Responses to the Audit
Use the links below to skip to the specific response you wish to view:
- Azusa Pacific University
- Bakersfield College and Kern Community College District
- Berkeley City College and Peralta Community College District
- Humboldt State University
- San José State University
- West Los Angeles College and Los Angeles Community College District
- California State University Office of the Chancellor
- University of California Office of the President
Azusa Pacific University
April 20, 2018
Elaine Howle
State Auditor
California State Auditor
621 Capitol Mall, Suite 1200
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Elaine Howle:
On behalf of the Azusa Pacific University and the Department of Campus Safety, we would like to thank the office of the California State Auditor for their professionalism during the recent audit of our 2016 Clery Act statistics and our Annual Security and Fire Safety Report. We appreciate the time and effort dedicated by the California State Auditor. Your team was extremely thorough and kept us advised of the status of the audit as it progressed.
Additionally, we are grateful for the opportunity to review and comment on your report, California Postsecondary Education Institutions, relative to Azusa Pacific University, a redacted, embargoed copy of which we received on April 16, 2018.1
I. Findings of, and Statements Indicating, Compliance
We fully support and agree with the following findings and statements in the report that establish APU’s compliance with the Clery Act, VAWA, and their implementing regulations:
- APU did not underreport or misreport any Clery Act crimes (p.13 and Table 2)
- APU has a “thorough review process” for identifying and reporting Clery Act crimes (p.13)
- APU’s “process is a best practice to help ensure institutions report all of their Clery Act crimes” (p.13)
- Azusa’s written procedures describe in detail its review process (p.13)
- APU “fully disclosed all of the information that the Clery Act and federal regulations require” (p.13)
- APU “was not missing any disclosures and did not have an incomplete disclosures” (p.14 and Table 3)
- APU “included all the required VAWA policy statements in its annual security report” (p.14 and Table 4)
- APU “fully provided descriptions of a variety of other security policies and processes that the Clery Act and federal regulations require” (p.15)
- APU “fully complied with the Clery Act by ensuring that it included all of its policies and procedures in its annual security report, fully disclosed all VAWA policies in its report, and had in place the needed policy disclosures outside of the annual security report.” (p.15)
- APU “has taken ownership for creating its own annual security report, which includes fully understanding the Clery Act’s requirements.” (p.15)
II. Recommendations
The State Auditor made two recommendations to APU (p.17). The first recommendation deals with reporting crime statistics. That recommendation begins: “To ensure that it does not overreport or misreport its crime statistics …”. We do not agree with the inclusion of the word “misreport” in this sentence and ask that it be deleted from the recommendation. As the State Auditor has found, APU did not misreport any crime statistics (p.13 and Table 2). We also respectfully disagree with the State Auditor’s recommendation that APU “should develop and begin following a procedure by August 2018 to review and adhere to applicable guidance related to the Clery Act, including the OPE handbook, when categorizing the Clery Act crimes it reports.” We believe this recommendation does not follow from, and even contradicts, the State Auditor’s findings, which concluded that (1) APU did not underreport or misreport any crime statistics (p.13 and Table 2), (2) APU has a “thorough review process” for identifying and reporting Clery Act crimes (p.13), and (3) APU’s “process is a best practice to help ensure institutions report all of their Clery Act crimes” (p.13). In other words, APU has already developed and is already following procedures to review and adhere to applicable guidance related to the Clery Act, including the OPE handbook, when categorizing the Clery Act crimes it reports. We respectfully submit that the recommendation be revised to state that APU should continue to do these things and revised to remove any deadline.
APU commits to reviewing the State Auditor’s findings that APU overreported a small number of crime statistics and making necessary adjustments in its understanding of a Clery Act crime to improve this aspect of its compliance efforts.
The second recommendation states that APU “should by December 2018 create and follow appropriate procedures, such as requiring supervisor review of entries or programming its records management system to create the daily crime logs automatically.” APU respectfully disagrees with this recommendation to the extent it suggests that APU has not already created and does not already follow “appropriate procedures” for creating and maintaining its daily crime log. APU has already addressed the issue in the old-record keeping system that caused it to omit two incidents in 2016. The new record keeping system is an “appropriate procedure” for avoiding such omissions presently and in the future. Automated systems of the kind you recommend may be helpful, but they are not required to ensure compliance as we have demonstrated. We also already engage in supervisor review when there is a question as to whether a crime should be included on the log. The Clery Act does not mandate that our procedures “require” supervisory review of the decision of whether or not to add a crime to the log.
