On September 25, 2025, two major developments in campus safety and student welfare unfolded on both sides of the Atlantic, signaling a renewed focus on transparency, prevention, and support in higher education. Vanderbilt University announced the upcoming release of its 2025 Annual Security and Fire Safety Report, scheduled to be available by October 1, 2025. Meanwhile, the Office for Students (OfS) in England published the results of its first sector-wide sexual misconduct survey, offering a sobering look at the prevalence of harassment, assault, and problematic staff-student relationships in universities.
Vanderbilt’s forthcoming report, mandated by a suite of federal laws including the Jeanne Clery Campus Safety Act, the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013, the Stop Campus Hazing Act (enacted in 2024), and the Fire Safety Right-to-Know provisions of the 2008 Higher Education Opportunity Act, is designed to provide a comprehensive overview of campus safety and security. According to Vanderbilt, the report will include university-wide security and safety information, crime statistics, fire safety systems, residence hall fire statistics, and policies for on-campus student housing. It also outlines the university’s Drugs and Alcohol Policy, which requires compliance with federal, state, and local laws, and details resources for those seeking help with drug and alcohol abuse.
Importantly, Vanderbilt’s report will address the university’s policies and procedures regarding sexual assault, stalking, dating violence, and domestic violence. In compliance with the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013, the report explains processes for making reports to law enforcement and to the university’s Title IX coordinator. It also describes prevention and awareness programs, including bystander intervention, as well as confidentiality, disciplinary procedures, and resources for those impacted by sexual misconduct. The Stop Campus Hazing Act of 2024 adds another dimension, requiring detailed information about hazing incidents, including reporting, prevention, definitions, investigations, disciplinary procedures, and available resources. The report will be accessible online via Vanderbilt’s Clery Compliance website or as a paper copy from the Vanderbilt University Police Department in Nashville.
While Vanderbilt’s approach exemplifies regulatory compliance and proactive transparency, the new OfS survey in England paints a complex picture of student experiences with sexual misconduct. The survey, which covered final year undergraduates in England with a 12.1% response rate, is the first of its kind to attempt national prevalence measurement of sexual harassment, assault, and intimate staff-student relationships. According to the OfS, 1.5% of students reported having intimate relationships with staff in the past year, and half of those cases involved staff with educational or assessment responsibilities—a finding that raises concerns about power dynamics and conflicts of interest.
The survey’s most alarming statistics relate to harassment and assault. Nearly a quarter (24.5%) of respondents reported experiencing sexual harassment since starting university, while 14.1% reported sexual assault or violence. Most incidents involved fellow students, with 58.4% of harassment and 44.1% of assault cases (occurring off-campus) involving someone connected to the victim’s institution. The data underscores the reality that campus misconduct often extends beyond university grounds, with 39.7% of harassment incidents and 61.9% of assault cases occurring entirely off-campus.
Vulnerability to misconduct is not evenly distributed. The survey revealed that female students reported harassment at a rate of 33%, while students with disabilities experienced harassment at 34.7% and assault at 22.1%. Lesbian, gay, and bisexual students faced even higher rates—46.6% reported harassment and 29.8% reported assault. Those under 21 at the start of their course were also more vulnerable, with 31.2% experiencing harassment and 18.2% experiencing assault. The most common form of harassment was “making sexually suggestive looks or staring at your body,” affecting 16.7% of respondents, followed by unwelcome sexual comments or questions about private life or appearance.
Socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds also played a role. Students from the least deprived areas and those not eligible for free school meals reported higher harassment rates. Mixed ethnicity students reported harassment at 31.5%, compared to 27.9% among white students. Religious identity intersected with these patterns, with Jewish students, those with no religion, and those from “any other religion” all reporting elevated harassment rates.
One of the most troubling findings was the low rate of formal reporting. Only 13.2% of harassment victims made formal reports to their institutions. For sexual assault, reporting varied dramatically by age: just 12.7% of under-21s reported incidents, compared to 86.4% of those aged 31 and above. Among those who did report, experiences were mixed—46.7% rated their harassment reporting experience as good, while 39.3% rated it as poor. For sexual assault, 57.3% rated the experience as good, but 32.4% found it poor. These figures suggest that despite institutional mechanisms, many students remain hesitant to come forward, and those who do often encounter unsatisfactory processes.
The OfS survey also highlighted confidence gaps in seeking support. While 67.5% of respondents felt confident about where to seek help, 29.3% did not, with confidence varying significantly by sexual orientation, sex, disability status, and age. The findings suggest that institutions must do more to ensure that support is accessible and tailored to the needs of diverse student populations. The regulatory framework, particularly Condition E6, requires providers to offer multiple mechanisms for reporting and to remove barriers that discourage students from seeking help. Yet, the data indicates that younger students and those from marginalized groups may face particular challenges in accessing support and navigating institutional processes.
Staff-student relationships, though reported by a small proportion of students (1.5%), present significant governance issues. The high percentage of these relationships involving educational or professional responsibilities points to the need for robust institutional policies to prevent conflicts of interest and abuse of power. The OfS requires providers to implement measures that make a “significant and credible difference” in protecting students from such risks, but the survey’s findings suggest that more work is needed to foster a culture of professional boundaries and accountability.
Both the Vanderbilt report and the OfS survey underscore the importance of transparency, prevention, and tailored interventions in addressing campus safety and misconduct. While regulatory compliance is a starting point, the lived experiences of students—especially those from vulnerable groups—highlight the need for ongoing vigilance, nuanced understanding, and responsive support systems. As universities continue to grapple with these challenges, the voices of students and the realities captured in data must remain at the center of policy and practice.
With the release of new data and reports, the higher education sector faces a crucial moment for reflection and action—one that will shape campus cultures and student well-being for years to come.
