Colleagues,
The revised report is posted at this link: http://www.nabita.org/documents/VATechRecordRpt179-09110909final.pdf
Regards,
The NCHERM Team
Friday, December 4, 2009
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Sexual Assault on Campus
Thought you would want to see this in-depth, investigative, multi-media story about sexual assault on college campuses by Kristen Lombardi and Center for Public Integrity
http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/campus_assault/
http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/campus_assault/
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Campus Sexual Assault Policy Press Release
PASSING ALONG A PRESS RELEASE...
V-Day and Students Active for Ending Rape Launch Campus Accountability Project: A Demand for Sexual Assault Policy Reform
New York, NY, December 1, 2009—V-Day and Students Active for Ending Rape (SAFER) are proud to announce the launch of their joint “Campus Accountability Project: A Demand for Sexual Assault Policy Reform.” For the past ten years, both V-Day and SAFER have been helping college and university students organize to fight sexual violence and challenge rape culture on their campuses. By combining forces on the multi-phase Campus Accountability Project (CAP), both organizations hope to empower more students to take an active role in changing the ways in which their campuses prevent and respond to sexual assault, and spark a nationwide dialogue on what schools should be doing to properly educate and protect their students.
Sexual assault on college campuses is a pressing issue. One in four women will survive rape or attempted rape during their college career and rape is the most common violent crime committed on college campuses. Colleges and universities have the power to change these statistics and foster healthy sexual attitudes on campus by implementing comprehensive and easily accessible sexual assault policies and prevention programs. V-Day and SAFER believe that students have the power to hold their schools accountable for these key provisions and to fight for and win reforms when necessary.
The CAP kicks off this winter as V-Day and SAFER invite college students across the country to become part of the movement by researching their school’s current sexual assault policy and providing feedback. Students can register for the V-Day/Safer Campus Accountability Project Database where they will be guided through a thorough policy analysis process, answering questions meant to assess the policy’s thoroughness, inclusivity, and adherence to federal law. Once completed, these analyses will be reviewed by staff and submitted to the Database, creating a powerful tool for student activists and administrators to see how their schools match up to peer institutions and what improvements can be made.
After the first batch of policies have been submitted, SAFER trainers will be available for students who want to make changes on their campus. During the 2010–2011 school year, V-Day and SAFER will review the compiled information to assess the state of the nation’s campus sexual assault policy’s and establish a thorough list of key criteria to effectively prevent, track and respond to sexual assaults on college campuses. We hope to eventually integrate our database into existing college ranking systems, so students and parents have easy access to the information.
Please visit http://safercampus.org/campus-accountability-project or http://www.vday.org/cap for more information.
About V-Day
V-Day is a global activist movement shattering taboos, raising millions and transforming communities to end violence against women and girls. Annually, activists stage thousands of benefit productions of Founder/playwright Eve Ensler’s The Vagina Monologues and other works. Working at the intersection of art, social action, and politics, V-Day empowers grassroots activists to become leaders, turning pain to power. To date, the V-Day movement has raised over $70 million, crafted international educational, media and PSA campaigns, reopened shelters, and funded over 11,000 community-based anti-violence programs and safe houses in Democratic Republic Of Congo, Egypt, Haiti, Iraq, Kenya, Pakistan, and South Dakota. V-Day was named one of Worth magazine's "100 Best Charities" in 2001 and Marie Claire’s “Top Ten Charities” in 2006. The 'V' in V-Day stands for Victory, Valentine and Vagina. http://www.vday.org
About SAFER
Started by Columbia University students in 2000, Students Active for Ending Rape (SAFER) is the only organization that fights sexual violence and rape culture by empowering student-led campaigns to reform college sexual assault policies. An all-volunteer collective, SAFER facilitates student organizing through a comprehensive training manual; in-person workshops and trainings; free follow-up mentoring; our Campus Sexual Assault Policies Database; and a growing online resource library and network for student organizers. Committed to social change through community mobilization, SAFER arms students with the tools needed to mobilize communities and make lasting change on campus. www.safercampus.org
V-Day and Students Active for Ending Rape Launch Campus Accountability Project: A Demand for Sexual Assault Policy Reform
New York, NY, December 1, 2009—V-Day and Students Active for Ending Rape (SAFER) are proud to announce the launch of their joint “Campus Accountability Project: A Demand for Sexual Assault Policy Reform.” For the past ten years, both V-Day and SAFER have been helping college and university students organize to fight sexual violence and challenge rape culture on their campuses. By combining forces on the multi-phase Campus Accountability Project (CAP), both organizations hope to empower more students to take an active role in changing the ways in which their campuses prevent and respond to sexual assault, and spark a nationwide dialogue on what schools should be doing to properly educate and protect their students.