APU commits to reviewing its crime log policy to see if further measures can be added to the determination of whether an event should be included on the crime log or not.
III. Specific Findings of Non-Compliance
APU respectfully submits the following statement of our understanding of the matters addressed in your findings of non-compliance. The Audit Results begin with the conclusion that APU “reported statistics that were inaccurate to varying degrees.” APU respectfully disagrees with that statement. As we explained during the audit process, APU did not report any criminal acts that were not Clery Act crimes and we disagree with the conclusion that we reported two such statistics. APU did inadvertently report five crimes that occurred on another institution’s Clery Act location that occurred when some APU students were staying at that institution. But such reporting, done in good faith, does not constitute inaccuracies “to varying degrees.”
* * * *
APU is committed to providing a safe and welcoming learning environment and we are committed to Clery Act compliance and the safety for our entire community of students, employees and guests. The opportunity to respond to this audit is sincerely appreciated and allows for a meaningful dialogue between the state and APU, so that a clear and concise representation of our Clery Act compliance actions are available for review by us and the community we serve.
If there is any additional information and assistance we can provide, please do not hesitate to ask.
Very truly yours,
Jon R. Wallace, DBA
President
Footnote
1 Our Clery Act Coordinator (Lieutenant Gary Kossky) received a copy of the Redacted Agency Draft and as directed by your instructions letter, he faxed the “receipt for reports” to Christina Edwards at 916-323-0913 on the morning of April 17, 2018. Go back to text
Comments
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR’S COMMENTS ON THE RESPONSE FROM AZUSA PACIFIC UNIVERSITY
To provide clarity and perspective, we are commenting on Azusa’s response to our audit. The numbers below correspond to the numbers we have placed in the margin of Azusa’s response.
We provided Azusa a shorter version of the draft audit report during the review period containing only those sections pertaining to it. Therefore, the page numbers Azusa cites in its response do not correspond to the page numbers in our final report.
The recommendation that Azusa refers to in the draft report was originally part of the recommendation in the Audit Results that pertains to the overreporting or misreporting of crime statistics by three other institutions. Although Azusa indicates that it has already developed and is following procedures to review and adhere to applicable guidance when categorizing the Clery Act crimes it reports, we still found seven instances of overreporting, as summarized in Table 2. To clarify our report, we modified our text in the Audit Results to state that Azusa did not underreport any Clery Act crimes, likely as a result of its thorough review process, although it did overreport some crimes. We also developed a separate recommendation in the Audit Results directing Azusa to strengthen its procedures for reviewing and adhering to applicable guidance related to the Clery Act when categorizing the Clery Act crimes it reports.
Although Azusa asserts that it has already taken action to maintain accurate information in its daily crime log, it did not inform us of these steps before submitting its response to our draft audit report. We stand by our recommendation and look forward to Azusa providing evidence in its 60-day response to demonstrate how its new system is able to prevent the omissions we identified. Further, as we note in the Audit Results, Azusa does not require as part of its crime log procedures a secondary review to ensure that staff appropriately update its crime log. Without such a review or the use of an automated system, Azusa is at risk of continuing to omit crimes from its log.
We stand by our conclusion that Azusa reported statistics that were inaccurate to varying degrees. As we discuss in the Audit Results, Azusa incorrectly reported five crimes that occurred at a Clery Act location of another private institution. Further, as shown in Table 2, Azusa reported two other crimes that we determined were not Clery Act crimes. These crimes did not meet the reporting criteria in the OPE handbook. Although Azusa disagreed with our conclusion pertaining to these two crimes, it could not provide any evidence to justify that either incident met the definition of a Clery Act crime.
Bakersfield College and Kern Community College District
Friday, April 20, 2018
California State Auditor
Attn: Sean McCobb, State Auditor
621 Capitol Mall, Suite 1200
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: State Audit on Clery Act Requirements and Crime Reporting at Bakersfield College
Dear Ms. Howle,
Please see attached responses from both Bakersfield College and the Kern Community College District.
Sincerely,
Donald Chrusciel, Ph.D.
Vice President of Finance and Administrative Services
BAKERSFIELD COLLEGE
Wednesday, April 18, 2018
California State Auditor
Attn: Sean McCobb, State Auditor
621 Capitol Mall, Suite 1200
Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Ms. Howle,
Thank you for your letter dated April 16, 2018 and for the opportunity to respond to the draft audit report, "Clery Act Requirements and Crime Reporting: Compliance Continues to Challenge California's Colleges and Universities".
