The Jeanne Clery Act

Introduction 

The Clery in an act initially passed with the best of intentions. It morphed from Title II of the Students right to know and campus security Act of 1990 to become an essential legal document that guides issues of crime in the higher learning institutions. Out of the desire of Jeanne Clery’s parents and that of the students to always have access to the information that may not be out to the public regarding the crime in various campuses the law was developed. Jeanne Clery was murdered in 1998, and that prompted their parents and students at large to demand the need to have such valuable information as a guide in selecting their institution. The Clery Act has indeed been a real legal document that provides guidance on issues of crime in higher learning institutions. Even though today the law has evolved taking a broader view of the offense in campuses due to various amendments it acquired its name from the 19-year-old student who was murdered in her hostel room. This essay takes a broad look at Clery Act and discusses its origin and evolution to date. Also, the essay takes a keen look at the current status of the Act through discussion some of the provisions of the Act, how it shapes institution and the progress so far. Additionally, the essay discusses some of the impacts of the Act both positive and negative and how they help shape the institutions. Finally, the article gives a summary conclusion of the points discussed throughout the paper. 

The Origins of the Jeanne Clery Act 

Walters, (2013) explains that historically the Clery Act was originally enacted as Title II of the Students right to know and campus security Act, 1990. The Act was then signed into law not as an Act on its own but as an amendment to the Higher Education Act 1965. Following the need to increase the accountability as well as the transparency of Higher Education, the Act was established to ensure that the Higher Education institutions can meet certain set out responsibilities concerning the safety and security of students in their institutions. It, therefore, requires the institutions of jigger education to disclose the security information on their campuses as well as campus crime statistics. 

According to Gregory, and Janosik, (2013), a few changes were made to the Clery Act in 1991. It was referred to as the Higher Education Technical Amendment of 1991. Although minor, the changes involved the time the time duration for reporting the crime statistics which was changed from the calendar year to academic year. In 1992, the Act was further amended to put it as a requirement for the Institutions of Higher Education to develop and implement policies as well as procedures that would protect the rights of survivors of sexual assault. Following the Higher Education Amendments of 1998, the Act was officially renamed Clery Act. The renaming of the Act to Clery followed the beastly action that occurred in 1986. A campus student, Jeanne Clery was tortured by his attackers, raped, sodomized and murdered. The heinous crime took place ion her campus, Lehigh University in Pennsylvania. The event and the reactions of Clery’s parent on the same made lasting impressions about the campus safety and security. Clery was barely 18 years old at the time of her murder, a young academic enthusiast whose life was nipped in the bad due to insecurity in the higher learning education center. 

Gregory, and Janosik, (2013) also add that the 1998 amendments included an increased category of crimes that would be included in the crime report by campuses. The categories combined were arson and negligent manslaughter. Also, the geographic locations to be included in crime reporting for higher education institutions was expanded. As such, they included resident hostels, all other non-campus buildings run or owned by the campus but are not located on the campus, public property adjacent to the institution that is either owned or run by the campus, as well as those adjacent to the campus. Also, the Act required the Higher education institution’s security of police to keep logs of public crime within and around the institution. Consequently, in their annual security reports, the Act required the Higher Learning institutions to publish the reports to be available to their employees, current students and prospective students or employees upon request. 

In 2000, the act further was amended. White, (2013) notes, the amendment required that the higher education institutions develop and distribute procedures for immediate campus emergency response and evacuation. Also, bias-related hate crimes reports were to be provided by the higher education institution. The categories of such hate crimes include vandalism of an individual’s property, intimidation, assault, and larceny. Further, the amendment required the campuses to develop and implement procedures for reporting and responding cases of a missing student, and fire safety reporting. In addition, the amendment also required the higher education institutions to disclose the relationship between their security and the state as well as local law enforcement bodies. Finally, the amendment recommended disclosure of the disciplinary proceedings to the alleged victims of any crimes heard by the Higher learning institutions. Lately, the most recent amendment to the Clery Act was adopted and made as part of the reauthorization the Violence against Women Act. 

