Research Paper

Research Paper

1

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

2

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

3

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

4

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

This

Page

Intentionally

Left

Blank

TABLE OF CONTENTS

5

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

I. Executive Summary …………………………………………………………………………. 11

II. Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………….. 25

A. Report Purpose and Scope ………………………………………………………………. 25

B. DoD’s Strategic Approach ………………………………………………………………… 26 1. Leadership Engagement …………………………………………………………………………….26

2. Organizational Change ……………………………………………………………………………….27

3. Partnerships/Collaborations ………………………………………………………………………..27

C. Scope of the Program ………………………………………………………………………. 28 1. DoD Definition of Sexual Assault ………………………………………………………………….28

2. Continuum of Harm ……………………………………………………………………………………29

D. Published SAPR Policy & Strategy …………………………………………………….. 30 1. SAPR Policy ……………………………………………………………………………………………..30

2. SAPR Strategy ………………………………………………………………………………………….31

E. Five SAPR Lines of Effort …………………………………………………………………. 31 1. Prevention (LOE 1)…………………………………………………………………………………….31

2. The Response System ……………………………………………………………………………….32

3. Investigation (LOE 2) ………………………………………………………………………………….33

4. Accountability (LOE 3) ………………………………………………………………………………..33

5. Advocacy and Victim Assistance (LOE 4) ………………………………………………………33

6. Assessment (LOE 5) ………………………………………………………………………………….34

F. Oversight and Accountability …………………………………………………………….. 34 1. Independent Oversight ……………………………………………………………………………….34

2. Internal Assessment …………………………………………………………………………………..36

G. Appendices, Annexes, and Enclosures ……………………………………………….. 36

III. Prevention (LOE 1) ………………………………………………………………………….. 37

A. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………. 37

B. Defining the Problem ……………………………………………………………………….. 39

C. Defining Prevention………………………………………………………………………….. 39

D. Key Highlights …………………………………………………………………………………. 41 1. Evolution of DoD Prevention Strategy …………………………………………………………..41

2. “DoD SAPR Connect” Community of Practice ………………………………………………..45

Table of Contents

6

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

E. Role of the Commander ……………………………………………………………………. 47 1. Importance of Command Climate …………………………………………………………………47

2. Commander’s Guide to Preventing Sexual Assault …………………………………………52

F. Training Enhancements ……………………………………………………………………………..52

G. From Awareness to Action ………………………………………………………………… 53 1. Sexual Assault Awareness Month (SAAM) …………………………………………………….53

2. Prevention Innovation Award ……………………………………………………………………….54

3. Encourage Active Bystander Intervention ………………………………………………………55

H. Reducing the Annual Occurrence of Sexual Assault……………………………… 57

I. Partnerships/Collaborations ………………………………………………………………. 58 Identifying Potential Solutions…………………………………………………………………………….58

J. Sexual Assault – High Risk Populations ……………………………………………… 60

K. Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………………………… 63

IV. Investigation (LOE 2) ……………………………………………………………………….. 65

A. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………. 65

B. Key Highlight …………………………………………………………………………………… 66 Special Victim Investigation and Prosecution (SVIP) Capability ……………………………….66

C. Role of the Commander ……………………………………………………………………. 68

D. Training Enhancements ……………………………………………………………………. 69 1. Improving Investigator Training ……………………………………………………………………69

2. Improving Investigative Sufficiency ……………………………………………………………….71

E. Oversight ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 75 Department of Defense Inspector General …………………………………………………………..75

F. Partnerships/Collaborations ………………………………………………………………. 75

G. Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………….. 76

V. Accountability (LOE 3) ……………………………………………………………………… 78

A. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………. 78

B. Key Highlight …………………………………………………………………………………… 78 Special Victims’ Counsel/Victims’ Legal Counsel (SVC/VLC) ………………………………….78

C. Fielding a Special Victim Investigation and Prosecution (SVIP) Capability .. 81

D. Training Enhancements ……………………………………………………………………. 82

Table of Contents

7

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

E. Role of the Commander ……………………………………………………………………. 82 1. Elevation of Initial Disposition Authority …………………………………………………………82

2. Improving Victim Confidence in the Military Justice System ……………………………..83

3. Impacts of UCMJ Reform Proposals …………………………………………………………….86

4. Handling of Sexual Assault Cases ………………………………………………………………..87

F. Partnerships/Collaborations ………………………………………………………………. 87 1. Collaboration with Civilian Organizations ……………………………………………………….88

2. External Observations of the Military Justice System ………………………………………88

G. Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………….. 90

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4) ………………………………………………….. 91

A. Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………….. 91 Establishing a Robust Sexual Assault Response System ……………………………………….92

B. Key Highlights ……………………………………………………………………………….. 100 1. DoD Safe Helpline …………………………………………………………………………………… 100

2. Special Victims’ Counsel/Victims’ Legal Counsel (SVC/VLC) …………………………. 104

3. DoD Sexual Assault Advocate Certification Program (D-SAACP) ……………………. 106

C. Role of the Commander ………………………………………………………………….. 109 Engaging Leaders in Victim Assistance …………………………………………………………….. 109

D. Training Enhancements ………………………………………………………………….. 111 Expanding Training to Gain and Maintain Proficiency ………………………………………….. 111

E. Partnerships/Collaborations …………………………………………………………….. 113 Improving Outcomes for Survivors …………………………………………………………………… 113

F. Preventing Retaliation and Ostracism of Victims Making Sexual Assault Reports ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 114

G. Expanding Existing Policies to Better Meet Victims’ Needs ………………….. 119

H. Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………… 121

VII. Assessment (LOE 5) ………………………………………………………………………. 123

A. Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………….. 123

B. Key Highlights ……………………………………………………………………………….. 123 1. Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database (DSAID) …………………………………….. 123

2. Survivor Experience Survey (SES) …………………………………………………………….. 125

C. Key Assessment Tools …………………………………………………………………… 126

Table of Contents

8

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

1. Scientific Surveys of the Military Population ………………………………………………… 126

2. Focus Groups …………………………………………………………………………………………. 130

3. Annual Reports ………………………………………………………………………………………. 131

D. Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………… 132

VII. Conclusion & Way Ahead ……………………………………………………………….. 134

List of Figures

Figure 1 – DoD Continuum of Harm ……………………………………………………………………. 30 Figure 2 – Influencing Behavior ………………………………………………………………………….. 41 Figure 3 – Social Ecological Model …………………………………………………………………….. 43 Figure 4 – DoD Social Ecological Model ……………………………………………………………… 44 Figure 5 – The four pillars of the SAPR Connect CoP ……………………………………………. 45 Figure 6 – The Climate Assessment Process ……………………………………………………….. 48 Figure 7 – Promoting a Culture of Dignity and Respect ………………………………………….. 49 Figure 8 – Metric 4: Command Climate Index – Addressing Continuum of Harm by Gender …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 50 Figure 9 – Metric 4: Command Climate Index – Addressing Continuum of Harm by Rank ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 51 Figure 10 – The 2014 SAAM poster ……………………………………………………………………. 54 Figure 11 – Metric 1a: Past Year Prevalence of USC …………………………………………….. 58 Figure 12 – The White House Task Force It’s On Us campaign logo ……………………….. 61 Figure 13 – Metric 5: Investigation Length ……………………………………………………………. 75 Figure 14 – The DoD IG Seal …………………………………………………………………………….. 75 Figure 15 – Non-Metric 1a: Command Action for Alleged Military Offenders under DoD Legal Authority ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 87 Figure 16 – Reporting option available to sexual assault victims. …………………………….. 93 Figure 17 – Metric 12: Reports of Sexual Assault, FY 2007 to FY 2014. ………………….. 96 Figure 18 – An informational poster about SAAM………………………………………………….. 98 Figure 19 – Metric 8: Percentage of Subjects with Victims Declining to Participate in the Military Justice Process …………………………………………………………………………………….. 99 Figure 20 – Safe Helpline Mobile App Screen short – from left to right, main navigation screen, “Learn” screen, “Create a Self Care Plan” screen, and “Exercises” screen ….. 102 Figure 21 – Quarterly, first-time Safe Helpline website visits, FY 2012 to FY 2014. ….. 104 Figure 22 – Metric 7: Victim Experience – Satisfaction with Services Provided by SVCs, SARCs, and VAs/UVAs …………………………………………………………………………………… 105 Figure 23 – Metric 10: Victim Experience – Victim Kept Regularly Informed of the Military Justice Process ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 106

Table of Contents

9

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Figure 24 – Metric 9a: Perceptions of Victim Retaliation- Command Climate Perspective by Gender …………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 116 Figure 25 – Metric 9a: Perceptions of Victim Retaliation- Command Climate Perspective by Rank ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 116 Figure 26 – Metric 9b: Perceptions of Professional and Social Retaliation – Victim Perspective …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 117 Figure 27 – Metric 9c: Perceptions of Professional and Social Retaliation – Victim Perspective …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 118

Appendices: Appendix A: Provisional Statistical Data on Sexual Assault Appendix B: Provisional Metrics on Sexual Assault Appendix C: List of Acronyms Enclosures: Enclosure 1: Department of the Army Enclosure 2: Department of the Navy Enclosure 3: Department of the Air Force Enclosure 4: National Guard Bureau Enclosure 5: United States Coast Guard Annexes: Annex 1: 2014 Military Workplace Study (RAND) Annex 2: 2014 Survivor Experience Survey (DMDC) Annex 3: 2014 Department of Defense Report of Focus Groups on Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (DMDC) Annex 4: Analysis of Military Justice Reform (OGC) Annex 5: 2014 Military Workplace Study – United States Coast Guard (RAND)

10

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

11

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Sexual assault is a significant challenge facing the United States military and the nation. Academia is wrestling with campus sexual assault, professional sports leagues struggle with intimate partner violence, and societies across the globe contend with horrific accounts of sexual violence that appear in daily headlines. For the first time in history, sexual assault has become a part

of the national conversation, and a collective awareness and desire for action has emerged. Given its history of leadership on other social problems, the Department of Defense recognizes its vital role in advancing the campaign to prevent this heinous crime. To this end, the Department’s aim is to reduce, with the ultimate goal to eliminate, the crime of sexual assault in the Armed Forces. The Department of Defense-wide strategic approach to sexual assault is prevention-focused with an unwavering commitment to victim1 care. By employing a comprehensive prevention and response system, the Department is taking deliberate, meaningful actions to:

• prevent the crime • empower victims and facilitate recovery when incidents do occur • sustain its commitment to holding offenders2 appropriately accountable

With unprecedented leadership engagement, the Department has worked diligently to define the scope of the problem and take appropriate steps to field solutions that will foster lasting organizational change. As illustrated throughout this report, the Department has made notable progress in several areas. While these accomplishments are encouraging, the mission is far from complete, as leadership and Service members alike acknowledge the need for continued growth, persistence, and innovation in eradicating sexual assault from the ranks.

Purpose and Scope In December 2013, the President of the United States directed the Secretary of Defense to provide a report on the Department of Defense’s progress in addressing the issue of sexual assault, to include a review of the military justice system, by December 2014. In response, this report encompasses the key programmatic initiatives and policy

1 Although many advocates prefer to use the term “survivor” to describe an individual who has been sexually assaulted, the term “victim” is also widely used. This document uses the terms interchangeably and always with respect for those who have been subjected to these crimes. 2 Use of the term “offender” or “perpetrator” in this report is not intended to convey presumptions on guilt or innocence.

There is no silver bullet to solving this problem. This is going to require a sustained effort over a long period of time and we will not stop until we’ve seen this scourge eliminated.