On behalf of Bakersfield College, we would like to thank the Office of the California State Auditor for their professionalism during the recent audit of the Clery Act Requirements and Crime Reporting at Bakersfield College. The State Auditor's team were extremely thorough and kept us advised of the status of the audit and responded to our inquiries as it progressed.
Bakersfield College's mission is to provide opportunities for students from diverse economic, cultural, and educational backgrounds to attain Associate and Baccalaureate degrees and certificates, workplace skills, and preparation for transfer. Our rigorous and supportive learning environment fosters students' abilities to think critically, communicate effectively, and demonstrate competencies and skills in order to engage productively in their communities and the world. Bakersfield College always strives to provide a safe learning environment for all our students and staff.
Upon receiving the redacted audit draft report (Report #2017-032) Bakersfield College reviewed the document and each recommendation noted in the audit report. This letter is our response. The College will form a Safety Review Team to work alongside the College's Clery Act Coordinator. The Safety Review Team will be led by the Director of Public Safety, who serves as the College's Clery Act Coordinator. Other team members shall include the College's Deputy Title IX Coordinator and Student Conduct Officer. The College has already initiated review of these audit recommendations and has begun implementing recommended changes. Below you will find our responses to each recommendation.
Recommendation #1
"To ensure that it does not underreport crime statistics in its annual security reports, [Bakersfield] should create and begin following written procedures by August 2018 that clearly describe the Clery Act crime identification process it will follow. These processes should include maintaining contemporaneous lists of Clery Act crimes that occur."
College Response
The College shall develop written procedures to accurately report crime statistics and clearly describe the Clery Act crime identification process. These procedures will ensure maintenance of contemporaneous lists of Clery Act crimes that occur.
Recommendation #2
"To ensure that it does not over report or misreport its crime statistics, [Bakersfield] should develop and begin following a procedure by August 2018 to review and adhere to applicable guidance related to the Clery Act, including the OPE handbook, when categorizing the Clery Act crimes it reports."
College Response
The College shall develop and begin following a procedure to review and adhere to the requirements of the Clery Act and the OPE Handbook when categorizing the Clery reports. This procedure shall be developed and implemented by August 2018, and reviewed and updated on an ongoing basis.
Recommendation #3
"To ensure Bakersfield requests and reports Clery Act crimes from local law enforcement, the institution should by August 2018 create and begin following a procedure, in conjunction with a written agreement with local law enforcement, to obtain crime statistics for the annual security report."
College Response
The College shall develop a written agreement with local law enforcement to obtain local crime statistics for the Annual Security Report. Template letters addressed to local law enforcement have already been developed and submitted to our community partners.
Recommendation #4
"To ensure that its district provides it with policies and processes that the Clery Act and federal regulations require, [Bakersfield] should develop and begin following a policy by August 2018 requiring that it periodically review its district's annual security report template, as well as district policies. To the extent that it identifies any inaccurate information or missing policies, it should work with its district to make updates as necessary."
College Response
The College shall develop and begin following procedures requiring complete and accurate information being included in the Annual Security Report (Clery Report). The College will take responsibility to include accurate and relevant policies in the Annual Security Report.
Recommendation #5
"[Bakersfield] should develop and implement procedures by August 2018 that it will regularly review and adhere to applicable guidance related to the Clery Act to ensure that it develops or discloses all required policies."
College Response
Same as response to recommendation #4.
Recommendation #6
"[Bakersfield] should create and follow procedures by August 2018 to ensure that it includes all crimes in its daily crime log as it becomes aware of those crimes, such as when it receives crime reports from local law enforcement agencies."
College Response
The College will develop procedures to ensure that it includes all crimes in its daily crime log as it becomes aware of those crimes including specific information about the date it receives from local law enforcement agencies.
Recommendation #7
"To ensure it properly informs students and employees, [Bakersfield] should notify its students and employees and update the U.S. DOE of the corrected Clery Act statistics as soon as possible."
College Response
The College shall update the U.S. DOE Clery statistics as soon as possible and notify its students and employees immediately.
Recommendation #8
"To ensure that its annual security reports' crime statistics and the statistics it submits to the
U.S. DOE align, [Bakersfield] should reconcile these statistics before publishing its reports or submitting the data to the U.S. DOE."
College Response
The College shall develop processes to reconcile the Annual Security Report crime statistics and the statistics it submits to the U.S. DOE before publishing its reports or submitting the data to the U.S. DOE.
