DAILY LOBO new mexico
The Independent Student Voice of UNM since 1895
dailylobo.com Available on the
GET IT ON
Google play
App Store April 25, 2016 | Volume 120 | Issue 62
Frank: DOJ report “disheartening”
James Coulter / Daily Lobo / @James_C_Coulter
University President Robert G. Frank holds a conference addressing the Department of Justice’s findings about sexual assault on UNM’s campus Friday afternoon at the SUB. Frank proposed the University’s future plans to help address sexual assault.
Courtesy: UNM Newsroom
By Johnny Vizcaino On Friday morning the Department of Justice revealed their findings regarding UNM’s handling of sexual assault causes, saying the University is not up to code because of confusing policies and outdated procedures. But at a press conference later that day, University officials emphasized that there is more to the issue than the DOJ report suggests. Informational posters were set up in the room, illustrating a timeline spanning the past three years and a checklist of key tasks that arose out of a University commissioned report in February of last year. UNM officials sought to visual-
ize the actions undertaken by UNM in response to the campus sexual assault issue. “We hope that you’ll keep that in mind when you report what the DOJ findings were,” UNM spokesperson Dianne Anderson said. Anderson said the University had just received the report a few hours before, at the same time it was made public. University President Bob Frank said his staff hadn’t had adequate time to digest the report in full, in light of receiving the report on short notice. “We believe that we can always improve how the University responds to issues that appear on our campus,” he said. “And we continuously work to improve our processes so that they’re fair and equitable to all parties. This is a very chal-
lenging process, and we work continuously to improve it.” Frank said the University is appreciative of any impact the DOJ report has in improving the equity and fairness of these processes, but said he doubted there was any tangible benefits in the report’s results. He specifically pointed to when the University commissioned an outside firm to evaluate the University’s practices and policies, saying the results from that report closely parallel the DOJ’s findings. “Prior to (the DOJ) arriving, we had commissioned our own report, done by Jill Pilgrim and her team, to look at our University,” he said. “Unfortunately, our first review of the report did not provide anything beyond what the Pilgrim team provided us, so we are not encouraged that this report has enhanced our
knowledge of our campus.” Frank said a more comprehensive, long-term study that follows campus activity over time would be more effective than the smallerscale approach taken by the DOJ. “We don’t believe the report represents the very intense efforts that (UNM) has undertaken to improve our processes, to improve the way that we have looked out for the safety and the processes to help our students who engage in adverse events on this campus,” he said. “We don’t believe the report is realistic in its expectations of how you engage with individuals who encounter assault or sexual harassment.” The University’s strongest objection is to the investigation’s conclusion that UNM is a hostile environment, Frank said, noting
the fine print within the report. “You’ll note that (the DOJ’s) definition of a hostile environment is that one event happens on that campus. By that definition, virtually every university in America is a hostile campus,” he said. Frank went on to say the report doesn’t perform its due diligence as it’s based on anecdotal data more than fact. “We think that it’s totally unrealistic,” he said. According to the DOJ report, students are generally confused in regard to taking action in the wake of being sexually harassed, and they lack confidence in the University’s capacity to respond to allegations of sexual misconduct. The investigation found that
see
DOJ page 3