
Subcommittee on Postsecondary Education, Training, and Life-Long Learning
U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities

June 6, 1996

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee,

I am pleased to appear before you today to share with you the efforts of the Department of Education to reduce crime on our college campuses. Our goals - that I am sure you share - are to assist schools in providing students nationwide a safe environment in which to learn and to keep parents well informed about campus security. Those goals were advanced by the Student Right To Know and Campus Security Act of 1990. I would like to provide you with information about the Department's efforts to implement and enforce that Act.

The Act was signed into law in November 1990 and amended several times in subsequent years. Title II is known as the "Crime Awareness and Campus Security Act of 1990." It requires several actions by institutions participating in the student financial aid programs under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA). Institutions are required to:

• Collect and distribute annually statistics concerning the occurrence on campus of certain criminal offenses reported to campus officials;

• Publish and distribute an annual security report that includes statements about campus law enforcement policies, campus security education and prevention programs, alcohol and drug policies, sexual assault education and prevention programs, procedures for reporting sexual assaults, and procedures explaining how reports of sexual assaults will be dealt with; and

• Provide a timely warning to the campus community about crimes that are considered to represent a continuing threat to other students and employees in a manner that aids in the prevention of similar crimes.

The Department first notified schools about the requirements of the law in March of 1991, four months after enactment. This letter informed schools about the requirement that they begin collecting statistics in August, 1991, allowing adequate time to put the collection mechanisms in place. A second, more detailed notice, was sent in August, 1991. This second notice informed schools how to comply with the law until the publication of the final regulations. The law was amended three times in subsequent years and final regulations were published in April, 1994, with technical amendments published in June, 1995. A new Dear Colleague Letter discussing the final regulations was completed last week and is being sent to schools. A copy of the notices are attached for your information.

There are a number of issues I would like to discuss with you today concerning our efforts to make colleges safer for students and to keep their parents well informed about campus security.

Relationship to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act.

It has come to our attention that there is some confusion regarding disclosures required under the Campus Security Act and the prohibitions against the disclosure of individual education records contained in the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). FERPA is not a barrier to complying with the disclosure requirements of the campus security regulations. It does not prevent the provision of statistical information; it does not interfere with the timely warning provision; it specifically allows for disclosure of the results of disciplinary hearings to victims of violent crimes; and, it does not relieve an institution from complying with the reporting requirements of the campus security regulations when the institution refers a matter to a disciplinary committee, rather than the campus security office.

Timely Warning Requirement

An institution must make "timely warning reports" to the campus community about certain criminal activities considered to represent a continuing threat to students and employees that are reported to officials with significant responsibility for student and campus activities, campus police, or local police. Individuals who are exempt from the timely warning provision, such as counselors, are still required to provide information for preparation of the annual statistical report.

Technical Assistance

Technical Assistance is available to help schools implement the Campus Security Act. Staff of the Department's Customer Support Branch in the Office of Postsecondary Education have been trained to provide technical assistance to institutions in administering the campus security regulations. An institution with specific questions, needing technical assistance, or that would like to receive in-service training concerning FERPA should contact the Department's Family Policy Compliance Office.

Complaint Procedure

Individuals wishing to file a complaint that an institution is not complying with these regulations are told to contact the Director of the Regional Office that serves the State in which the institution is located. When a complaint is filed against an institution alleging noncompliance with the campus security regulations, the Department will assess the complaint and determine the appropriate response. If an institution has difficulty administering a provision of these regulations, the Department will provide technical assistance so that violations can be corrected. If, however, an institution flagrantly or intentionally violates the campus security regulations, or fails to take corrective action, we will then take appropriate action against the institution by imposing sanctions. The type of sanction will depend upon the severity of the violations; possible sanctions include the assessment of fines, and in very severe violations, the limitation, suspension or termination of the institution's participation in the Title IV, HEA programs. In addition, findings made by the Office of Postsecondary Education will be referred to other offices or agencies when appropriate, including the Office for Civil Rights, the Inspector General, and the Justice Department.

We recently clarified our position on these and other issues relating to the Campus Security Act in the new Dear Colleague Letter that is on its way to schools. A copy of this letter is attached for your information.