Barack Obama President of the United States

May 16, 2014

I. Executive Summary

12

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

enhancements undertaken by the Department in Fiscal Years 2012 through 2014, with accompanying rationale, as well as synopses and evidence of progress. Also included are reports covering the same three-year timeline contributed by the Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, the National Guard Bureau, and the United States Coast Guard, as well as a review of the Uniform Code of Military Justice by the Office of the General Counsel of the Department of Defense. The report also contains preliminary results from the new Survivor Experience Survey and the recent focus group effort on sexual assault prevention and response in the military, both fielded by the Defense Manpower Data Center;3 provisional results of the RAND Corporation’s Military Workplace Study;4 and provisional statistical data on the Department’s Fiscal Year 2014 reports of sexual assault.5 Metrics and non-metrics6 developed by the Department – as requested by the White House – are also provided for the assessment of strengths and opportunities for improvement in the Department’s sexual assault prevention and response program. The data cover elements of prevention, the investigative and legal processes, and victim confidence in – and satisfaction with – the response system. Organizational Change – Within and Beyond The Department of Defense is unique in comparison to many other organizations or social groups, as it has an existing leadership structure, empowered by law to promote good order and discipline. In seeking ways to eliminate sexual assault, the Department is leveraging its existing culture of honor, dignity, and respect to drive organizational changes that empower every Service member to take action against disrespectful and dangerous behaviors. All who wish to serve must understand the Department of Defense has no place for those who do not live up to military core values. While the Department has been acutely focused on addressing sexual assault internally, senior leaders, Service members, and even veterans have recently taken a public stand on sexual assault – and related issues of sexual harassment and intimate partner violence – in multiple venues external to the Department. In the past couple of months alone, the Secretary of Defense reviewed the relationship the Department has with a professional sports league over

3 The 2014 Survivor Experience Survey Overview Report and the 2014 Department of Defense Report of Focus Groups on Sexual Assault Prevention and Response are available at Annexes 2 & 3, respectively. 4 The 2014 RAND Military Workplace Study report is available at Annex 1. 5 See Appendix A: Provisional Statistical Data on Sexual Assault. 6 “Non-metrics” are items that address the military justice process. There will be no effort to direct these aspects or outcomes, as doing so may constitute unlawful command influence on military justice. However, given the substantive interest in the military justice system and how it functions, these items will be used to describe or illustrate certain aspects of the system.

We know that lasting change begins by changing the behaviors that lead to sexual assault.

General Martin E. Dempsey Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

June 4, 2013

I. Executive Summary

13

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

concerns regarding its handling of domestic violence,7 a famous entertainer’s performance was cancelled at a military installation due to his inaccurate and insensitive commentary on rape,8 and a group of 60 veterans apologized via public letter to a female pilot from the United Arab Emirates when an inappropriate, sexist joke was made about her on an American news channel.9 These are just a few examples of the change in attitudes and behaviors the Department seeks to inspire in its personnel as it advances a broader national and international discussion on dignity and respect for all. Evidence of Progress – Top Ten Indicators and Agents of Change In the past three years, the Department of Defense Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program has undergone significant renewal and growth, impacting its strategy, policies, and programs. It has also invested profoundly in the development of its leaders and key “first responder personnel.”10 While the long-term target of eliminating sexual assault remains fixed on the horizon, the Department presents the following list of promising indicators and/or agents of positive change from Fiscal Years 2012-2014.

The Department of Defense is exhibiting unprecedented leadership engagement in its commitment to eradicate sexual assault in the ranks.

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel has built on former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta’s momentum on the issue, directing 28 sexual assault prevention and response initiatives during his tenure thus far. The result is a total of 41 Secretary of Defense-directed initiatives over the past three fiscal years (2012- 2014). The efforts include promoting and upholding a healthy command climate, enhancing training of key personnel involved in sexual assault prevention and response

7 Starr, Barbara, “Defense Secretary Hagel asking for information about military ties to NFL,” CNN, Sept. 19, 2014, http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/19/politics/hagel-and-nfl/. 8 Dries, Kate, “Cee-Lo Green Pulled From Military Base Performance,” Jezebel, Sept. 5, 2014, http://jezebel.com/cee-lo-green- pulled-from-military-base-performance-1630961014. 9 Macias, Amanda, “US Veterans Send Fox News An Open Letter About ‘Boobs On The Ground’ Joke,” Business Insider, Sept. 27, 2014, http://www.businessinsider.in/us-veterans-send-fox-news-an-open-letter-about-boobs-on-the-ground- joke/articleshow/43657166.cms. 10 The term “first responder personnel” refers to Sexual Assault Response Coordinators, Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Victim Advocates, Special Victims’ Counsel/Victims’ Legal Counsel, medical and mental health personnel, law enforcement, military criminal investigators, legal personnel, chaplains, and more.

We must ensure that every Service member understands that sexist behaviors, sexual harassment, and sexual assault are not tolerated, condoned, or ignored.

Chuck Hagel United States Secretary of Defense

May 1, 2014

I. Executive Summary

14

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

efforts, revising policy and strategy regarding victim rights and care, and improving criminal investigative capabilities and the military justice process. While sexual assault prevention and response policy has been in place for some time, the Secretary’s leadership is the catalyst behind the lasting and substantive organizational changes deployed since 2011. Through professional assessment tools and training, commanders and leaders across the Department are empowered to promote an environment intolerant of the disparaging behaviors that may bring about sexual assault. The championing of the program has had noticeable effects, as is evidenced in the latest climate survey and focus group feedback indicating Service members feel leadership is firmly committed to the issue.11 Military leaders demand Service members understand and embody overarching military core values, and demonstrate the social courage needed to act on the issue as well. As a result, peer-to- peer mentoring, where every Service member plays a role in preventing sexual assault and is empowered to intervene when necessary, is now a growing practice across the Force.

The Department’s strategic approach to sexual assault is at the organizational level, the centerpiece of which is the Department of Defense Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Strategic Plan, revised12 and published in May 2013. The strategy

provides a proactive and multi-disciplinary approach to achieve Department-wide unity of effort and purpose on sexual assault prevention and response across five Lines of Effort, as follows:

• Prevention – focused elements at multiple levels to prevent the crime • Investigation – competent investigations to yield timely and accurate results • Accountability – offenders held appropriately accountable • Advocacy/Victim Assistance – first-class victim services and care provided • Assessment – qualitative and quantitative measures to inform programs/policies

The aforementioned comprehensive sexual assault prevention and response system is aligned across the Military Services and the National Guard Bureau in their respective strategies and programs. This provides a coordinated approach to sustain progress and implement requisite organizational change, leveraging the Department’s enduring culture of dignity and respect. The Assessment component is the watermark behind the other Lines of Effort, as it allows for continuous evaluation and feedback to inform improvements to ongoing programs, as well as identify areas for improvement.

11 See Defense Equal Opportunity Climate Survey (Feb. to Sept. 2014 results); 2014 Department of Defense Report of Focus Groups on Sexual Assault Prevention and Response, available at Annex 3. 12 The Department of Defense Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Strategic Plan was originally published in 2009.

I. Executive Summary

15

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

The five Lines of Effort sections in this report detail the recent programmatic and policy initiatives implemented, to include rationale for action, synopses of progress thus far, and evidence of that progress in each area. Each Line of Effort section also addresses the following common topics:

• Role of the commander in supporting the respective Line of Effort • Specialized and enhanced training and certification of key personnel • Partnerships and collaborations with government and civilian experts • Prevalent myths and clarifying facts related to the particular Line of Effort

Recent survey data suggest the percentage of Active Duty women who experienced unwanted sexual contact in the past year declined from 6.1 percent in 2012 to 4.3 percent in 2014.13 For Active Duty men, the rate of unwanted sexual contact stayed about the same, moving from 1.2 percent in 2013 to 0.9 percent in 2014. Although

the prevalence rates of sexual assault in the Department are showing a downward trend, even one sexual assault in the Armed Forces is one too many. The Department’s goal is to intensify its prevention work to continue this progress in forthcoming years. Another positive trend is the recent substantive increase in reporting by victims of military sexual assault. While underreporting continues to be a problem, the number of victims in Fiscal Years 2013 and 2014 who came forward to make reports significantly increased. Fiscal Year 2013 featured a 50 percent increase in sexual assault reporting from 2012, and 2014 reporting maintained that gain and increased by another 8 percent. Whereas only one in 10 victims was reporting just two years ago, that rate has increased to one in four. Given that the past-year prevalence (occurrence) of sexual assault decreased from Fiscal Year 2012 to Fiscal Year 2014, the importance of this upward trend in reporting cannot be overstated. Increased reporting signals not only growing trust of command and confidence in the response system, but serves as the gateway to provide more victims with support and to hold a greater number of offenders appropriately accountable.

13 Statistics cited are based on the Workplace and Gender Relations Survey administered by Defense Manpower Data Center in 2012 and the RAND Corporation’s fielding of the prior form 2012 Workplace and Gender Relations Survey in 2014, for comparative reasons (for more information, see page 57).

By establishing the right command climate, ensuring leadership support, and empowering Service members to safely intervene, the Department of Defense will be the last place an offender wants to be.

Major General Jeffrey J. Snow Director

Department of Defense Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office May 1, 2014

I. Executive Summary

16

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Increased Conversion Rate Victims have the option to make either a Restricted or Unrestricted Report. The former provides the victim with limited disclosure of an incident to specified parties, and allows victims to access medical, mental health, and advocacy services while avoiding initiating the investigative or legal process. Unrestricted Reports, on the other hand, immediately trigger an independent investigation conducted outside the chain of command. Survivors who make a Restricted Report may convert their report to an Unrestricted Report at any time and participate in the military justice process. In Fiscal Year 2014, 19 percent of Restricted Reports received converted to Unrestricted Reports, more than in any prior year. An additional 47 Restricted Reports initially made in Fiscal Year 2013 and preceding years also converted to Unrestricted Reports during Fiscal Year 2014. Since 2006, conversion rates have typically averaged at 15 percent.

The Department has consistently and steadily augmented the depth and breadth of its approach to the prevention of sexual assault. In 2014, the Department revised its prevention strategy with the assistance of the Military Services and the National Guard. The 2014-

2016 Department of Defense Sexual Assault Prevention Strategy provides a unified plan and purpose across the Department at all levels, and identifies commanders as the center of gravity for promoting prevention and safety. Based on the social-ecological model for prevention,14 the new strategy provides a roadmap for the delivery of consistent and effective prevention strategies and initiatives through empirically-based promising practices. The social-ecological model considers the complex interplay between individual, relationship, community, and societal factors, and allows the Department to address those factors that put people at risk for experiencing or perpetrating violence. While there is no single “silver bullet” solution, as the President

14 ‘”The Social-Ecological Model: A Framework for Prevention,” Injury Prevention & Control: Division of Violence Prevention, Centers for Disease Control, http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/overview/social-ecologicalmodel.html.

I am impressed by the scope and focus of DoD’s strategy for addressing this important public health problem. Building a strategy based on what works in prevention holds great promise for achieving positive change.

Dr. James A. Mercy Acting Director, Division of Violence Prevention

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on the 2014-2016 DoD Prevention Strategy,

October 2014

I. Executive Summary

17

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

recognized, this innovative prevention strategy allows for new promising practices to be incorporated, assessed, and adapted accordingly.