Current Status of the Jeanne Clery Act 

The Clery Act today applies to institutions although confined to crimes committed within and adjacent to the campus or off campus but connected to the institution. The Act was expanded in 2013 to include Violence against Women Act (Gregory, & Janosik, 2013). Following that amendment, the act has now been reauthorized to protect women from violence targeting them. The current status of Clery Act can be understood through seven critical areas. 

The first is recording campus crime statistics. In regard to this area, all the crimes that occur on the campus are recorded in a daily log and an Annual Security report published on the institutions' website accessible for employees, students and the wider public (Gregory, & Janosik, 2013). The Act now allows for the daily logs to be updated within two days of such reports. The act has also ensured that the universities or institutions of higher learning released an annual report of all the crimes that have happened on the campus or its surrounding. Myers, Nelson, & Forke, (2016) state that the Act defines such reports to include: Stalking which it defines as continuous conduct that may make an individual fear for their safety as well as for others including that which will cause emotional distress. Intimidation which includes words and actions that have the potential of placing the victim in situations of fear of harm or danger. Dating violence which encompasses all the sexual and physical abuse in a romantic relationship. Domestic violence which encompasses crimes committed by a current or former spouse or cohabiting partners, and sexual assault. The last ones are hate crimes and other forms of crime perpetrated due to biases in religion, race, color, sex, ethnicity among others. As it is, the Clergy Act does not grant permission to the higher education institution to initiate an investigation on such matters. 

Secondly, the Clery Act has empowered the higher learning institutions to give alert in a situation of a threat to the university/ campus and its community. As such it ensures that the communities around such institutions are able to benefits from such warnings although it prohibits disclosure of the name of the victim if they are a student for security purposes. 

Thirdly, the Clery Act currently gives powers to higher learning institutions to institute policies and procedures how they respond to crimes within the campus. The act requires institutions of higher education to provide details of how they respond to crime within their facility; come up with procedures for issuing an alert in case of threats; develop procedures to be followed when a crime is reported (Walters, 2013). The Clergy Act as currently also empowers the institutions of higher learning to develop procedures for victims to preserve evidence and report the incidence of crime to the institution and receive any assistance required to ensure the report reaches the police. Issues regarding the safety of the victim and report confidentiality are also to be part of the procedures. Also, the Act empowers the campus to develop disciplinary procedures for crimes including the standard of evidence that campuses use in their disciplinary process. 

Fourthly, of great importance in the current status of the Clery Act is its provision on the victims’ rights (White, 2013). The Act currently empowers the victim by requiring the student or employee victim of any form of violence to be provided with a written form of explanation that spells out their rights. 

The fifth is that the Clery Act today spells out policies on prevention education, an important step towards ensuring that incoming employees and students are aware of the procedures in place in dealing with crime within the institution (Hope, 2016). As such, the Act now spells out particular areas of focus in such training institutions. These include prevention of the offense; security procedures towards ensuring an individual’s safety within the campus, the definition of various forms of crime addressed within the campus; how a bystander could intervene in cases of crime and also ensure their safety. The act is currently is also ensures that the campuses train their employees and students on how they can identify potential risks, warnings, and abusive behaviors. 

Moreover, the Act as currently offers protection against retaliation which safeguards victims of crime as well as agents of the higher learning institutions and other enforcement authority officers (Gregory, & Janosik, 2013). This is a major progress in the realization of justice for the victims of crime. The act includes threats, coercion, and intimidation amongst some of the likely threats to such individuals. However, it seeks to prevent any other form of retaliation other than the mention. Finally, the Act further spells out for college and campuses to have disciplinary procedures. It indeed a good thing that the Act ensures emphasizes the need for such proceedings to be impartial enabling the students and victims to have a fair hearing and just ruling. 