Sexual assault on college campuses is a pressing issue. One in four women will survive rape or attempted rape during their college career and rape is the most common violent crime committed on college campuses. Colleges and universities have the power to change these statistics and foster healthy sexual attitudes on campus by implementing comprehensive and easily accessible sexual assault policies and prevention programs. V-Day and SAFER believe that students have the power to hold their schools accountable for these key provisions and to fight for and win reforms when necessary.
The CAP kicks off this winter as V-Day and SAFER invite college students across the country to become part of the movement by researching their school’s current sexual assault policy and providing feedback. Students can register for the V-Day/Safer Campus Accountability Project Database where they will be guided through a thorough policy analysis process, answering questions meant to assess the policy’s thoroughness, inclusivity, and adherence to federal law. Once completed, these analyses will be reviewed by staff and submitted to the Database, creating a powerful tool for student activists and administrators to see how their schools match up to peer institutions and what improvements can be made.
After the first batch of policies have been submitted, SAFER trainers will be available for students who want to make changes on their campus. During the 2010–2011 school year, V-Day and SAFER will review the compiled information to assess the state of the nation’s campus sexual assault policy’s and establish a thorough list of key criteria to effectively prevent, track and respond to sexual assaults on college campuses. We hope to eventually integrate our database into existing college ranking systems, so students and parents have easy access to the information.
Please visit http://safercampus.org/campus-accountability-project or http://www.vday.org/cap for more information.
About V-Day
V-Day is a global activist movement shattering taboos, raising millions and transforming communities to end violence against women and girls. Annually, activists stage thousands of benefit productions of Founder/playwright Eve Ensler’s The Vagina Monologues and other works. Working at the intersection of art, social action, and politics, V-Day empowers grassroots activists to become leaders, turning pain to power. To date, the V-Day movement has raised over $70 million, crafted international educational, media and PSA campaigns, reopened shelters, and funded over 11,000 community-based anti-violence programs and safe houses in Democratic Republic Of Congo, Egypt, Haiti, Iraq, Kenya, Pakistan, and South Dakota. V-Day was named one of Worth magazine's "100 Best Charities" in 2001 and Marie Claire’s “Top Ten Charities” in 2006. The 'V' in V-Day stands for Victory, Valentine and Vagina. http://www.vday.org
About SAFER
Started by Columbia University students in 2000, Students Active for Ending Rape (SAFER) is the only organization that fights sexual violence and rape culture by empowering student-led campaigns to reform college sexual assault policies. An all-volunteer collective, SAFER facilitates student organizing through a comprehensive training manual; in-person workshops and trainings; free follow-up mentoring; our Campus Sexual Assault Policies Database; and a growing online resource library and network for student organizers. Committed to social change through community mobilization, SAFER arms students with the tools needed to mobilize communities and make lasting change on campus. www.safercampus.org
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Mandated Psychological Assessment -- Best Practices
NCHERM-affiliated consultant Brian Van Brunt has suggested ten questions you may want to pose when choosing outside assessors to perform evaluations on students:
1) Does the mandated assessment create a “counseling” relationship with the student. If so, what does the informed consent for treatment and assessment look like (can we see a copy?). Is the relationship covered by HIPAA or FERPA---or is it medical in nature without electronic billing (HIPAA)
2) Is the student required to have information shared with the referring party regardless of the results or their wishes? If so, what does this release of information form look like (can we see a copy?)
3) What is the scope of the assessment? Will previous records (e.g. judicial files, out of state criminal records, third-party interviews, review of transcripts/GPA/class attendance, contact with RA or RD to determine residential life performance) be considered. If so, is the student informed of this prior to the assessment starting.
4) What kind of testing will be used to augment the clinical interview (e.g. symptom based measures (beck scales, EDIT, STAXI…), outcome measures (SCL-90-R, OQ-45, QOLI), personality testing (MMPI-2, TAT, Rorschach). How are the results reported back to the referring agent (e.g. letter, summary vs. overly technical data). Is there an additional costs for these assessments or are they provided as part of the overall cost?