Victim participation and engagement throughout the military justice process are key to maintaining good order and discipline within the Total Force, as well as holding offenders appropriately accountable. However, participating in criminal proceedings

can be exceedingly difficult for survivors, given that recalling memories about a sexual assault can sometimes be as traumatic as the crime itself. As a means to provide advice and advocacy, as well as empower victims to participate in the justice system, the Department created the groundbreaking Special Victims’ Counsel/Victims’ Legal Counsel Program. These military judge advocates provide independent, personalized legal advice and representation to victims of sexual assault, protecting their rights and empowering them to successfully navigate the military justice system. These specialized attorneys are assigned to victims and act independently of the prosecutor. The Department’s highly-regarded Special Victims’ Counsel/Victims’ Legal Counsel Program provides survivors with a dependable resource that is specially trained to represent their legal interests – a service with overwhelmingly positive survivor reviews.15

The Survivor Experience Survey, fielded by the Defense Manpower Data Center, is the first standardized and voluntary survey of sexual assault survivors conducted across all Department of Defense components (Active Duty, Reserve, and National Guard). This

ongoing survey affords survivors an opportunity to provide direct and confidential feedback on their experiences throughout the reporting process. Topics addressed include: awareness of sexual assault resources and reporting options; use of and satisfaction with key first responder personnel; use of and satisfaction with sexual assault-related medical and mental health services; and leadership responses to sexual assault reports. Survey results offer essential insights into how the Department can 15 See Annexes 2 and 3.

Witnesses who had been assigned Special Victims’ Counsel told the Panel that their Special Victims’ Counsel were critical to their ability to understand the process and participate effectively as witnesses against the accused.

Report of the Response Systems to Adult Sexual Assault Panel

I. Executive Summary

18

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

build on existing successes and address any remaining gaps and concerns to ensure every victim is treated with respect and sensitivity.16 While the number of respondents to this first effort was modest (just over 150), a large majority of these survivors favorably rated the services they received from first- responder personnel. Ninety percent of survivors who used the services from Sexual Assault Response Coordinators and Special Victims’ Counsel/Victims’ Legal Counsel were satisfied or very satisfied with the assistance they received.

Further, survivors indicated that maintaining privacy, having a ”voice” in the process, safety, support in managing duty responsibilities, and mental health/counseling services are their most important concerns. However, too many of these respondents indicated they perceived social and/or professional retaliation as a result of making a report. Even so, nearly three quarters of all respondents indicated they would recommend others report their sexual assault. To this end, combatting social and professional retaliation after reporting a sexual assault will remain a focus area for the Department, along with other potential barriers to reporting. A Phase II version of the Survivor Experience Survey, including questions on the investigative and legal processes, is under development.

The Department implemented several training enhancements, advanced certification requirements for first responders, and newly developed training expectations for Service members that impact every Line of Effort in the comprehensive sexual assault prevention and

response system. This deliberate professionalization of key sexual assault prevention and response personnel seeks to develop and sustain a cadre of individuals armed with skills and a level of preparedness that meets or surpasses what is available in the civilian sector.

The following are the major training and certification advancements recently put into effect across the Armed Forces:

• Trauma-informed Interviewing Techniques: Investigators assigned to Military Criminal Investigative Organizations17 from all Services/National Guard Bureau undergo training that provides agents with the knowledge and skills to better understand the fundamentals of neuroscience, trauma, and effective victim

16 The full report for the 2014 Survivor Experience Survey is included at Annex 2, and is based on preliminary findings from Quarter 4 of Fiscal Year 2014. 17 Army Criminal Investigation Command agents and Naval Criminal Investigative Service agents learn a technique called the Forensic Experiential Trauma Interview. Air Force Office of Special Investigation agents learn a technique called Cognitive Interviewing.

I. Executive Summary

19

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

interviewing. These innovative interview techniques help agents work with victims to obtain more information about crimes, potentially leading to improved offender accountability. Since 2009, nearly 2,000 special agents and prosecutors have completed courses in advanced sexual assault investigations in the Department.

• Professional Certification of Sexual Assault Response Coordinators and Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Victim Advocates: As the personnel who interact most frequently with sexual assault victims, Sexual Assault Response Coordinators and Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Victim Advocates offer a specialized skill set and expertise to assist victims and advocate on their behalf. Further, they advise commanders and assist with sexual assault prevention and awareness training. The Department’s Sexual Assault Advocate Certification Program ensures that regardless of a victim’s location, he or she will have access to the same high-level standard of support. This professional certification signals to survivors that Sexual Assault Response Coordinators and Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Victim Advocates have the requisite level of knowledge and training to assist victims in their recovery. Since the program was launched in Fiscal Year 2012, over 22,000 Sexual Assault Response Coordinators and Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Victim Advocates have been certified in a process administered by the National Organization for Victim Assistance.

• Advanced Training Course for Certified Sexual Assault Response

Coordinators and Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Victim Advocates: The Department’s Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office and the Military Services/National Guard collaborated with the Department of Justice’s Office of Justice Programs, Office for Victims of Crimes during 2013 to develop an advanced training course for Sexual Assault Response Coordinators and Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Victim Advocates. The online course, Advanced Military Sexual Assault Advocate Training, provides advanced sexual assault victim advocacy skills training by leveraging gaming technology in an interactive, online environment designed specifically for a military audience.

• Standardized Core Competencies and Learning Objectives: The Department

worked collaboratively to develop a set of core competencies and learning objectives to assure consistency and effectiveness in training at all command levels. Sexual Assault Prevention and Response content has been integrated into military training, as follows:

The special agent was great. He treated me with sensitivity, kept me informed about the steps the investigation would take and with witness interviews and then provided me a wrap-up.

Survivor regarding a Military Criminal Investigative Organizations agent

I. Executive Summary

20

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

 All levels of Professional Military Education  Pre-Command and Senior Enlisted Leader Training  Accession Training (within 14 days of entry on active duty)  Initial Military Training  Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Annual Training  Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Pre-/Post-Deployment Training

The Department continues to collaborate and communicate with a variety of entities to discuss strategies and share best and promising practices to inform and enhance its programs. These efforts include reaching out to reputable government and civilian experts,

as well as responding to requests in order to share knowledge and offer experience- based guidance. Leveraging partnerships and collaborations across these sectors provides significant advantages and allows the Department to remain at the cutting edge of the latest research and initiatives regarding sexual assault prevention. By the same token, organizations across the country and internationally are looking to the United States military as a model to inform their own Sexual Assault Prevention and Response programs. Various universities and military allies have replicated the Department’s policies and programmatic approach. Noteworthy interagency, international, and cross-sector collaborations include:

Government Agencies/Organizations o Centers for Disease Control and Prevention o Department of Justice, Office for Victims of Crime o Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation Victim Services o Department of Veterans Affairs o Department of State o The Peace Corps** o United States Coast Guard**

Advocacy Organizations

o Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network o National Organization for Victim Assistance o National Sexual Violence Resource Center

The DoD has done an incredible amount of work in a short amount of time in combatting sexual assault and violence against women. We have never seen that kind of change in a civilian community and I just wish more people would recognize that fact.

Joanne Archambault Executive Director of End Violence Against Women

January 17, 2012

I. Executive Summary

21

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Academia o Universities and colleges** o Subject Matter Experts in various disciplines

Foreign militaries

o Canada, Australia, United Kingdom, and Norway**

**Indicates organizations that have consulted with the Department of Defense to inform their respective programs or approach

The Department also works closely with Congress to improve its programs and policies. The last three National Defense Authorization Acts included 53 sections of law, containing more than 100 requirements related to sexual assault in the military – many of which were built on or in parallel with existing Secretary of Defense initiatives. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 alone provided the most sweeping changes to military law since 1968. Additionally, the Department was invited to serve in an advisory role on the White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault. Many of the recommendations made by the Task Force, including professional advocacy, confidential reporting, bystander intervention training, and surveying for prevalence, have been proven components of the Department’s Sexual Assault Prevention and Response policy for many years.

The Department created the Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database, a secure, web-based tool designed for reporting and case management of sexual assaults committed by or against Service members.18 The database captures case

information entered by Military Service and National Guard Sexual Assault Response Coordinators about both Restricted and Unrestricted sexual assault reports, enhances a Sexual Assault Response Coordinator’s ability to provide comprehensive and standardized victim case management, enables authorized legal officers to enter and validate case disposition data, supports Service Sexual Assault Prevention and Response program management, provides improved oversight of how sexual assault cases are managed, and enables the Department to meet Congressional reporting requirements. Since October 2013, all Military Services and the National Guard are utilizing this innovative product.

Military commanders are responsible for establishing a command climate that promotes honor, discipline, respect, and integrity, all of which are core values of the United States military and fundamental components of the

18 Available at: http://responsesystemspanel.whs.mil/Public/docs/Reports/00_Final/00_Report_Final_20140627.pdf.

I. Executive Summary

22

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Department’s effort to reduce – with the intent to eliminate – sexual assault in its ranks. The Department strives to provide military commanders with the resources they need to address this critical issue, and hold them accountable for failure to do so. At every level of Department leadership, beginning with the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the message has been clearly established that sexual assault and harassment will not be tolerated, and the United States military is no place for individuals who find such behavior acceptable. Commanders are expected to embrace this philosophy, and do their part in disseminating this message to future leaders for whom they are responsible. To assist commanders at every level to promote and uphold a healthy, respectful command climate and give reports of sexual assault the high-level attention and seriousness they deserve, the Department has implemented a climate assessment process. This process represents a fundamental shift in how the Department drives organizational change. The climate assessments involve three primary activities:

• The Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute Organizational Climate Survey: This important assessment tool for commanders provides feedback from unit members to enhance a leader’s knowledge about specific trends and behaviors within his or her unit, and provides an avenue for them to confidentially communicate concerns. Commanders leverage results to drive unit change, employing Service member feedback to address inappropriate actions, as necessary.

• Senior Leader Involvement: Results from the climate survey are automatically

shared with the unit commander’s immediate supervisor. Unit commanders are responsible for using survey results and additional information gathering activities to address any challenges facing the unit.

• Officer Evaluation Reports: Senior leaders rate unit commanders on their

actions to address unit climate. By incorporating commanders’ response into their performance reviews, commanders are accountable for promoting a climate of dignity and respect. Given that sexual assault is less likely when sexist behavior and sexual harassment are less prevalent in a unit, the climate assessment process has the promise to produce substantive organizational change within the Department.

In addition, starting in June 2012, the Secretary of Defense directed that initial decisions about the dispositions of penetrating sexual assault cases be made by senior military officers who were at least in the grade of colonel or Navy captain and hold special court- martial convening authority. This action allowed seasoned commanders – typically without any personal knowledge of the victim or subject in the impacted subordinate units – to appropriately review how to best address the evidence and subsequent command action in these matters.

I. Executive Summary

23

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Metrics Overview

This report includes provisional results for 12 metrics and six non-metrics that were developed in collaboration with the White House for the purpose of analyzing specific aspects of the Department’s Sexual Assault Prevention and Response program (available in their entirety in Appendix B). Encouragingly, the Department clearly demonstrates indicators of progress in the areas of:

• Prevalence • Reporting • Bystander Intervention • Command Climate • Victim Support • Perception of Leadership’s Efforts

However, the Department was unable to identify clear progress in the area of perceived victim retaliation. Despite significant efforts by the Department, military victims continue to perceive social and/or professional retaliation. Retaliation, in any form, is unacceptable in the Department of Defense. Addressing this issue will be a top priority moving forward for Sexual Assault Prevention and Response programs across the Military Services. Military Justice System Review

The following are key findings from the review of the military justice system conducted by the Office of the General Counsel of the Department of Defense, as directed by the President of the United States for inclusion in this report:

• The military justice system has undergone massive change over the past three fiscal years, resulting in the most sweeping revisions since 1968

• As a result, the system is better able to investigate and try sexual assault cases in a fair and just manner, while better protecting victims’ privacy interests

• The military justice system can be further improved, and additional reforms will be implemented

• The Department agrees with the conclusion of the Response Systems Panel19 that future reforms should not include transferring prosecutorial discretion from commanders to judge advocates – a move that would likely not only degrade mission readiness, but also diminish commanders’ effectiveness in the fight against sexual assault in the military

19 The Response Systems to Adult Sexual Assault Crimes (Response Systems Panel) was established under Section 576 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, as amended by National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, to perform an independent assessment of the systems used to investigate, prosecute, and adjudicate crimes involving adult sexual assault and related offenses.