We hope our College responses have addressed the recommendations outlined in the audit report. For additional questions or clarifications, please feel free to call us at (661) 395-4034.
Sincerely,
Donald Chrusciel, Ph.D.
Vice President of Finance and Administ ration
Zav Dadabhoy, Ph.D.
Vice President of Student Affairs
KERN COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
April 16, 2018
Ms. Elaine M. Howle California State Auditor
621 Capitol Mall, Suite 120
Sacramento, California 95814
Dear Ms. Howle,
Thank you for your letter dated April 16 and for the opportunity to respond to the audit report, "Clery Act Requirements and Crime Reporting: Compliance Continues to Challenge California's Colleges and Universities." The auditors' recommendation is as follows:
To ensure that its campuses provide the necessary resources and information to students about campus safety, the [Kern Community College District] should, by December 2018, develop all required policies related to campus safety in compliance with the California Education Code .
We agree with this recommendation and will work with our Board of Trustees to ensure district policy is updated and implemented within the established timeframe.
Please send our thanks to your staff for their courteous and professional demeanor in completing this audit.
Sincerely,
Thomas J. Burke
Chancellor
Berkeley City College and Peralta Community College District
April 20, 2018
Elaine M. Howle, CPA
State Auditor
621 Capitol Mall, Suite 1200
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Ms. Elaine M. Howle,
On behalf of Berkeley City College and the Peralta Community College District, thank you for your letter of April 16, 2018 and the opportunity to review and respond to your report, “Clery Act Requirements and Crime Reporting: Compliance Continues to Challenge California’s Colleges and Universities.” We also want to thank your team members as they were very professional and provided consistent updates on the progress of the audit.
The recommendations included in the “Redacted Agency Draft” are listed below and they encompass 11 undisclosed and two partially disclosed security policies and procedures located in Appendix C (p. 24) of the report:
- To ensure that it accurately reports Clery Act crime statistics, Berkeley City College, by working with its district, should by August 2018 enter into an updated MOU with Berkeley Police that outlines the process for compiling crime statistics and defines responsibilities of both parties.
- To ensure that its respective district provide it with policies and processes that the Cleary Act and federal regulations require, [Berkeley City College] should develop and begin following a policy by August 2018 requiring that it periodically review its district’s annual security report, as well as district policies. To the extent that it identifies any inaccurate information or missing policies, [Berkeley City College] should work with its district to make updates as necessary.
- Berkeley City College should develop and implement procedures by August 2018 that it will regularly review and adhere to applicable guidance related to Clery Act to ensure that it develops or discloses all required policies.
- To ensure completeness of its daily crime log, Berkeley City College should develop and implement a policy by August 2018 that describes its process for maintaining the log and ensuring that it is adequately maintained by its security guards.
- Berkeley City College should create and follow procedures by August 2018 to ensure that it includes all crimes in its daily crime logs as it becomes aware of those crimes, such as it when it receives crime reports from local law enforcement agencies.
- Berkeley City College should retain documentation of Peralta’s notification to its students demonstrating that Peralta appropriately notified the campus’s community about the availability of its annual report.
Berkeley City College (BCC)/Peralta Community College (PCCD) are in agreement with the recommendations made by the CA State Auditor Team. BCC will work with PCCD to develop and implement the recommended policies and procedures by August 2018. Additionally, BCC and PCCD will develop an updated MOU with Berkeley Police to include accurate Clery Act crime statistics reporting.
Thank you again for the opportunity to review and comment on this report. If you have any questions, please contact me at (510) 981-2850.
Sincerely,
Rowena M. Tomaneng, EdD
President
Berkeley City College
2050 Center Street
Berkeley, CA 94704
Office Phone: 510-981-2850
Email: rtomaneng@peralta.edu
Cc: Dr. Jowel C. Laguerre, Chancellor
Dr. Sadiq Ikharo, Vice Chancellor, Department of General Services
Humboldt State University
Office of the President
April 20, 2018
Ms. Elaine M. Howle
California State Auditor
621 Capital Mall, Suite 1200
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Ms. Howle:
This letter is in response to your draft audit report titled "Clery Act Requirements and Crime Reporting: Compliance Continues to Challenge California's Colleges and Universities." We received and reviewed the draft report, and we appreciate the opportunity to respond to it and its recommendations. We concur with the recommendations listed.
Humboldt State University (HSU) is deeply committed to providing a safe environment for our students, and adhering to the Clery Act is one of the tools we use to achieve that goal. We have numerous methods for communicating with students about the information, services, and processes available to them. Specifically, we distribute publications, post information on our website, and make presentations during new student orientation, all of which help demonstrate our commitment to student safety.