5) What is a reasonable time frame for a first meeting? How long does a letter or results typically take to generate?
6) Is there a limit on the number of assessments that can be completed in a time frame (e.g. we know there are busy times where multiple students may be referred for an assessment---will this slow down the process)
7) Are there choices for the student in terms of who can do the assessment (e.g. is it only one person or a team that the student can switch to another person if they are uncomfortable)
8) What kind of ways does the assessment address concerns of “faking” or malingering responses? If assessments are used, do they address valid responses?
9) Who is paying for the assessment? If the student pays, do they then have a right to refuse having the results shared? If the school pays, how to you address the students right to see the results? (who gets the results first? Are both parties given the same results?)
10) What are the credentials of the person doing the assessment? Do they have specific training in the area of assessment and college student development?
Hope you find these helpful.
Regards,
Brett A. Sokolow, Esq.
1) Does the mandated assessment create a “counseling” relationship with the student. If so, what does the informed consent for treatment and assessment look like (can we see a copy?). Is the relationship covered by HIPAA or FERPA---or is it medical in nature without electronic billing (HIPAA)
2) Is the student required to have information shared with the referring party regardless of the results or their wishes? If so, what does this release of information form look like (can we see a copy?)
3) What is the scope of the assessment? Will previous records (e.g. judicial files, out of state criminal records, third-party interviews, review of transcripts/GPA/class attendance, contact with RA or RD to determine residential life performance) be considered. If so, is the student informed of this prior to the assessment starting.
4) What kind of testing will be used to augment the clinical interview (e.g. symptom based measures (beck scales, EDIT, STAXI…), outcome measures (SCL-90-R, OQ-45, QOLI), personality testing (MMPI-2, TAT, Rorschach). How are the results reported back to the referring agent (e.g. letter, summary vs. overly technical data). Is there an additional costs for these assessments or are they provided as part of the overall cost?
5) What is a reasonable time frame for a first meeting? How long does a letter or results typically take to generate?
6) Is there a limit on the number of assessments that can be completed in a time frame (e.g. we know there are busy times where multiple students may be referred for an assessment---will this slow down the process)
7) Are there choices for the student in terms of who can do the assessment (e.g. is it only one person or a team that the student can switch to another person if they are uncomfortable)
8) What kind of ways does the assessment address concerns of “faking” or malingering responses? If assessments are used, do they address valid responses?
9) Who is paying for the assessment? If the student pays, do they then have a right to refuse having the results shared? If the school pays, how to you address the students right to see the results? (who gets the results first? Are both parties given the same results?)
10) What are the credentials of the person doing the assessment? Do they have specific training in the area of assessment and college student development?
Hope you find these helpful.
Regards,
Brett A. Sokolow, Esq.
Monday, November 2, 2009
Mandated Psychological Assessment
Another look at mandated assessment
The second step in Covey’s seven habits of highly effective people is “begin with the end in mind.” Keeping this simple statement in mind has the potential to improve the quality of any mandated suicide or risk assessment. Too often, clinicians become distracted by non-essential questions or external pressures which lead them away from what the referral source is really looking for in terms of feedback.
What is that primary focus when performing an assessment? Well, it depends. It may be a Dean or VP of Student Affairs needs to determine if the student is likely to be safe remaining on campus or if he should be removed them from campus housing. Police may be looking to gauge the severity of a given situation, perhaps a note that lists “people I hate” left on the outside of the student’s door or a creative writing essay that outlines a campus shooting scenario.
Before I start digging into the magic bag of assessments and structured clinical interviews, it is helpful to being any assessment with the end in mind. What is the referral source looking for? It is rarely a 10 page psycho-social assessment or summary of developmental milestones. More often, referral sources are looking for counseling to assist in their process of determining risk. Too much time and effort is spent on answering questions that no one is asking.
Deans, Housing directors and campus police know we can’t predict the future. They understand that a counseling assessment isn’t a guaranteed prediction of future behavior. What they are looking for is assistance in determining a future course of action. Too often, psychologists and counselors don’t focus enough on providing assistance to the questions being asked by the referral source.
Many of the difficulties which arise between counselors and BIT teams center on the lack of effort put into developing the expectations of the beginning of the referral process. Counselors end up guessing at what kind of information they need to provide and BIT teams try to decipher overly technical assessment reports that may be thorough, but miss answering the key questions.