I. Executive Summary

24

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Conclusion and Way Ahead

Senior leaders across the Department of Defense have provided unprecedented leadership engagement on sexual assault prevention and response, employing a proactive communication posture with clear and consistent messaging. Through reaching out to victims for feedback, collaborating with external partners and experts, working with Congressional and White House leaders, and professionalizing key personnel through advanced training and certifications, the Department continues to seek inventive and effectual approaches to inform and augment its strategic and comprehensive sexual assault prevention and response system. The crime of sexual assault is a detriment to the welfare of men and women in uniform and is antithetic to core military values of trust, dignity, and respect. Combatting this crime requires sustained effort and resolve, coupled with a multidisciplinary approach across the five Lines of Effort. With an increased focus on prevention and steadfast commitment to excellence in support and care for victims, the Department has demonstrated significant progress in its mission to eradicate sexual assault from the Armed Forces. However, additional research and evaluation are necessary in order to refine and optimize existing approaches, as well as build on successes, positive trends, and insightful feedback to discover opportunities for improvement. Beyond 2014, the Department will remain focused on its concerted efforts to sustain and enhance ongoing and new programs and initiatives, and identify and close gaps in requisite areas. As the many sectors of society contend with similar challenges, the Department will continue to advance the national conversation on eradicating sexual assault, and remain at the forefront of this moral imperative.

The Department needs to be a national leader in preventing and responding to sexual assault. We are committed to lead the daughters and sons of the American people with the values of our honorable profession and to ensure they serve in an environment that is free from sexual assault and protects the dignity and respect of every Service member.

Chuck Hagel United States Secretary of Defense

May 6, 2013

II. INTRODUCTION

25

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

A. Report Purpose and Scope In December 2013, the President of the United States directed the Secretary of Defense to provide a report on the Department of Defense’s (DoD’s) progress in addressing the issue of sexual assault by December 2014. This report encompasses the key programmatic initiatives and policy enhancements undertaken by the Department from October 2011 through September 2014 – essentially Fiscal Years (FY) 2012 through 2014. Additionally, it details DoD’s strategic and multidisciplinary approach to eliminating sexual assault and includes Service summaries contributed by the Departments of the Navy, Army, and Air Force, as well as summaries from the National Guard Bureau (NGB) and the United States Coast Guard (USCG). An analysis of recent Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) reform by the Office of the General Counsel (OGC) of the DoD is also provided, as directed. This report answers that direction, and also details the most recent assessment methods utilized by the Department, including the Survivor Experience Survey (SES) and the 2014 focus group effort on sexual assault prevention and response in the military, both fielded by the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC). Also included are provisional results of the 2014 RAND Corporation’s Military Workplace Study and of the Department’s FY 2014 reports of sexual assault as per the Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database (DSAID). The report organizes and communicates the Department’s progress using the five lines of effort (LOEs) from the DoD Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) Strategic Plan, revised20 and published in May 2013. The LOEs are Prevention, Investigation, Accountability, Advocacy/Victim Assistance, and Assessment. Metrics and non-metrics, developed by the Department as requested

20 The DoD SAPR Strategic Plan was originally published in 2009.

DoD-wide Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Mission Statement

The Department of Defense prevents and responds to the crime of sexual assault in order to enable military

readiness and reduce — with a goal to eliminate — sexual assault from the military.

II. Introduction

26

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

by the White House, are also provided to help evaluate the Department’s SAPR program, and cover elements of prevention, the investigative and legal processes, and victim confidence in – and satisfaction with – the response system.

B. DoD’s Strategic Approach This report details DoD’s proactive and multidisciplinary approach across the five LOEs to achieve unity of effort and purpose across the Department in reducing, with the goal of eliminating, sexual assault. The approach engages leaders at all levels and requires a personal commitment from every Service member to uphold military core values. The key to promoting the organizational changes needed to eliminate sexual assault is active leadership engagement with a commitment to DoD’s enduring culture of mutual dignity and respect. Over the past three years, Secretaries of Defense Chuck Hagel and Leon Panetta directed a total of 41 SAPR initiatives. Beginning with a December 2011 order giving victims the ability to request a transfer away from the accused, and continuing with multiple directive memos intended to enhance various aspects of the SAPR program, both Secretaries advanced necessary and significant changes to the Department’s approach to prevention and response. The efforts have included promoting a healthy command climate, enhancing training across all LOEs, revising SAPR policies and strategy regarding victim rights and care, and improving accountability measures for investigations and the military justice process. While SAPR policy has been in place for some time, the Secretaries’ leadership is the catalyst behind the lasting and substantive organizational changes deployed since 2011.

1. Leadership Engagement

Strong and informed leadership at every level is essential to the effective prevention of and response to sexual assault. While some mistakenly infer that commander involvement impedes progress against sexual assault, no problem in the military has

Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Designated as Chairman’s

#1 High Interest Training Issue for the Joint Force

On October 10, 2013, Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, released the FY 2014 – 2017 Chairman’s Joint Training Guidance. At the top of the list for high-interest training issues (HITIs) is SAPR.

The HITIs represent operational focus areas consistent with the priorities established in defense strategic guidance, the Chairman’s Strategic Direction to the Joint Force, and the Capstone Concept for Joint Operations, and constitute an integral part of joint training programs. “The Services, Combat Support Agencies, and Combatant Commands should advocate a robust Sexual Assault Prevention and Response program and provide individual education and training to prevent and appropriately respond to incidents of sexual assault.” (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Notice 3500.01 October 10, 2013)

II. Introduction

27

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

ever been solved without the strength of the women and men in command making the right decisions and leading change. Leaders are expected to be more involved in the solution, not less involved. Research shows that sexual assault is more likely in environments where offensive behavior, unwanted sexual attention, and sexual harassment occur. Therefore, the Department’s approach places a high level of responsibility on commanders and leaders to be proactive in identifying and correcting these behaviors. Command demands that Service members understand and embody overarching military core values, and embrace their responsibility to demonstrate the social courage needed to lead on the issue as well. Commanders’ behaviors, priorities, counsel, and actions set the expectations and tone for the entire unit. Therefore, the commander’s role in sexual assault prevention and response is interwoven throughout DoD’s SAPR strategy, and is essential to effecting organizational change.

2. Organizational Change Sexual assault is a broad societal problem, one not just found in the military. While efforts to combat sexual assault can be found in pockets across society and the globe, DoD is unique in comparison to many other organizations or social groups, as it has an existing leadership structure, empowered by law to promote organizational good order and discipline. In seeking ways to eliminate sexual assault, the DoD leverages its existing culture of honor, dignity, and respect to effect organizational changes that empower every Service member to take action against disrespectful and dangerous behaviors. All who wish to serve must understand that DoD has no place for those who do not live up to military core values.

3. Partnerships/Collaborations The Department continues to collaborate with a variety of entities to develop strategies and share best and promising practices. DoD’s efforts include both reaching out to organizations, as well as responding to requests to share knowledge and offer experience-based guidance. Noteworthy interagency, international, and cross-sector collaborations include:

a. Government Agencies o Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) o Department of Justice (DOJ), Office for Victims of Crime (OVC)

II. Introduction

28

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

o DOJ, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Victim Services o Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) o Department of State o The Peace Corps** o USCG**

b. Advocacy Organizations o Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network (RAINN) o National Organization for Victim Assistance (NOVA) o National Sexual Violence Resource Center

c. Academia o Universities and colleges** o Subject Matter Experts in various disciplines

d. Foreign militaries o Canada, Australia, United Kingdom, and Norway**

**Indicates organizations that have consulted with the DoD to inform their respective programs or approach

The Department also works closely with Congress to improve its SAPR program. The last three National Defense Authorization Acts (NDAAs) included 53 sections of law, containing more than 100 requirements – many of which built on Secretary of Defense initiatives. Last year’s NDAA alone resulted in the most sweeping revisions to military justice since 1968. DoD was also invited to serve in an advisory role on the White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault. Many of the recommendations made by the Task Force, including professional advocacy, confidential reporting, bystander intervention training, and surveying for prevalence, have been proven components of the Department’s SAPR policy for many years.

C. Scope of the Program 1. DoD Definition of Sexual Assault In the Department, the term “sexual assault” does not refer to one specific crime; rather, it encompasses a range of sex crimes between adults that represent a broad spectrum of offenses from rape to forcible sodomy to abusive sexual contact, as well as attempts to commit these offenses. Consequently, the definition of sexual assault in the military is broader than the crime of rape. In its current form, DoD SAPR policy21 defines sexual assault as follows:

Intentional sexual contact characterized by use of force, threats, intimidation, or abuse of authority or when the victim does not or cannot consent. The term includes a broad category of sexual offenses consisting of the following specific

21 DoDD 6495.01, Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program.

II. Introduction

29

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

UCMJ offenses: rape, sexual assault, aggravated sexual contact, abusive sexual contact, forcible sodomy (forced oral or anal sex), or attempts to commit these acts.

Consent is defined as:

Words or overt acts indicating a freely given agreement to the sexual conduct at issue by a competent person. An expression of lack of consent through words or conduct means there is no consent. Lack of verbal or physical resistance or submission resulting from the accused’s use of force, threat of force, or placing another person in fear does not constitute consent. A current or previous dating relationship or the manner of dress of the person involved with the accused in the sexual conduct at issue shall not constitute consent. There is no consent where the person is sleeping or incapacitated, such as due to age, alcohol or drugs, or mental incapacity.

2. Continuum of Harm The Continuum of Harm represents the environment and potential for harm where people live, work, and spend their lives. As illustrated in Figure 1, on the left side of the continuum is a healthy environment. As one moves to the right, behaviors and misconduct that detract from a healthy environment increase in severity, and range from such problems as sexism, objectification, and sexual harassment, to inappropriate touching and sexual violence. At the bottom of the continuum are capabilities that DoD has in place to prevent, correct, and respond to harmful behaviors. While all of these problems can coexist in a given environment, this figure graphically represents the pattern of escalation some use to dehumanize or objectify others, and the very serious consequences that can result. While considered in the Continuum of Harm addressed by Department prevention efforts, other non-contact misconduct, such as indecent exposure and stalking, does not fall under the SAPR program as chartered in 2005. However, the Military Criminal Investigative Organizations (MCIOs)22 investigate these and other sex crimes as appropriate. Incidents of sexual harassment are also not in this report because they fall under the purview of the Office of the Secretary of Defense Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity (ODMEO). Lastly, sexual abuse of children and spouses are not contained in this report because they fall under the purview of the DoD Family Advocacy Program (FAP). DoD Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office (SAPRO) continues to work closely with these DoD agencies and others in order to share lessons learned and develop complementary and reinforcing approaches to create and maintain climates of dignity and respect for all our personnel.