Impact of Clery Act on Campus Crime and Campus Safety 

Positive Impacts 

Since its enactment, the Clery Act has been of great significance to the campus fraternity. Carmody, (2015) notes that the Clery Act has over the past witnessed positive results. Since its enactment as well as the reauthorization of the Violence against Women in 2013, the Clery Act has achieved firstly an awareness that is prudent for its success. A universal awareness of the Act across the institution and the judicial officers as well as other law enforcement agencies working with the campuses. The awareness of the act is one step towards success, it is because, and various players in the system as instituted by the Act are able to be informed of their roles. Similarly, in cases such as reporting of crimes, the students, and other employees within the campus now know that they could report having their concerns addressed. The mere hope of having issues addressed makes an individual feel safe by reducing their fears. Awareness is good for bringing about participation. As such, the Clery Act having gained awareness from the public has benefited from it in ensuring its set out mechanism can operate to deal with crime affecting the higher learning institutions. 

By virtue of enactment alone, the Act achieves a positive outcome in containing crime. Walters, (2013) notes, Criminal psychologist argue that human beings are rational actors. As such, before they engage in any form of crime they think about the consequences vis a vis the rewards. Consequently, a criminal will weigh between the penalty imposed upon the crime, Possibility of being apprehended and the reward of the crime. If the reward outweighs the risk, such a person will engage in crime. Therefore, by virtue of having the law in lace and defining the procedures in addition to creating awareness of the Act, criminal activities that exist within the defined groups reduce. 

Thirdly, a positive impact of the Cley Act has been a relatively large number of students’ response to safety programs which are having an effect on the student in terms of ensuring their safety and that of their property (Gregory, Giblin, Stafford, & DeBowes, 2016). The safety measures as a portion of the requirement for the institution to develop policies and procedures that guide the students and employees on ways of ensuring that they are safe. Consequently, based on the efforts that individual students make towards such policy, there have been positive outcomes involving students’ behavior in relation to their safety and that of their property. 

Negative Impacts 

Despite the good outcome that the Act has had in reducing crime, Clery Act has also brought with it some challenges as a part of its impact. This act requires the Higher learning institutions to publish their crime data. Beyond that are other requirements of the Act which include developing policies and procedures for reporting crime etc. however, due to failure to comply with the requirements of the Clery Act, the department of education has fined various schools. For example, in 2011, Yale was fined $115,000 for failing to comply fully with the Act (White, 2013). Also, to avoid the fines various colleges make attempts to remain in good books with the authorities. Such attempts involve heavy spending. Therefore the federal Act and other federal mandates that require the institutions to comply with the recommendations end up pushing the running cost for higher learning institutions up. The implication is a higher tuition fee for students admitted to such colleges. Education is a fundamental right of a citizen. By making education so expensive, some people are denied the right to education. Beyond denying people access to education, the federal government is overburdening the citizens through increasing the cost of education. Currently, many colleges are diverting their resources from what would technically be their second best to compliance with the Clery Act. However, the cost does not seem justified because the students still do not make a choice to avoid relatively unsafe institutions. The cost outweighs the benefits. 

Another challenging outcome of the act has in many situations failed to achieve its purpose. For instance, in a study conducted in 2003, the outcome showed that the situations in which students showed to have selected their preferred campus on the basis of security data were very minimal. The study suggests that only 4% of the students made a choice of their institution using the crime data (Gregory, Giblin, Stafford, & DeBowes, 2016). It, therefore, follows that such crime data even though are published by the university as a legal requirement the impact of such among students are very minimal. Students don’t care much about the statistics of crime in various colleges as they apply to attend but rather other parameters. In this case, it is important to point out the cost benefit of the Clery Act compliance. As pointed out earlier in this paper, the institutions of higher learning spend huge chunks of money in complying with the requirements of the Clery Act. Consequently, a question begs on whether it is still important for such institution to invest such huge sums of money on the compliance of this act. 