I would suggest counselors and BIT teams come together and discuss what kind of help they can offer each other to build a better foundational conversation prior to beginning any assessment. Some of these questions might include:
1) Are decision makers trying to determine whether the student can live on campus? The real question or threat may be more focused on the dangers or difficulty experienced by roommates and community members. The assessment may want to focus on the relationships the student has and the likelihood of these relationships being disruptive to the residential life community.
2) Does the referral source need help developing educational sanctions or monitoring if the student remains on campus? Counseling may not be the office providing these, but often those performing these assessments are in an excellent position to offer some advice about what kinds of corrective action or treatment would be helpful to avoid future problems.
3) Does the student seem remorseful and show insight into the severity of the situation?
4) Are there personality or psychological issues that may impact the likelihood of the threat occurring again (future suicide attempts, poor impulse control, past behavior, difficult environmental stressors)?
5) Is there a specific timeline that needs to be adhered to? Performing a detailed assessment that will not be ready for a hearing will not be as helpful to the threat team.
6) How can the information best be shared? Is a formal letter needed or a conversation more helpful?
Have a great weekend.
Brian Van Brunt, Ed.D.
Director of Counseling and Testing, WKU
NCHERM-Affiliated Consultant
Brian@NCHERM.org
Brian Van Brunt and Brett Sokolow will explore the topic, "We've Intervened -- Now What?" in a webinar this Friday, November 6th. Details are posted at http://www.ncherm.org/webinars.html
The second step in Covey’s seven habits of highly effective people is “begin with the end in mind.” Keeping this simple statement in mind has the potential to improve the quality of any mandated suicide or risk assessment. Too often, clinicians become distracted by non-essential questions or external pressures which lead them away from what the referral source is really looking for in terms of feedback.
What is that primary focus when performing an assessment? Well, it depends. It may be a Dean or VP of Student Affairs needs to determine if the student is likely to be safe remaining on campus or if he should be removed them from campus housing. Police may be looking to gauge the severity of a given situation, perhaps a note that lists “people I hate” left on the outside of the student’s door or a creative writing essay that outlines a campus shooting scenario.
Before I start digging into the magic bag of assessments and structured clinical interviews, it is helpful to being any assessment with the end in mind. What is the referral source looking for? It is rarely a 10 page psycho-social assessment or summary of developmental milestones. More often, referral sources are looking for counseling to assist in their process of determining risk. Too much time and effort is spent on answering questions that no one is asking.
Deans, Housing directors and campus police know we can’t predict the future. They understand that a counseling assessment isn’t a guaranteed prediction of future behavior. What they are looking for is assistance in determining a future course of action. Too often, psychologists and counselors don’t focus enough on providing assistance to the questions being asked by the referral source.
Many of the difficulties which arise between counselors and BIT teams center on the lack of effort put into developing the expectations of the beginning of the referral process. Counselors end up guessing at what kind of information they need to provide and BIT teams try to decipher overly technical assessment reports that may be thorough, but miss answering the key questions.
I would suggest counselors and BIT teams come together and discuss what kind of help they can offer each other to build a better foundational conversation prior to beginning any assessment. Some of these questions might include:
1) Are decision makers trying to determine whether the student can live on campus? The real question or threat may be more focused on the dangers or difficulty experienced by roommates and community members. The assessment may want to focus on the relationships the student has and the likelihood of these relationships being disruptive to the residential life community.
2) Does the referral source need help developing educational sanctions or monitoring if the student remains on campus? Counseling may not be the office providing these, but often those performing these assessments are in an excellent position to offer some advice about what kinds of corrective action or treatment would be helpful to avoid future problems.
3) Does the student seem remorseful and show insight into the severity of the situation?
4) Are there personality or psychological issues that may impact the likelihood of the threat occurring again (future suicide attempts, poor impulse control, past behavior, difficult environmental stressors)?
5) Is there a specific timeline that needs to be adhered to? Performing a detailed assessment that will not be ready for a hearing will not be as helpful to the threat team.
6) How can the information best be shared? Is a formal letter needed or a conversation more helpful?
Have a great weekend.
Brian Van Brunt, Ed.D.
Director of Counseling and Testing, WKU
NCHERM-Affiliated Consultant
Brian@NCHERM.org
Brian Van Brunt and Brett Sokolow will explore the topic, "We've Intervened -- Now What?" in a webinar this Friday, November 6th. Details are posted at http://www.ncherm.org/webinars.html
Sunday, October 25, 2009
NCHERM Consultant Brian VanBrunt Comments on UCLA Stabbing
Colleagues,
You may find this article of interest.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-college-mental25-2009oct25,0,2132918.story
Regards,
Brett A. Sokolow, Esq.