22 MCIOs include the Army Criminal Investigations Division, NCIS, and the AFOSI.

II. Introduction

30

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Figure 1 – DoD Continuum of Harm

D. Published SAPR Policy & Strategy 1. SAPR Policy DoD SAPR Program policy is found in DoD Directive (DoDD) 6495.01 and DoD Instruction (DoDI) 6495.02. In FY 2013, the Department reissued both documents with a range of new policies, training requirements, and safety measures.23 These changes reflect feedback from survivors and advocacy groups, as well as the Military Services, NGB, military investigators, DoD OGC, and DoD Health Affairs. The updated policy documents also incorporate recommendations from the GAO, the DoD Inspector General (IG), and the Defense Task Force on Sexual Assault in the Military Services (DTF-SAMS), as well as legislative requirements from the NDAA for FY 2009, FY 2011, FY 2012, and FY 2013. Other interim guidance addressing Sexual Assault Incident Response Oversight Reports (SAIRO), the Department’s Special Victim Investigation and Prosecution (SVIP) capability, and the DoD Sexual Assault Advocate Certification

23 DoDD 6495.01, “SAPR Program,” Incorporating Change 1 was published on April 30, 2013.

II. Introduction

31

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Program (D-SAACP) has been published and will be incorporated into future revisions to DoD policy documents.24

2. SAPR Strategy The DoD SAPR Strategic Plan represents the Department’s holistic approach, applicable to all stakeholders and clarifying Department priorities, objectives, and initiatives with regard to prevention and response to victims. In FY 2013, DoD SAPRO and the Military Services and NGB revised the DoD SAPR Strategic Plan to align with and operationalize the key tasks defined in the Joint Chiefs of Staff’s (JCS) Strategic Direction to the Force.25 The 2013 update was the first since 2009, the year the plan was originally published. In a May 2013 memo, the Secretary of Defense directed the Military Services to align their respective programs and strategies with the DoD SAPR Strategic Plan, which has since occurred. Hereafter, DoD will review and update the DoD SAPR Strategic Plan as necessary each year via an annual review process, in collaboration with the Military Services and NGB.

E. Five SAPR Lines of Effort DoD SAPRO organizes and reports Department progress in the SAPR program using the five LOEs from the DoD SAPR Strategic Plan. The plan presents a multidisciplinary approach with initiatives and objectives to achieve unity of effort and purpose across the Department. The five LOE sections in this report describe the initiatives taken and evidence of progress in each area, and also address the following common topics:

• Role of the commander, specific to the LOE • Specialized and enhanced training • Partnerships and collaborations • Prevalent myths and clarifying facts

1. Prevention (LOE 1) No one should ever have to experience this crime. Prevention is the only means by which to stop sexual violence. Each Service is working to effectively embed key prevention strategies that empower leaders to affect the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of Service members, while shaping the environment in which all live and work. The 24 All policies referenced are available on http://www.sapr.mil. 25 JCS’s Strategic Direction to the Joint Force was issued in May 2012.

II. Introduction

32

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

objective of the LOE is to deliver consistent and effective prevention methods and programs that reduce, with a goal to eliminate, the occurrence of sexual assault. The desired end state is a culture wherein all elements of the military community work together to preclude the opportunity for sexual assault. During FY 2014, the Department took steps to implement the 2014-2016 DoD Sexual Assault Prevention Strategy.26 Prevention is more than training and education of individuals. A successful prevention strategy addresses the entire continuum of harm, shapes the environment, and includes a wide range of integrated elements targeting accountability, community involvement, communication, deterrence, incentives, and harm reduction at every level of military society.

2. The Response System The Department’s response system is designed to empower victims and facilitate recovery. Moreover, this comprehensive support system refers every Unrestricted Report27 of sexual assault to an MCIO for a thorough investigation, holds offenders appropriately accountable, and supports victims throughout the process. The “Response” component of DoD’s SAPR system incorporates the following three LOEs that demonstrate the Department’s uncompromised commitment to victim support:28

• Investigation (LOE 2) • Accountability (LOE 3) • Advocacy and Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

The DoD response system provides multiple reporting channels both inside and outside the chain of command and prioritizes victims’ preferences in how they choose to heal. Several policy reforms are a direct result of victim feedback: opportunity for expedited transfers away from accused offenders, providing the option for Special Victims’ Counsel (SVC), treating every case as a medical emergency, combatting professional and peer retaliation, encouraging more reporting from male victims, and ensuring the availability of anonymous, worldwide, 24/7 crisis support through the DoD Safe Helpline. Since 2011, DoD has published updated policies and incorporated extensive recommendations from oversight organizations on sexual assault prevention and response, many of which advance victims’ rights and offer a greater variety of medical,

26 SAPRO developed and executed a sexual assault prevention campaign to identify evidence-based prevention practices and lessons learned, in order to update the 2008 Department of Defense Sexual Assault Prevention Strategy. 27 Military victims of sexual assault have two reporting options: Restricted and Unrestricted. Restricted Reporting provides the victim with the option of limiting disclosure of the incident to specified parties. Unrestricted Reporting provides the victim the opportunity to participate in the military justice process. For more information regarding reporting options, please see Advocacy and Victim Assistance (LOE 4) in this report. 28 While the DoD Strategic Plan addresses the Investigation and Accountability LOE, these activities fall outside the oversight of the SAPR Program. Oversight of the criminal investigative process falls under the purview of the DoD IG, and legal processes involved in Accountability are the responsibility of the Judge Advocates General (JAGs) of the Military Departments.

II. Introduction

33

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

psychological, and legal assistance than any other institution or jurisdiction in the United States. In the past three years, DoD made significant advances in identifying, developing and implementing best practices to support victims of sexual assault. The most successful and ground-breaking initiatives with regard to the response component are the launching of DoD Safe Helpline, the fielding of the Special Victims Investigation and Prosecution (SVIP) capability, and the creation of a SVC program.

3. Investigation (LOE 2) The objective of the Investigation LOE is to achieve high competence in the investigation of sexual assault. The end state is where investigative resources yield timely and accurate results. The Department continues to develop expert investigative capabilities that enable professional, responsive, and accurate investigations, independent from the chain of command. DoD investigative resources employ scientifically-informed techniques that optimize the recovery of physical and testimonial evidence while mitigating the potential for re-traumatizing a victim.

4. Accountability (LOE 3) Achieving high competence in holding offenders appropriately accountable is the objective of the Accountability LOE, while the end state is where perpetrators are held appropriately accountable. The legal counsel and representation provided though the SVC program are intended to give sexual assault victims confidence that they will be treated fairly should they choose to engage the criminal justice process. Over the past three years, the military justice process has been modified to inspire greater participation by victims, to include requiring more senior commander involvement in initial disposition decisions about the most serious sexual assault cases, protecting victim communications with victim advocates (VAs), and creating a more highly skilled set of response professionals. Through these efforts and others, the Department is sending a clear message that the military is no place for individuals who coerce, degrade, and humiliate others through sexual assault.

5. Advocacy and Victim Assistance (LOE 4) The objective of the Advocacy/Victim Assistance LOE is to deliver consistent and effective victim support, response, and reporting options. The end state is to provide high quality services and support, to instill confidence and trust, strengthen resilience, and inspire victims to report. Throughout FY 2012-2014, the Department implemented numerous advocacy and victim assistance programs, initiatives, and policy enhancements.

II. Introduction

34

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

A record number of victims in FY 2013 and FY 2014 came forward to make reports.29 Given that the Department’s estimate of past-year prevalence (occurrence) of sexual assault decreased from FY 2012 to FY 2014, the Department views this increased reporting behavior as an indicator of growing confidence in the DoD response system. DoD SAPR policies are designed to help victims exercise their rights, as well as provide them with a professional response, effective treatment, legal support, and a voice in the military justice process.

6. Assessment (LOE 5) Assessment entails continuous evaluation of SAPR initiatives and programs to promote achievement of intended outcomes. The objective of the fifth LOE is to effectively standardize, measure, analyze, and assess program progress. The end state is where the Department incorporates responsive, meaningful, and accurate systems of measurement and evaluation into every aspect of the SAPR program. Each year, the Department integrates data from sexual assault reports, scientifically conducted surveys, and other forms of research to provide a fully transparent view of DoD SAPR program progress.

F. Oversight and Accountability To support this effort, the Under Secretary of Defense (USD) for Personnel and Readiness (P&R) and the Director of DoD SAPRO provide weekly updates to the Secretary of Defense and other senior Department leaders on the progress of new and ongoing SAPR initiatives, development of new policy, and implementation of legislation. The Secretary uses these regularly scheduled meetings to consider recommendations from senior leadership and to hold Department leaders accountable to further enhance SAPR policies and programs.

1. Independent Oversight The Department makes transparent its advances and setbacks as it works to eliminate sexual assault from the military. Outside evaluation and reporting on Department progress is important to achieving stakeholder trust. Evaluative reviews by various organizations are described below:

a. The Response Systems to Adult Sexual Assault Crimes Panel (June 2014) Section 576 of the NDAA for FY 2013, as amended by the NDAA for FY 2014, directed the Secretary of Defense to establish the Response Systems to Adult Sexual Assault Crimes Panel – or RSP – “to conduct an independent review and assessment of the systems used to investigate, prosecute, and adjudicate crimes involving adult sexual assault and related offenses under Section 920 of Title 10, United States Code (Article 120 of the UCMJ), for the purpose of developing recommendations regarding how to improve the effectiveness of such systems.” The RSP released its report, including 132

29 These reports include members of the military who reported being sexually assaulted by a civilian as well as survivors who reported being sexually assaulted prior to entering the military.

II. Introduction

35

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

recommendations for the DoD, on June 27, 2014. The Department is currently identifying an appropriate action for each of the recommendations.30

b. Defense Task Force on Sexual Assault in the Military Services (December 2009)

As the result of a year-long review of all sexual assault policies and programs among the Services and DoD, this report recognized the significant progress made in responding to sexual assault since the establishment of the SAPR Program in 2005. Recommendations covered the spectrum from strategic proposals to specific actions that would continue improvement of prevention, victim response, and accountability within DoD.31 Of the 91 recommendations, DoD has implemented 88. The other three are ongoing actions.

c. Defense Task Force for Care for Victims of Sexual Assault (April 2004) This Task Force conducted a 90-day review of all sexual assault policies and programs in the Services and DoD. Throughout the review, the Task Force sought to understand the culture, command structures, and resource limitations involved with improving in- theater care of sexual assault victims. The findings provided a high-level, comprehensive assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, and gaps in DoD and Service policies regarding care for sexual assault victims in 2004. This Task Force report was the first of three Task Forces on sexual assault prevention and response, and encouraged a Department-wide approach, culminating in ground-breaking new policy and establishment of DoD SAPRO in 2005.

d. DoD Inspector General (IG) The DoD IG conducts audits and provides reports on topics of special interest. The DoD IG provides independent, relevant, and timely oversight of the DoD that supports the warfighter; promotes accountability, integrity and efficiency; advises the Secretary of Defense and Congress; and informs the public. With regard to SAPR, the DoD IG oversees the policies of the MCIOs that investigate sexual assault in the military. Since 2011, the DoD IG has published four reports that addressed and recommended improvements to DoD investigation, records retention, and sex offender registration policies.

e. Government Accountability Office (GAO) GAO’s mission is to support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and ensure the accountability of the federal government for the benefit of the American people. Since 2008, GAO has published the findings and recommendations of six engagements regarding DoD SAPR policies, programs, and functions. The most recent engagement report, published September 9, 2014, assessed action taken to prevent sexual assault during initial military training. As of this report, DoD has implemented 25 of 31 recommendations from the six engagements and is working to implement the remaining six. Additionally, there are two ongoing GAO assessments: an assessment of the policy and program as it pertains to

30 Available at: http://responsesystemspanel.whs.mil/Public/docs/Reports/00_Final/00_Report_Final_20140627.pdf. 31 Available at: http://www.sapr.mil/public/docs/research/DTFSAMS-Rept_Dec09.pdf.