There are three other provisions in the Campus Security Act that I want to report on today.

1. The first is the amendment of the Program Participation Agreement that each institution must have in order to participate in the Title IV student aid programs. The Act requires institutions to certify that they have established a campus security policy and that they have complied with the disclosure requirements. The revised Program Participation Agreements reflecting this requirement were executed between the Department and the participating institutions in the summer of 1991.

2. The second provision of the Act requires the Department to identify exemplary campus security policies and disseminate information regarding those policies, procedures and practices that have proven effective in the reduction of campus crime. This effort was undertaken by the Department's Office of Educational Research and Improvement and resulted in a publication titled "Campus Security: A First Look at Promising Practices" that was published in September, 1994. The Department disseminated the publication by mailing it to the presidents of all two- and four-year colleges, as well as all members of IACLEA, the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators. We sent out over 7,000 copies, and the publication was also available for purchase from the Government Printing Office. At the current time, we have only a few copies remaining and GPO has sold out all of their copies. We have included a photocopy of this publication for your information.

3. The third provision is a requirement that the Department report to the Congress on campus crime statistics. The report is underway at the current time and we expect to have a preliminary report ready by the end of this year. A final version ready for wide dissemination is expected in January of next year.

Rather than duplicate the efforts of IACLEA and the Chronicle, the Department undertook a broader survey to provide national benchmarks for campus crime at different types of institutions. The survey is being administered by the Department's National Center for Education Statistics and includes questions that are designed to allow comparisons between types of institutions. In this way, the report will provide useful and unique information about the level of campus crime and efforts that have been undertaken to make college campuses safer for students. However, it is important to understand what the report will not do. The Act requires a one-time report, so there will not be annual surveys performed by the Department. The Act does not specify, and the survey will not provide, institution by institution comparisons. A copy of the survey instrument has been attached for your information.

You have also asked for our views on H.R. 2416, the Open Campus Police Logs bill. The Department has identified what we believe are problems in the bill as currently drafted.

First, the bill does not contain provisions to allow law enforcement to withhold information if it would threaten an ongoing investigation, if it would pose a threat to personal safety, or if it would lead to destruction of evidence. An example of language that would incorporate these exceptions can be found in a Virginia law requiring open campus crime logs that was passed in 1994. Also, the bill does not clarify its relationship with State laws requiring non-disclosure of the names of juveniles charged with crimes.

Second, the bill as drafted is inconsistent with the Campus Security Act. This bill requires disclosures for all reported crimes against persons and property, including larceny and vandalism. These crimes are not covered by the Campus Security Act. Also, the bill would not cover crimes against the public order, such as drug and weapons arrests, which are covered by the Campus Security Act. These inconsistencies would make it confusing for schools to implement this bill as currently drafted.

Third, it appears that the bill as drafted would not provide more protection to the campus community than is already available in the timely warning provision of the Campus Security Act. The timely warning provision requires campus law enforcement and other campus officials to inform the campus community about crimes that may present a threat to other students and employees and requires them to provide the reports in a manner that will aid in the prevention of similar crimes.

These are the problems we see with the bill as currently drafted, but we would be glad to work with the Committee to find ways that would better achieve our mutual objective-to provide safer college campuses for students and to keep parents better informed about campus security.

Mr. Chairman, I have explained the actions taken by the Department to enforce the letter and spirit of the Campus Security Act. We are in the beginning stages of implementing a new law. We are working with the postsecondary community to ensure that the Campus Security Act of 1990 is implemented fully by postsecondary institutions. We have focused on collaborative efforts to bring schools into compliance with the law. When we find schools who have intentionally or flagrantly violated the law, or are unwilling to come into compliance, we will impose sanctions against those schools.

We believe we are engaged in a productive effort to use the Act to make college campuses safer and more conducive to learning. The Secretary, with his colleagues in the higher education community, believes that students nationwide must have a safe environment in which to learn. Our hard work in implementing the Crime Awareness and Campus Security Act of 1990 is consistent with the President's vision, and the National Education Goals specified by the Nation's Governors.

I would be happy to answer your questions at this time.

-###-