Overview
Salem State University (SSU) did not accurately report some statistics for Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (Clery Act) crimes that were committed within SSU’s Clery geography during calendar years 2020 through 2022 in its 2023 annual security report (ASR).
There were a total of 24 Clery Act crime categories listed on SSU’s 2023 ASR. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) inspected all 24 Clery Act crime categories and identified 8 Clery Act crime categories that had variances between what was reported in SSU’s ASR and what was reported in SSU’s daily crime log and disciplinary action record management system. Of the 8 Clery Act crime categories with variances, 6 Clery Act crime categories had variances in the total numbers of specific incidents reported. For example, SSU did not report one incident of rape and one incident of stalking in 2022. See the table below for a breakdown of SSU’s reported incidents considered Clery Act crimes and the incidents we identified as Clery Act crimes within this audit.
| Calendar Year | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clery Act Crime Category | SSU Reported | OSA Identified | SSU Reported | OSA Identified | SSU Reported | OSA Identified |
| Rape | 1 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 |
| Stalking | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Arrests: Liquor Law Violations | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Disciplinary Referrals: Weapons Carrying, Possession, Etc. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Disciplinary Referrals: Liquor Law Violations* | 53 | 31 | 59 | 45 | 5 | 16 |
| Disciplinary Referrals: Drug Use Violations | 0 | 21 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 20 |
* SSU-reported figures in this category may include disciplinary referrals related to drug use violations because SSU may have been misclassifying drug use violations as liquor law violations (see the variance charts for liquor law and drug use disciplinary referrals below).
The charts below show the variances in the total number of offenses we identified as Clery Act crimes compared to the total number of offenses SSU reported in its 2023 ASR.
Variances Identified—Rape
Variances Identified—Stalking
Variances Identified—Arrests: Liquor Law Violations
Variances Identified—Disciplinary Referrals: Weapons Carrying, Possession, Etc.
Variances Identified—Disciplinary Referrals: Liquor Law Violations
Variances Identified—Disciplinary Referrals: Drug Use Violations
For the remaining 2 out of the 8 Clery Act crime categories that had variances between what SSU reported and the supporting data from SSU’s daily crime log and its disciplinary action record management system, we noted the following:
- The daily crime log included two cases that the investigating police officers recorded as assaults with a dangerous weapon. These two assault cases were not included in SSU’s 2023 ASR, resulting in a variance of two underreported aggravated assaults, according to our count. However, upon further review of the police reports and discussion with the SSU Police Department (SSUPD), these two aggravated assault cases were not assaults with a dangerous weapon because no dangerous weapons were used that could result in death or great bodily harm. Therefore, these cases should have been recorded in the daily crime log as simple assaults not motivated by bias. SSU was correct to not include these two cases in its 2023 ASR, but it should have updated these two cases from aggravated assault offenses to simple assault offenses in SSU’s daily crime log.
- SSUPD’s interim chief of police requested Clery Act crime statistics from the Salem Police Department (SPD) for calendar years 2020 through 2022 to include in SSU’s 2023 ASR on July 17, 2023. We inspected these Clery Act crime statistics that SPD emailed to SSUPD. The email listed the addresses of the offenses that occurred on or within SSU’s Clery geography and the type and total number of Clery Act crimes that occurred at these addresses. We noted 11 domestic violence offenses in SPD’s Clery Act crime statistics, but there were only 4 domestic violence offenses reported in SSU’s 2023 ASR, resulting in a variance of 7 unreported domestic violence offenses. According to SSUPD employees, all 7 domestic violence offenses occurred on private property (not owned or controlled by SSU), which are not categorized as being on or within SSU’s Clery Act geography; therefore, the offenses were not required to be reported in SSU’s 2023 ASR. We asked SSUPD employees how they determined that these 7 domestic violence offenses occurred on private property, and they explained that they had obtained and reviewed SPD’s case files for all Clery Act crimes that occurred on or within SSU’s Clery geography. However, when we requested these case files to review them, SSUPD employees explained that they did not retain SPD’s case files for the audit period.
If SSU inaccurately reports its Clery Act crime statistics, current and prospective students, SSU employees, and members of the public may draw incorrect conclusions about campus safety. Additionally, not complying with the Clery Act’s ASR reporting requirements may result in SSU having to pay fines to the US Department of Education (US DOE).
Authoritative Guidance
According to Section 668.46(c) of Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR),
- Crimes that must be reported and disclosed. An institution must report to the [US DOE] and disclose in its annual security report statistics for the three most recent calendar years concerning the number of each of the following crimes that occurred on or within its Clery geography and that are reported to local police agencies or to a campus security authority:
- Primary crimes, including . . .
(1) Rape . . .
- Arrests and referrals for disciplinary actions, including—
(A) Arrests for liquor law violations, drug law violations, and illegal weapons possession . . .
(iv) Dating violence, domestic violence, and stalking. . . .
(2) All reported crimes must be recorded.