II. Introduction

36

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

male victims of sexual assault, and a review of DoD’s efforts to prevent sexual assault. Results are expected in early 2015.

2. Internal Assessment DoD SAPRO is the oversight body responsible for continually assessing the Department’s SAPR strategy. SAPRO utilizes both qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods, including surveys, focus groups, and annual reports in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the Department’s overall SAPR programs. While SAPRO serves as the overarching authority responsible for this assessment, the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps also perform their own internal assessments.

G. Appendices, Annexes, and Enclosures Accompanying this report are several attachments submitted by the Military Departments, the NGB, the USCG, OGC, DMDC, and other government agencies or contractors that complement the Department’s submission. These attachments include:

• provisional statistical data on FY 2014 reports of sexual assault • background and trending of metrics and non-metrics • a review of the UCMJ provided by OGC • in-depth reports from the DMDC on findings from the SES and the Focus Groups

on Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (FGSAPR) in the Military • report from the RAND Corporation on the 2014 Military Workplace Study • an analysis of Service-specific SAPR initiatives provided by each of the Military

Departments and NGB, as well as the USCG

III. PREVENTION (LOE 1)

37

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

A. Introduction Prevention is the key LOE, as it is the only one that precedes an incident of sexual assault. Prevention has neither a beginning nor an end. To sustain any reduction in the annual occurrence of the crimes that constitute sexual assault under military law, prevention work must be continuous and pervasive. Accordingly, the DoD has focused significant efforts on a proactive, comprehensive and multidisciplinary approach to preventing the crime of sexual assault. Demonstrating progress in prevention is inherently challenging. By definition, effective prevention makes something much less likely to occur. Given the challenges associated with measuring the underreported problem of sexual assault, few institutions have taken on the challenge of regularly demonstrating their progress in preventing the crime. The Department has been documenting its progress since its first annual report to Congress in 2004. However, in the past three years, there has been considerable

progress made to further advance dignity and respect as an inherent part of military culture. DoD’s prevention mission is to disrupt a perpetrator’s offense cycle by targeting the attitudes and behaviors that precede an offense. While deterrence plays an important and necessary role in this mission, it is not sufficient to stop all offenders – especially since research showsSecretary of Defense Chuck Hagel speaks with U.S. Navy recruits during a Recruit SAPR

training class while visiting Naval Station Great Lakes, Ill., May 6, 2014.

Objective: Deliver consistent and effective prevention methods and programs. End state: Cultural imperatives of mutual respect and trust, professional values, and team commitment are reinforced to create an environment where sexual assault is not tolerated, condoned, or ignored.

We must ensure that every Service member understands that sexist behaviors, sexual harassment, and sexual assault are not tolerated, condoned, or ignored.

Chuck Hagel United States Secretary of Defense

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

38

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

that perpetrators believe forcing sex can be acceptable and even justifiable32. Instead, the Department has taken a much broader view of prevention, leveraging its culture and core values to embed prevention initiatives at every level of military society. To this end, DoD prevention programs do not rely solely on training and education of individuals. Prevention encompasses a variety of new and ongoing initiatives that are regularly assessed and modified to advance a climate of dignity and respect throughout the Department. These organizational changes, promoted by DoD leadership at all levels, are intended to make DoD inhospitable to offenders. Key among the initiatives driving organizational change is the annual climate assessment process required of every unit commander. Because law enforcement and leadership cannot be present in every situation, the Department promotes a personal commitment from each individual Service member to be a steadfast participant in creating an appropriate culture for upholding standards of behavior and military core values. Prevention is most effective when there is a sense of collective ownership across an organization in combatting sexual assault. In the past year, there is substantive evidence that Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines have embraced a personal commitment to helping eradicate sexual assault within the ranks and intervening before offenses can take place. Key elements of an effective prevention program include policies that shape the environment to encourage the best outcomes, tailored education and awareness,

leadership involvement, and empowerment of people to take direct action, as well as a wide range of integrated elements addressing accountability, community involvement, communication, deterrence, and incentives for participation. Ultimately, effective prevention is dependent upon substantial leadership engagement at all levels to promote a professional command climate based on dignity and respect for all.

32 Abbey, A., Zawackia, T., Bucka, P., Clintona, P., McAuslanc, P. (2003) Sexual Assault and Alcohol Consumption: What Do We Know About Their Relationship and What Types of Research Are Still Needed? Aggression and Violent Behavior, 9, 271-303.

Sailors and Marines participate in a 5K run in support of Sexual Assault Awareness Month 2014 on the flight deck of the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman.

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

39

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

B. Defining the Problem Rationale: Defining the problem in the military provides important insights into how to best prevent sexual assault. Synopsis of Progress: Although the Department has made great strides in sexual assault prevention and response in recent years, research suggests that sexual assault remains a significant problem in the Armed Forces. As in the civilian sector and contrary to common perception, most sexual assaults are perpetrated by someone known to the victim. While some sexual assaults can be perpetrated by strangers in attacks that leave the victim visibly injured, most crimes occur between people who know each other, often involving alcohol, and limited to few, if any, visible injuries. This “non-stranger” fact pattern has a number of significant implications for prevention efforts, particularly given that most people mistakenly believe the “stranger” fact pattern often depicted in popular culture to be the predominate form of the crime. Past Workplace and Gender Relations Surveys of Active Duty Members (WGRA) show that sexual harassment and stalking may be related to incidents of sexual assaults; over half of women and nearly half of men surveyed who reported having been sexually assaulted also experienced some form of sexual harassment and/or stalking by the alleged offender, prior to, or after the unwanted sexual contact (USC) incident. As in the civilian sector, a significant percentage of sexual assaults in the military go unreported each year, meaning that official reports of sexual assault to DoD authorities are vastly outnumbered by the numbers of incidents believed to occur each year, as estimated by representative, scientific surveys of the military population. Evidence of Progress: The preceding information is explained in greater detail in the 2014-2016 DoD Prevention Strategy signed by the Secretary of Defense on May 1, 2014.33 In addition, DoD regularly updates its understanding of the problem of sexual assault through new and existing data sources and publishes this information in its Annual Report to Congress.34

C. Defining Prevention Rationale: Defining prevention allows for the subsequent identification and organization of strategies. 33 Available at: http://www.sapr.mil/public/docs/reports/SecDef_Memo_and_DoD_SAPR_Prevention_Strategy_2014-2016.pdf 34 Annual Reports to Congress are available at: http://www.sapr.mil/index.php/annual-reports

By establishing the right command climate, ensuring leadership support, and empowering Service members to safely intervene, the Department of Defense will be the last place an offender wants to be.

Major General Jeffrey J. Snow Director, DoD SAPRO

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

40

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Synopsis of Progress: The DoD looked to the CDC for assistance in better defining prevention as it applies to sexual violence.35 The CDC identifies three levels of prevention based on when the prevention efforts occur:

Primary Prevention: Approaches that take place before sexual violence has occurred to prevent initial perpetration. Secondary Prevention: Immediate responses after sexual violence has occurred to address the early identification of victims and the short-term consequences of violence. Tertiary Prevention: Long-term responses after sexual violence has occurred to address the lasting consequences of violence and sex offender treatment interventions.

Evidence of Progress: The DoD placed Primary Prevention at the core of its focus in developing prevention-related tasks and initiatives. Primary Prevention is a systematic process that promotes healthy environments and behaviors and reduces the likelihood or frequency of sexual violence/assault before it occurs.36 It improves understanding of the underlying conditions in society that perpetuate sexual assault, which in turn enhances the ability to change those conditions. The preceding information is provided in greater detail in the 2014-2016 DoD Prevention Strategy signed by the Secretary of Defense on May 1, 2014.

35 “Sexual violence is any sexual act that is perpetrated against someone’s will, and encompasses a range of offenses, including a completed nonconsensual sex act (i.e., rape), an attempted nonconsensual sex act, abusive sexual contact (i.e., unwanted touching), and non-contact sexual abuse (e.g., threatened sexual violence, exhibitionism, verbal sexual harassment).” http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/sexualviolence/definitions.html, accessed Sept. 18, 2014. 36 Davis, R., Fujie Parks, L., & Cohen, L. (2006). Sexual Violence and the Spectrum of Prevention: Towards a community solution. Enola, PA: National Sexual Violence Resource Center, Prevention Institute.

Major General Jeffrey J. Snow, SAPRO Director, discusses new initiatives designed to continue efforts to eliminate sexual assault in the military, directs implementation of the updated sexual assault prevention strategy, and releases the annual report on sexual assault in the military for FY 2013.

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

41

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

D. Key Highlights 1. Evolution of DoD Prevention Strategy 2. SAPR Connect Community of Practice

1. Evolution of DoD Prevention Strategy Rationale: As unique subsets of U.S. society, the U.S. Armed Forces have cultures all their own. Effective Primary Prevention of sexual assault requires “population-based and/or environmental and system-level strategies, policies, and actions” that work to “modify and/or eliminate the events, conditions, situations or exposure to influences (risk factors) that result in the initiation of sexual assault.”37 Further, Primary Prevention includes “universal interventions directed at the general population as well as selected interventions aimed at those who may be at increased risk for sexual violence perpetration.”38

37 2014-2016 DoD Prevention Strategy, p. 2. 38 CDC (2004). Sexual violence prevention: beginning the dialogue. Atlanta, GA: CDC in DeGue, Sarah, Valle, Linda Anne, Holt, Milissa K., Massetti, Greta M., Matjasko, Jennifer L, and Tharp, Andra Teten, “A Systematic Review of Primary Prevention Strategies for Sexual Violence Perpetration,” Aggression and Violent Behavior, 19 (2004) 346-362.

Figure 2 – Influencing Behavior

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

42

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Changing well-established social norms requires an overhaul of entrenched knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors that support sexual assault. The influence of these factors beyond the individual can be so powerful that, as the Institute of Medicine concluded in its study on health promotion, “It is unreasonable to expect that people will change their behavior easily when so many forces in the social, cultural and physical environment conspire against such change.”39 Hence, the Department seeks to promote behaviors that define and support gender equity, healthy relationships, and conflict resolution (including safe and effective bystander intervention), with the goal of surpassing these barriers to change. Synopsis of Progress: A key Prevention LOE task included in the 2013 DoD SAPR Strategy was to review and update the 2008 DoD Sexual Assault Prevention Strategy. The 2008 Strategy established a rationale for greater prevention initiatives and identified a variety of means by which to promote prevention. However, it did not identify a means by which to promote unity of effort.

As previously noted, DoD embarked on a four-phased plan to revise the 2008 strategy that included multiple visits to existing programs, a vast exploration of academic literature, and consultations with several renowned subject matter experts from advocacy groups, government agencies, and educational institutions known for their innovative programs and research. Utilizing the consolidated results of the research and observations, SAPRO published the revised 2014-2016 DoD Sexual Assault Prevention Strategy (see pages 43-44 for more detail).