Most programs must continuously evolve in order to be successful. For example, HSU follows California State University (CSU) systemwide policy, including Executive Order 1107 "Implementation of the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act" (the "Clery Act"), which was issued in March 2017. In addition, to help build consistency, HSU and all other CSU campuses use a standard template/format guide from the CSU Chancellor's Office for preparation of the annual security rep01is required under the Clery Act.
CSU campuses have worked to comply with the Clery Act since its
inception. Historically, most of the reporting requirements were the
responsibility of the University Police Department (UPD). In 2014, HSU
established a Clery Act Coordinator, who is located at the UPD. In
addition, within the last year, HSU has established a Clery Director
and Clery Compliance Team. The team consists of members from several
functional areas, which helps ensure that all areas of campus have
input in the Clery Act process and can provide support to the Clery Act
Coordinator. The director, coordinator,
and team continually strive to improve HSU's compliance with Clery Act
requirements and provide a safe campus environment for our students.
Thank you again for the opportunity to respond to this audit.
With best wishes,
Lisa A. Rossbacher, Ph.D. President
San José State University
April 19, 2018
Ms. Elaine M. Howle, CPA
State Auditor
621 Capitol Mall, Suite 1200
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: Campus response to the Clery Act Requirements and Crime Reporting audit at San Jose State University
Enclosed is our campus response to the Clery Act draft audit report. San Jose State University is committed to addressing the issues identified in this audit report.
Please let me know if I can provide you with additional information.
Charlie Faas
Vice President Administration and Finance
Enclosure
Cc: Mary Papazian, President
San Jose State University - Campus responses to the Clery Act audit report
Recommendation 1
To ensure that it does not underreport crime statistics in its annual security reports [San Jose State] should create and begin following written procedures by August 2018 that clearly describe the Clery Act crime identification process it will follow. These processes should include maintaining contemporaneous lists of Clery Act crimes that occur.
We concur. Written procedures will be created and implemented for the purpose of Clery Act crime identification, including the maintenance of contemporaneous lists of Clery Act crimes that occur.
Recommendation 2
To ensure that it does not overreport or misreport its crime statistics, [San Jose State] should develop and begin following a procedure by August 2018 to review and adhere to applicable guidance related to the Clery Act, including the OPE handbook, when categorizing the Clery Act crimes it reports.
We concur. Written procedures will be created and implemented for on-going review of Clery Act guidance and the OPE handbook for the purpose of accurately categorizing Clery Act crimes.
Recommendation 3
[San Jose State] should develop and implement procedures by August 2018 that it will regularly review and adhere to applicable guidance related to the Clery Act to ensure that it develops or discloses all required policies.
We concur. Written procedures will be created and implemented for on-going review of and adherence to Clery Act guidance for the purpose of developing and disclosing all policies as required.
Recommendation 4
To ensure that it includes all criminal incidents in its daily crime logs, [San Jose State] should by December 2018, create and follow appropriate procedures, such as requiring supervisor review of entries or programming its records management systems to create the daily crime logs automatically.
We concur. Written procedures will be created and implemented to require supervisory review of crime log entries. In addition, the manual reports that were found to contain transcription errors during the audit will be re defined as internal management safety reports instead of being considered as crime logs, thus the existing automated database and automated reports without manual reformatting will serve as official crime logs.
Recommendation 5
[San Jose State] should create and follow procedures by August 2018 to ensure that it includes all crimes in its daily crime logs as it becomes aware of those crimes, such as when it receives crime reports from local law enforcement agencies.
We concur. Written procedures will be created and implemented to ensure the inclusion in the daily crime logs all reported crimes that we receive from local law enforcement agencies .
West Los Angeles College and Los Angeles Community College District
WEST LOS ANGELES COLLEGE
April 20, 2018
Ms. Elaine M. Howle, CPA
California State Auditor
621 Capitol Mall, Suite 1200
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Ms. Howle,
We are in receipt of and reviewed your report, “Clery Act Requirements and Crime Reporting: Compliance Continues to Challenges California’s Colleges and Universities”, under Education Code 67382.
We generally agree with your findings and conclusions, and will work to correct any identified deficiencies. Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
James M. Limbaugh, Ph.D.