According to US DOE’s Handbook for Campus Safety and Security Reporting, SSU must “retain the annual security report and all supporting records used in compiling the report for three years.” This includes any case files SSU acquires from SPD related to Clery Act crimes that occurred on or within SSU’s Clery geography, which SSU uses to complete its ASR.
Reasons for Issue
SSUPD told us that the Clery Act crime statistic variances relating to rape, disciplinary referrals for weapons carrying/possession/etc., and arrests for liquor law violations exist because of human error, such as instances of some SSUPD officers not checking the “Clery” checkbox in SSUPD’s case management system. According to SSU management, there was employee turnover and role changes within the Resident Life and Student Life Departments throughout the audit period. The current dean of students and associate dean of students indicated that they could not determine the causes for the variances in Clery Act crime statistics for disciplinary referrals related to drug use and liquor law violations, because they were not in those roles during the audit period. SSU management further stated that one reason for the variances in disciplinary referrals may have been misclassifying drug use violations as liquor law violations.
According to an email the associate dean of students sent us on April 24, 2024, the associate dean of students looked into the reason for the variance related to the stalking incident, which was recorded in SSU’s disciplinary action record management system. However, it appeared that the incident was left unresolved and SSUPD was not notified by the Resident Life or Student Life Departments; therefore, SSUPD was not involved.
According to SSUPD employees, the reason for the variances of the aforementioned two unreported aggravated assaults was because of an oversight by SSUPD employees of not updating the daily crime log for two simple assaults cases that were misclassified.
The reason for the variances of seven domestic violence cases was because SSUPD determined that these SPD cases did not occur on or within SSU’s Clery geography. However, SSUPD did not retain SPD’s case files after reviewing them. SSUPD did not provide a reason why it did not retain SPD’s case files after reviewing them.
Recommendation
SSU must make certain that all Clery Act crimes that occur within its Clery geography are accurately reflected in SSU’s daily crime log and its ASR by establishing policies and procedures to ensure that the following occur:
- cases are recorded accurately in SSU’s daily crime log and the offense types are updated as needed;
- the “Clery” checkbox in SSUPD’s case management system is always selected for Clery Act crimes;
- SSUPD retains all supporting documentation for its Clery Act crime statistics, including case files provided by SPD, for at least three years;
- employees from the Resident Life and Student Life Departments accurately record disciplinary incidents in SSU’s disciplinary action records management system; and
- Clery Act crimes are accurately documented in SSU’s disciplinary action records management system and reported to SSUPD so they can be properly investigated and included in SSU’s ASR.
Auditee’s Response
We agree with the above finding. During the period of the audits, both the SSUPD and SSU’s student life department experienced leadership turnover. At the same time, the university was immersed in responding to the [COVID-19] pandemic to protect the safety of all students, faculty, staff and visitors of the university. SSUPD and SSU’s student life department led the re-opening operations of our campus. Compounding these issues, both departments also experienced significant shortages in staffing that impacted our consistency in reporting.
SSU’s reported incidents considered and identified as Clery Act crimes as a result of the audit have been presented in a table under the Detailed Audit Findings section of the OSA report. This table presents 8 categories for which the OSA had some discrepancies but did not indicate the total categories which were looked at as part of their audit (24 categories). The table below summarizes what has been audited and what was found by category to provide the reader with an overall perspective of the Clery reported audit findings.
|
|
|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While we were substantially in compliance in following the policies and procedures in place to meet the requirements of the Clery Act, these significant shortages in leadership and staff positions contributed to a lack of consistent oversight. Since that time, we have established a strong and stable leadership team that is committed to maintaining compliance with Clery Act reporting. Our current team is diligently following and strengthening our established reporting policies and procedures. We are confident that these leadership and staff changes will ensure that all Clery Act crimes occurring within SSU’s Clery geography are accurately documented and categorized in both the daily crime log and the Annual Security Report (ASR) to eliminate the under-reporting and over-reporting identified by this audit.
SSUPD acknowledges inadvertent errors in tabulating some of the reported crime statistics. As a result of this occurrence, SSU has strengthened their procedures and practices and has required Clery offenses to be catalogued, tabulated, and crosschecked on a monthly basis. This monthly cross checking will be performed utilizing manual, automated, and record management systems controlled by the SSUPD, as well as the various records systems controlled by student life, residence life, athletics, and Clery data provided by other campus areas. SSU will ensure that all supporting documentation is retained for the appropriate length of time.
The university has and will continue to annually provide and review the Clery report with our Board of Trustees. As noted during the audit, we regularly announce the availability of this report to all employees, students, and the public, including making the report publicly available on our website with printed copies distributed at our police station. We will incorporate the discrepancies identified in this audit so that corrected information is available to all audiences moving forward.
Auditor’s Reply
Based on its response, SSU is taking measures to address our concerns regarding this matter. As part of our post-audit review process, we will follow up on this matter in approximately six months.
| Date published: | November 4, 2024 |
|---|