39 The Institute of Medicine (IOM) Report, “The Future of the Public’s Health in the 21st Century,” (IOM, 2003, p. 4).

Sailors and Marines gather on the flight deck of the multipurpose amphibious assault ship USS Bataan (LHD 5) to form a teal ribbon in support of SAAM, April 2013.

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

43

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

The 2014-2016 DoD Sexual Assault Prevention Strategy The objectives of the 2014-2016 Prevention Strategy are to achieve unity of effort and purpose across all of DoD in the execution of sexual assault prevention, to develop objective criteria for measuring progress, and to publish tasks that operationalize the Prevention LOE. The strategy’s vision is to ensure a military environment where every Service member lives and operates in a climate of mutual respect, free from sexual violence; where individuals are motivated and empowered to intervene against inappropriate behaviors; where effective sexual assault prevention practices are institutionalized across the DoD; and where the Department serves as a national leader in preventing sexual assault. Finally, the mission calls for the DoD to execute proactive and comprehensive sexual assault prevention programs in order to enable military readiness and reduce −with a goal to eliminate− sexual assault from the military. The updated strategy further enhances and augments existing efforts in the Prevention LOE by formalizing many of the successful ongoing initiatives, and standardizing practices and programs across the Department. The shift in emphasis is to a more complete, approach that includes the many spheres of influence in the “social ecological model (SEM).”40 (Figure 3) The SEM is a framework for behavioral change and intervention at various levels or spheres of influence and is utilized by numerous organizations. For example, the CDC uses the framework to understand different influences on a person’s values, attitudes, and behaviors and their relationship to one another. In addition, public health and safety organizations around the world employ this model to combat cancer, HIV, tobacco abuse, youth violence, and many other health-related issues.

Figure 3 – Social Ecological Model

The SEM model describes how each level of society has its own collection of risk factors and protective factors41 that must be considered when trying to achieve the prevention of sexual violence, as there are multiple levels of interconnected influences across society: • Individual-level influences involve biological factors, personal history, and individual characteristics that

increase or decrease the likelihood an individual will become a victim or perpetrator of violence. • Interpersonal relationship-level influences are factors that involve the interactions of peers, intimate partners,

and family members. • Community-level influences are factors at play in community and social environments and include an

individual’s experiences and relationships with schools, workplaces, and neighborhoods. • Societal-level influences are larger, macro-level risk and protective factors that influence sexual violence such

as gender inequality, religious or cultural belief systems, societal norms, and economic or social policies that create or sustain gaps and tensions between groups of people.

• To better understand the military environment in which sexual assaults occur, DoD leveraged the SEM to establish its own framework for understanding risk and protective factors, their influences, and their relationship to one another. In the 2014-2016 DoD Sexual Assault Prevention Strategy, the SEM was adapted to address the prevention of sexual assault in the military (Figure 4), and advocates prevention initiatives and intervention

40 Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 32(7), 513. 41 Risk factors increase the likelihood sexual violence will occur and protective factors decrease the likelihood sexual violence will occur, or buffer someone from becoming a victim or perpetrator of sexual violence.

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

44

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Figure 4 – DoD Social Ecological Model

across the spectrum of influence. The Department added an additional sphere – leaders – because they are the center of gravity in any prevention program. Leaders set the tone in word and deed, and their involvement is critical. Recognizing the essential role of leadership, DoD included leaders as a distinct sphere of influence to highlight the necessity that commanders and their staffs develop and execute tactics that target this “center of gravity” for prevention efforts. In the DoD SEM, the levels are as follows:

• Individual – Each person plays a role (beliefs, attitudes, and values) • Relationships – Family, friends, peers, coworkers • Leaders at all levels • DoD/Services/Units (“the military community”) • Society – Laws, policies and cultural norms The new strategy provides a roadmap for the delivery of consistent and effective prevention strategies and initiatives to address all the spheres of influence in the SEM. In order to address all the spheres of influence and reach the Strategy’s desired end states, prevention programs in the DoD shifted toward the integration of a variety of practices using an multidisciplinary, comprehensive approach. This paradigm shift in theoretical application was based on established research indicating single-faceted (e.g., training only or deterrence only) efforts have not shown long-term effectiveness in reducing sexual assault. The DoD researched promising practices and identified the following ten elements to include in all military sexual assault prevention programs: • Leadership Involvement at all Levels (“center of gravity”) • Peer to Peer Mentorship (informal leaders) • Personal Accountability • Organizational Support (resources) • Community Involvement • Deterrence • Communication • Incentives to Promote Prevention • Harm Reduction (aka Risk Avoidance/Risk Reduction) • Education and Training Leaders at all levels are the “center of gravity” for the prevention of sexual assault, as they are responsible for the climate of their unit and the welfare of their subordinates. Peer to peer mentorship promotes healthy relationships between peers, partners, family, and friends. Personal accountability for behavior enhances the unit climate of trust and safety. Organizational support involves the institutionalization of resources to support sexual assault prevention programs, to include manpower, budget, policies, and beyond. Community involvement extends the unit climate to the local community with the involvement of advocacy groups, healthcare services providers, family and social support service providers, and researchers, university faculty, epidemiologists, and subject matter experts grounded in scientific data. Specific actions ranging from deterrence of negative behaviors, targeted communication endorsing appropriate values, attitudes, and behaviors, incentives to promote prevention and harm/risk reduction tactics have shown to reduce the risks of sexual assault and help promote a healthy command climate. Lastly, education and training curricula that incorporates adult learning principles and is evidence-based, adapted to the environment, and responsive to the gender, culture, beliefs, and diverse needs of the targeted audiences improves knowledge, imparts skills, and influences attitudes and behaviors that support the concepts underlying the aforementioned ten prevention elements.

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

45

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

2. “DoD SAPR Connect” Community of Practice Disseminating best and promising practices Rationale: Given the size and global reach of the DoD, a means to connect personnel working the SAPR program worldwide is imperative. A military Community of Practice (CoP) focused on primary prevention of sexual assault provides a means to learn, share knowledge, and collaborate. Synopsis of Progress: In FY 2014, the DoD developed a CoP to allow the Department to leverage and advance research, as well as share promising practices and lessons learned with external experts, federal partners, Military Services, advocacy organizations, and educational institutions for prevention of sexual assault. DoD SAPR Connect is the overarching name for the Department’s collaboration and information- sharing CoP. Comprised of four “pillars” (Figure 5), SAPR Connect includes interfaces that range from virtual to face-to-face to webinars to a community toolkit.

• Virtual. The centerpiece of the

DoD’s virtual efforts is the presence of SAPR Connect on milSuite. This secured, collaborative environment features a variety of channels, including video sharing and a portion called “milBook,” a social media venue where members can post and share ideas. DoD also has a virtual presence with SAPR.mil, the website for DoD SAPRO, and with Defense Connect Online, the DoD’s means for holding on-line trainings and discussion forums.

• Face-To-Face. In-person meetings provide an opportunity to

bring the Service SAPR Program Managers (PMs) together to collaborate on DoD prevention efforts. Established in 2013, the DoD Sexual Assault Prevention Roundtable has served as a forum to communicate and share information across the Services on prevention-related issues. For example, this forum was used to introduce the initial concepts behind the updated 2014-2016 Prevention Strategy. DoD SAPRO site visits allow the Department to learn of new research and promising practices in use around the country. For example, in August 2014, SAPRO and the Service SAPR leads traveled to Atlanta to meet with CDC experts on research and practices that could further inform DoD prevention efforts.

Figure 5 – The four pillars of the SAPR Connect CoP

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

46

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

• Webinars. Held once a quarter (Q), webinars build awareness within DoD of new programs as well as share insights on experiences with ongoing efforts. Depending on the topic, DoD webinar participants can hear from internal DoD experts, other federal agencies or non-federal entities. To encourage participation from Sexual Assault Response Coordinators (SARCs), participants can earn Continuing Education Units (CEU) from webinar attendance to apply toward their D-SAACP maintenance requirements.

• Community Toolkit. These resources support prevention efforts, such as SAPR-related policy and strategy documents, core competencies and learning objectives for SAPR Training, and prevention-related posters, public service announcements, videos and media materials. Another tool, currently in draft, is the Commander’s Guide to Preventing Sexual Assault in the Military, a resource manual for commanders and those implementing sexual assault prevention programs. The Commander’s Guide will be a concise reference for unit leaders desiring assistance in implementing the core elements of the 2014-2016 Prevention Strategy.

Evidence of Progress: In May 2014, the Secretary of Defense directed the development of a military CoP.42 SAPRO developed the CoP in the months following and officially launched the SAPR Connect page on milSuite.mil in October 2014. SAPR Connect has membership from all four Services and the National Guard, including many personnel from overseas locations. As of October 2014, SAPRO has hosted five prevention webinars with 1,030 participants and awarded 1,000 CEUs. Topics thus far have covered Peer Education and Peer Mentors; a SAPR Program Highlight on prevention practices from the U.S. Army 704th Military Intelligence Brigade in Fort Meade, Maryland; Sexual Assault Offenders and Harm Reduction; the SEM supporting the DoD Sexual Assault Prevention Strategy; and the SAPR Connect CoP.

42 Memorandum from the Secretary of Defense, “Develop a Collaborative Forum for Sexual Assault Prevention Methods,” May 1, 2014.

Any big problem in society that is resolved has to begin at the top. Every leader in the military is focused on [sexual assault], so it is important that our people in the military institution know that the Secretary of Defense is very focused on stopping sexual assault in the military.

Chuck Hagel U.S. Secretary of Defense

during his visit to the Safe Helpline at RAINN April 21, 2014

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

47

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

E. Role of the Commander 1. Importance of Command Climate Commanders Leading Long-Term Organizational Change Rationale: Military-specific research highlights the relationship of a hostile work environment to incidents of sexual assault.43 Chief among these findings is that there is a strong positive correlation between the level of sexual harassment in a military unit and the sexual assault of personnel within that unit. Further, sexually demeaning, offensive and/or humiliating behaviors that are sometimes minimized and labeled as hazing or horseplay have been central features in past cases of male-on-male sexual assault. Leaders play a central role in the DoD strategy towards the prevention of sexual assault, as they provide a critical prevention capability in the Armed Forces unlike other sectors of US society that must capitalize on coalitions and networks to influence attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors of individuals and groups. As the “center of gravity” in the unit, military commanders are instrumental in setting the tone and climate. This approach places a high level of responsibility on commanders to set an example of appropriate behavior, to be proactive in identifying and rooting out inappropriate behaviors, and to mentor and educate unit members through targeted messaging on sexual assault prevention. Synopsis of Progress: To assist commanders, the Department has armed them with information, tools, and tactics to prevent sexual assault and other forms of misconduct in their units. From specialized leadership training to command climate surveys, commanders are equipped with information, tools, and resources to combat sexual assault and other problems that impact unit climate. To help commanders better understand the factors at play within their units and within each command, the Secretary of Defense and Congress both directed the use of a command climate assessment process (see Figure 6), required annually or within 120 days of a change in unit command. At the heart of the climate assessment is a unit survey developed by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI).44 The DEOCS assists commanders in identifying a wide variety of potentially damaging attitudes and behaviors within their respective units.

43 Harned, M., Ormerod, Al, Palmieri, P., Collinsworth, L., and Reed, M. (2002). Sexual Assault and Other Types of Sexual Harassment by Workplace Personnel: A Comparison of Antecedents and Consequences. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 7, 174-188. 44 The Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity (ODMEO) provides staff supervision of DEOMI.