The other issue of great importance in relation to the Clery Act is crime hiding (Gregory, Giblin, Stafford, & DeBowes, 2016). If students are going to use the crime data of an institution to select their prefer college, the colleges are this at risk of an image crisis. If the colleges are custodians of the data, it is very definite that they will not be willing to give out information that could possibly work against them. Consequently, they may opt for other ways of addressing the crimes committed within their premises than report and involve law enforcement authorities. It is because the institution at all cost will be trying to avoid bad publicity. Such a scenario has left institutions with the option of not being honest. As such, institutions hide the crimes to record a lower statistic which in the end misrepresent the actual situation of the campus. 

Conclusion 

Originally passed with the best intentions, The Clery sort to improve the safety of students and contain crimes within campuses in the US. It morphed from Title II of the Students right to know and campus security Act, 1990 to become an essential legal document that guides issues of crime in the higher learning institutions. Following the 1998 torture, sodomy and murder of Jean Clery, a student at Leigh University there was a felt need to have an act that would enable campuses to have a crime data published by their prospective students to know about the institutions they are going to. The essay sort to discuss the origin of the Act. Consequently, it has been established that the Act originally enacted as Title II of the Students right to know and campus security Act, 1990. However, following the murder of Jeanne Clery, the Act was amended and renamed Clery Act. In assessing the current status of the Act, the essay has established that various institutions have complied with the Act and it is lowering the crimes within the higher learning institutions. However, institutions are not being honest when publishing their crime data; they often hide data in a bid to make their campuses look less prone to crime. However, institutions of jigger learning have largely complied with the Act and are engaging its requirements which among other include developing procedures for reporting crime and getting justice as well as protection of the victims. Finally, the essay examined the Clery Act to ascertain its impacts. Following the analysis, the findings included the following: The Act has made the institutions of higher learning spend a lot of resources in compliance efforts. These resources have in effect impacted on the quality of education in terms of budgetary allocation to some of the key areas in education. Secondly, the Act has led dishonesty by various institutions who fear negative publicity when they record high crimes rates. Consequently, such institutions have opted to hide crime to record minimal occurrences. Nonetheless, the Act has had positive outcomes on providing safety for students and their property within campuses. Arenas creation by itself has enabled students to learn how to report crime and stay safe from crime. 

References 

Carmody, M. (2015). Sex & Ethics in the Lives of Young Women and Men. In    Sex, Ethics, and Young People   (pp. 139-153). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. 

Hope, J. (2016). Handbook provides latest safety and security reporting guidelines.    Campus Security Report ,    13 (5), 9-9. 

White, K. N. (2013).    The influence of "Clery Act Training Seminars" on participants' ethical commitment to campus safety beyond compliance in colleges and universities. SAINT Joseph's University: Dissertations & Theses - Gradworks. Retrieved from http://gradworks.umi.com/10/06/10062557.html. 

Walters, M. M. (2013).    Making campuses safer and staying out of court: leadership practices facilitating compliance with The Jeanne Clery Act. California State University, Sacramento: Doctoral dissertation. 

Marshall, S., Betron, R., Bubbers, C., & Keightley, M. (2016). Going Too Far Sexual Assault on Campus.    Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership ,    19 (3), 50-61. 

Gregory, D. E., & Janosik, S. M. (2013). Research on the Clery Act and crime reporting: Its impact on the literature and administrative practice in higher education.    BS By Fisher and and JJ Sloan III (eds.) Campus Crime. 3rd edn. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher , 46-62. 

Gregory, D. E., Giblin, J., Stafford, D. A., & DeBowes, M. M. (2016). Clery compliance on American campuses: Knowledge and organization by Clery compliance officers.    Security Journal (Palgrave Macmillan UK). 

Myers, R. K., Nelson, D. B., & Forke, C. M. (2016). Occurrence of Stalking Victimization among Female and Male Undergraduate Students.    Journal of College Student Development ,    57 (2), 213-218.