You may find this article of interest.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-college-mental25-2009oct25,0,2132918.story
Regards,
Brett A. Sokolow, Esq.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
NCHERM Joins Corporate Partnership Program to Support IACLEA and Campus Public Safety
NCHERM Joins Corporate Partnership Program to Support IACLEA and Campus Public Safety
WEST HARTFORD, CT. – NCHERM has become a Corporate Partner of the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators, Inc., (IACLEA), under a program developed to honor IACLEA’s 50 years of service and to support initiatives to enhance the ability of campus public safety to protect higher education institutions in the future.
NCHERM is a Titanium Sponsor and, as such, has pledged a significant donation to support IACLEA’s 50th Anniversary and future initiatives. The goals of IACLEA’s Corporate Partnership program are to highlight the growth and importance of campus public safety during IACLEA’s first 50 years and to support initiatives to strengthen campus public safety and expand its impact on higher education and its service to stakeholders worldwide.
IACLEA celebrated its 50th Anniversary with a series of events, beginning in Las Vegas in 2007 and culminating with its 50th Annual Conference and celebration in Hartford, CT, in June of 2008. These included a commemorative anniversary book entitled, “IACLEA: The First 50 Years,” and a video called, “Five Decades of Success.”
NCHERM, the National Center for Higher Education Risk Management, is a law and consulting firm dedicated exclusively to higher education practice. NCHERM’s 11 consultants offer more than 100 training and consulting workshop topics, focused on prevention, risk management and preventive law. Started in 2000, NCHERM’s recent work on behavioral intervention and threat assessment has taken it into far greater interaction with campus law enforcement, though many in IACLEA are already familiar with NCHERM’s Managing Partner Brett A. Sokolow, Esq., and his work on the Clery Act since 1996. In a short time, NCHERM has received national prominence for its CUBIT Behavioral Intervention Team model, now in place at nearly 300 campuses, its threat assessment model, and its recent creation of NaBITA, the National Behavioral Intervention Team Association. More information is posted at www.ncherm.org and www.nabita.org
NCHERM continues to support IACLEA and the campus public safety profession. IACLEA asks all of its members to thank NCHERM for its support by keeping their services in mind for any future assistance they can provide in developing mission critical solutions for campus public safety departments.
WEST HARTFORD, CT. – NCHERM has become a Corporate Partner of the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators, Inc., (IACLEA), under a program developed to honor IACLEA’s 50 years of service and to support initiatives to enhance the ability of campus public safety to protect higher education institutions in the future.
NCHERM is a Titanium Sponsor and, as such, has pledged a significant donation to support IACLEA’s 50th Anniversary and future initiatives. The goals of IACLEA’s Corporate Partnership program are to highlight the growth and importance of campus public safety during IACLEA’s first 50 years and to support initiatives to strengthen campus public safety and expand its impact on higher education and its service to stakeholders worldwide.
IACLEA celebrated its 50th Anniversary with a series of events, beginning in Las Vegas in 2007 and culminating with its 50th Annual Conference and celebration in Hartford, CT, in June of 2008. These included a commemorative anniversary book entitled, “IACLEA: The First 50 Years,” and a video called, “Five Decades of Success.”
NCHERM, the National Center for Higher Education Risk Management, is a law and consulting firm dedicated exclusively to higher education practice. NCHERM’s 11 consultants offer more than 100 training and consulting workshop topics, focused on prevention, risk management and preventive law. Started in 2000, NCHERM’s recent work on behavioral intervention and threat assessment has taken it into far greater interaction with campus law enforcement, though many in IACLEA are already familiar with NCHERM’s Managing Partner Brett A. Sokolow, Esq., and his work on the Clery Act since 1996. In a short time, NCHERM has received national prominence for its CUBIT Behavioral Intervention Team model, now in place at nearly 300 campuses, its threat assessment model, and its recent creation of NaBITA, the National Behavioral Intervention Team Association. More information is posted at www.ncherm.org and www.nabita.org
NCHERM continues to support IACLEA and the campus public safety profession. IACLEA asks all of its members to thank NCHERM for its support by keeping their services in mind for any future assistance they can provide in developing mission critical solutions for campus public safety departments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
