Easily accessible reporting options are an important indicator of an institution that encourages reporting. Check whether reporting channels are well publicized, easy to find on the institution's website, and include an anonymous reporting channel, if possible. It is also recommended that the email address of at least one board member be made available online as an additional avenue for reporting.

Review how reports are handled at the institution, including which office or individual processes the reports and launches the investigation. If possible, give one staff member oversight of all reports so trends and repeat offenders are identified, or establish a process that looks for these patterns. Inquire about guidelines for notifying high-level administrators, legal counsel, and others when more than one report is made against an individual. Ask whether the institution has any policies regarding the reporting of allegations to external law enforcement, especially with victims who are minors.

Have we established clear expectations for receiving updates on sexual misconduct reports and investigations, both on a routine schedule and an emergent basis for certain inquiries?

Presidents and trustees need not be involved in every allegation, but they should establish clear guidelines for regular updates about critical inquiries such as allegations involving more than one victim, more than one allegation against the same respondent, patterns of inappropriate behavior from teams or departments on campus, or allegations involving individuals in positions of power. Depending on the board's structure, one of its committees could take responsibility for monitoring these sexual abuse reports.

Similarly, presidents and trustees should establish guidelines for when they will be notified about settlements involving allegations with more than one victim or allegations involving individuals in positions of power. By working with the general counsel's office or the individuals responsible for negotiating settlements on behalf of the institution, the president and trustees can ensure that they are informed early in the settlement negotiation process.

2/4

Increasingly, educational institutions are implementing processes that require background checks of all employees at hire to screen for individuals with red flags in their pasts. Review your institution’s policy regarding which positions or groups are subject to background checks, and what those checks entail. Keep in mind that phone calls to references—with fine-tuned questions that ask about the individual’s respect for boundaries in interactions with students and children—are often the best source of information to weed out possible predators.

Take note of whether faculty, coaches, volunteers, and third parties are subject to the same screening as regular employees. Consider whether some employees, depending on job function, should have their background checks updated routinely during employment.

allegations with more than one victim or allegations involving individuals in positions of power. By working with the general counsel's office or the individuals responsible for negotiating settlements on behalf of the institution, the president and trustees can ensure that they are informed early in the settlement negotiation process.

Often, staff have a strong reluctance to tell the president bad news, and the first instinct is to handle the matter so that it does not reach the president or board. However, on issues of serial sexual assault, presidents and boards are often held accountable despite being unaware of the allegations. Accordingly, they must become actively engaged and require updates on allegations. This cultural change may require professional development to educate staff and help shift attitudes.