President
LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
April 19, 2018
Ms. Elaine M. Howle, CPA
California State Auditor
621 Capitol Mall, Suite 1200
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Ms. Howle:
Thank you for your April 16, 2018 letter and for the opportunity to respond to the report, “Clery Act Requirements and Crime Reporting: Compliance Continues to Challenge California’s Colleges and Universities.” The Los Angeles Community College District understands the importance of maintaining a safe environment on its campuses, and has already initiated a workgroup to develop revisions to its existing policies relating to sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking.
Recommendation: To ensure that its campuses provide the necessary resources and
information to students about campus safety, the Los Angeles Community College District should, by December 2018, develop all required policies related to campus safety in compliance with the California Education Code.
Response: Agree. The Los Angeles Community College District will be working to revise or add policies in compliance with the Education Code.
We appreciate the professionalism of the California State Auditor’s Office throughout its review.
Sincerely,
Francisco C. Rodriguez, Ph.D.
Chancellor
California State University Office of the Chancellor
April 20, 2018
Ms. Elaine M. Howle
State Auditor
California State Auditor
621 Capitol Mall, Suite 1200
Sacramento, California 95814
Dear Ms. Howle:
The California State University (CSU) welcomes the opportunity to respond to the draft audit report Clery Act Requirements and Crime Reporting: Compliance Continues to Challenge California’s Colleges and Universities .
The CSU understands and appreciates the importance of campus safety and providing accurate information to students and other stakeholders so they can make informed decisions. Toward that end, the CSU has continued its efforts to improve its compliance with the requirements of the Clery Act and federal regulations. For example, as noted in your report, in 2017 we issued an executive order that provides direction to the campuses on how to implement the Clery Act. Your staff concluded that policy was robust in most areas, and we will implement your recommendations for improvements. In addition, we have continued to host Clery Act workshops for Clery directors, most recently on March 27-29, 2018.
Recommendation 1: To ensure that its campuses include all necessary policy disclosures in their annual security reports, the CSU Chancellor’s Office should revise its systemwide annual security report template by August 2018 so that it directs its campuses to specifically include each of the policies that the Clery Act and federal regulations require.
Response: We concur. The Chancellor’s Office will revise its systemwide annual security report template/format guide so that it directs the campuses to specifically include each of the policies that the Clery Act and federal regulations require.
Recommendation 2: To help ensure its institutions maintain complete and accurate information about crimes that occur on their properties, the CSU Chancellor’s Office should issue a policy by August 2018 to specify the information its institutions should include in their daily crime logs.
Response: We concur. The Chancellor’s Office will issue an update to existing policy to specify the information the campuses should include in their daily crime logs.
Recommendation 3: To ensure it is fully compliant with the California Education Code, the CSU Chancellor’s Office should create and implement a procedure by December 2018 regarding the handling of requests for information regarding sexual assault incidents.
Response: We concur. The Chancellor’s Office will create and implement a procedure regarding the handling of requests for information regarding sexual assault incidents.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have questions.
Sincerely,
Timothy P. White
Chancellor
TPW/cs
University of California Office of the President
April 20, 2018
Ms. Elaine M. Howle
California State Auditor
621 Capitol Mall, Suite 1200
Sacramento, California 95814
State Auditor Howle:
Thank you for the opportunity to review and respond to the audit report, “Clery Act Requirements and Crime Reporting: Compliance Continues to Challenge California’s Colleges and Universities.” Below are the University’s responses to the recommendations in the report directed to the University of California Office of the President.
1. To help prevent errors during the next Clery Act reporting cycle, UCOP should revise its Clery Act policy by August 2018 to include details on where institutions can find the specific disclosure requirements for their annual security reports.
We agree with this recommendation and will update our Clery Act Policy to include this detail by August 2018.
2. To ensure that it provides accurate and comprehensive information to its students and employees, UCOP should by December 2018 revise its intolerance form to allow reporters to include offender characteristics and provide to the public complete information regarding occurrences of noncriminal acts of hate violence. Additionally, UCOP should by February 2019 more clearly address both stranger and nonstranger sexual assault within its policies.
We agree with this recommendation. UCOP will:
- Revise the systemwide Intolerance Form to include a field for reporters to include offender characteristics by December 2018.
- Publicly post annual systemwide summaries of reported noncriminal acts of hate violence / acts of intolerance by December 2018.
- Amend its Sexual Violence Sexual Harassment Policy to clarify that its policy applies to both stranger and nonstranger sexual assaults by February 2019.
We appreciate your team’s professionalism and cooperation during the audit process, and we look forward to implementing the report’s recommendations.
Yours very truly,
Janet Napolitano
President