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

48

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Figure 6 – The Climate Assessment Process

The DEOCS45 is an important assessment tool for commanders, as the feedback obtained from unit members enhances a leader’s knowledge about specific trends and behaviors within his or her unit and provides an avenue for unit members to confidentially communicate concerns. Responses to the survey are then used to spur additional information gathering and corrective action by unit leadership, as appropriate. Last year, Secretary Hagel directed the results of the DEOCS be provided to both the unit commander and the next level commander in the chain of command. This added layer of oversight provides another level of commander accountability as a part of a broader system of checks and balances. The Secretary further directed each of the Military Services to require commanders’ yearly evaluations to include an assessment of their ability to promote climates of dignity and respect.46 As a result, the Department has implemented measures that motivate commanders to promote and sustain healthy command climates. 45 For more information on the DEOCS, please see the Assessment (LOE 5) section. 46 Memorandum from the Secretary of Defense, Enhancing Commander Accountability (Elevate Command Climate Surveys) May 6, 2013.

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

49

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

As Figure 7 shows, the vast majority of Service members have never – and would never – commit a sexual assault.

Figure 7 – Promoting a Culture of Dignity and Respect

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

50

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Evidence of Progress:

• Metric Data: One of the metrics the Department developed uses a DoD-wide roll-up of three questions from the DEOCS that specifically address how Service members perceive unit command climate with regard to sexual assault prevention and response.47 The roll-up rates respondent assessments on a four- point scale. As this was a new metric developed for the Report to the President, data is available from February to September of 2014. o Key Findings:

 Overall, Service members perceived a favorable command climate with

regard to SAPR, consistently rating their command climate, on average, 3.3 to 3.4 on a 4 point scale. While these data may appear similar month after month, they represent the average responses from 100,000 to 200,000 different respondents each month. This suggests that many Service members across the Force have a favorable rating of their respective commands. However, the DEOCS is a convenience sample and not necessarily representative of the entire Force.

 Women perceived a slightly less favorable climate than men (Figure 8).

 Junior enlisted and Noncommissioned Officers (NCOs) perceived a slightly less favorable climate than Service members of all other ranks (Figure 9).

Figure 8 – Metric 4: Command Climate Index – Addressing Continuum of Harm by Gender

47 Additional information about this metric and the methodology it employs is available at Appendix B.

3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3

1

2

3

4

Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.

Me an

C om

m an

d Cl

im at

e I nd

ex

2014

Metric 4: Command Climate Index – Addressing Continuum of Harm by Gender

Men

Women

Le ss

fa vo

ra bl

e

M or

e fa

vo ra

bl e

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

51

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Figure 9 – Metric 4: Command Climate Index – Addressing Continuum of Harm by Rank

• Focus Group Feedback: In the Focus Groups fielded by DMDC,48 the

researchers asked participants about command climate. Focus group participants indicated their unit and senior leadership encouraged an environment of dignity and respect, and informed unit personnel that sexual assault and sexual harassment have no place in the military. Some individual Service member quotes include: o “I think along the same lines of a culture of dignity and respect, it kind of

encompasses all of that. It’s not just sexual assaults or anything, it’s just general respect of people.” (O2-O3 Female)

o “It’s not tolerated. No matter what pay grade you’re at, it’s not tolerated.” (E7-E9 Mixed Group)

o “We actually had our leadership read off what everyone in the past month had been sent home for, and that really opens up what you see and what’s going on. So it makes it more real.” (E1-E4 Male)

Focus group participants also indicated all pay grade levels within the military contribute to creating respectful environments: o “I think it does start up top, because in order for it to get pushed to the junior

level, it had to come from somewhere else, because most of us didn’t come in here with all these new ideas about how we are going to change the United States military.” (E1-E4 Male)

48 Additional information about the DMDC Focus Groups and the methodology employed is available in the DMDC FGSAPR report, which is Annex 3.

3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6

1

2

3

4

Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.

Me an

C om

m an

d Cl

im at

e I nd

ex

2014

Metric 4: Command Climate Index – Addressing Continuum of Harm by Rank

Jr. Enlisted/NCO

All Remaining Ranks

Le ss

fa vo

ra bl

e

M or

e fa

vo ra

bl e

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

52

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

o “Can I say it works both ways? I feel like top down sets direction of a culture, of a desired culture change. If you set a policy and you have people who are enforcing that policy… and it sets an expectation. And then you have people underneath [who] are policing each other to make sure that they respect them.” (E1-E4 Male)

o “It’s got to be collaborative. I think the top has got to change their old ways of thinking, and then the new people have to know what is not acceptable and they have to meet in the middle.” (E3-E4 Female)

2. Commander’s Guide to Preventing Sexual Assault To assist commanders with addressing sexual assault in their respective organizations, DoD is developing a Commander’s Guide to Preventing Sexual Assault in the Military. It is designed to be a concise reference to assist installation and tactical commanders, unit leaders, DoD civilian supervisors, and SARCs. The guide is also intended to be a reference for help in selecting and implementing prevention practices that could be used at any installation or command, with some adaptation.

F. Training Enhancements

Rationale: A number of training enhancements were directed over the past three years, required by either the Secretary of Defense or Congress via NDAA provisions. The Military Services and DoD SAPRO were directed to work collaboratively to develop a set of core competencies and learning objectives to assure consistency and effectiveness in training at all command levels.

Synopsis of Progress: Significant enhancements for SAPR-related training have been implemented across the Department, including for military personnel, first responders, those involved in the investigative or legal aspects, and those who work in a victim support capacity. While much of the training upgrades focus on specific populations on the response side, prevention-related training has advanced profoundly to incorporate a much more comprehensive and effective approach that impacts individuals on many levels to reinforce the Department’s commitment to preventing sexual assault. More specifically, the implementation effort occurred throughout FY 2014 as a coordinated effort among the Services, the NGB, and the entire DoD community, underscoring the continued resolve of the Department to prevent sexual assault.

Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Central Command, U.S. 5th Fleet, Combined Maritime Forces, Vice Adm. John Miller gives opening remarks during a SAPR stand-down at Naval Support Activity Bahrain.

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

53

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Evidence of Progress: The Department standardized SAPR training across the Services in 2013. Core competencies and learning objectives were identified, defined, and implemented so that all Service members receive the same level of training. Below is a list of the many SAPR training upgrades and augmentations implemented across the Force:

• Incorporation of specific SAPR monitoring, measures, and education into normal command training, readiness, and safety forums (e.g., quarterly training guidance, unit status reports, safety briefings)

• Expansion of SAPR Training to include Recruit Sustainment Programs, Student Flight Programs, and National Guard prior to arrival at Basic Training

• Enhancement and integration of SAPR training into:

o All levels of Professional Military Education (PME) o Pre-Command and Senior Enlisted Leader Training o Accession Training (within 14 days of going on active duty) o Initial Military Training o SAPR Annual Training o SAPR Pre- and Post-Deployment Training

• Focus Group Feedback: In the Focus Groups fielded by DMDC,49 focus group trainees indicated they first received sexual assault prevention and response training in boot camp or basic training.

o “Boot camp… every day.” (E1-E4 Male)

o “[At Basic Training, received training] at least weekly. And I don’t think a week went by that there wasn’t something on it.” (E1-E4 Male)

G. From Awareness to Action 1. Sexual Assault Awareness Month (SAAM)

Rationale: As a national event, SAAM offers a unique opportunity to call attention to the problem of sexual assault and encourage Service members to take an active role in prevention. Recognized annually throughout the month of April, SAAM offers a chance to build on existing momentum to fight the crime of sexual assault and to promote a culture of dignity and respect within the military community. While the DoD’s prevention mission continues year-round, SAAM serves as a conduit for continued awareness as

49 Additional information about the DMDC Focus Groups and the methodology employed is available in the DMDC FGSAPR report, which is Annex 3.

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

54

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

well as a re-emphasis of the seriousness of the crime and the importance of everyone’s respective part in combatting and eradicating it from the ranks.

Synopsis of Progress: The Department has observed SAAM every April since 2005. Throughout the years, DoD SAPRO has designed SAAM materials to support installation and unit sexual assault prevention efforts during the month. The Department also uses SAAM to promote the multi- disciplinary approach to prevention and victim advocacy, specifically services to help victims, implemented by DoD in recent years, including the DoD Safe Helpline, the SVC, and professional and credentialed SARCs and SAPR VAs, among others. For April 2015, the Department will be incorporating prevention into the month’s name, terming it Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month (SAAPM). The 2015 theme is, “Eliminate Sexual Assault. Know Your Part. Do Your Part.” This focus highlights the fact that everyone in the military has a role in prevention, no matter one’s rank, position, or otherwise.

Evidence of Progress:

• Recent Activity: In April 2014, the Department employed the theme “Live Our Values: Step Up to Stop Sexual Assault.” Major General Jeffrey J. Snow, Director, SAPRO, visited troops at Fort Belvoir, Virginia to kick off SAAM and encouraged social courage to combat sexual assault. “We all have a critical role in preventing and responding to sexual assault,” said Major General Snow. “To be successful, leaders need to lead on this issue and every [Service member] needs to personally demonstrate the kind of social courage it takes to Step Up and Stop Sexual Assault.” Major General Snow and Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel also visited the DoD Safe Helpline to commemorate SAAM and the third- anniversary of the confidential and anonymous hotline for victims.

• Survey Results: In the 2012 Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of the Active Duty, 67 percent of women and 74 percent of men indicated they were aware of their installation’s SAAM programs. These results also indicate an increase in awareness since the prior survey in 2010. This suggests that SAAM activities are continuing to register with a growing majority of Service members.

2. Prevention Innovation Award Rationale: Efforts to encourage widespread participation in prevention can take many forms. Awards programs are a useful means to promote such participation, especially from those Service members whose duties do not usually include SAPR.

Figure 10 – The 2014 SAAM poster

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

55

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Synopsis of Progress: In July 2014, SAPRO announced the launch of the Sexual Assault Prevention Innovation Award to annually recognize a group or individual (military or civilian) from each military component who contributed or developed an innovative idea, concept, methodology, or approach to positively impact sexual assault prevention efforts either on an installation, in a deployed environment, or in a reserve component. This award recognizes individuals or groups whose work has been particularly noteworthy and demonstrates outstanding service in support of Service members. Awardees are recognized each year in October to coincide with numerous crime-prevention awareness efforts underway across the country. A total of six awards were presented to individuals or groups from the Military components. Evidence of Progress: In October 2014, Major General Snow honored the 2014 recipients.50 “The 2014 Prevention Innovation awardees deserve recognition for the mark they have made in their military environment by making a personal commitment to eliminate sexual assault,” General Snow said. “Earlier this year, Secretary Hagel provided a roadmap for the delivery of consistent and effective prevention strategies, and SAPR personnel are leading the way with innovative ways to incorporate core values and shape the environment in which Service members live and work.” 3. Encourage Active Bystander Intervention Rationale: Active Bystander Intervention is a “philosophy and strategy for prevention of various types of violence, including bullying, sexual harassment, sexual assault, and intimate partner violence.”51 The approach is based on evidence that “people make decisions and continue behaviors based on…the cultural conditioning and norms [learned] through subtle reactions from others” and the resultant expectations of social interaction.52 Bystander intervention is unique in that it:

• Discourages victim blaming • Offers the chance to change social norms

50 Available at: http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=123423. 51 Referenced on October 20, 2014, and available at: http://wiki.preventconnect.org/Bystander+Intervention. 52 Ibid.

Service members and civilians pose for a group photo before the start of a 5K Run/Walk in support of SAAM at Kandahar Airfield in Kandahar province, Afghanistan, April 1, 2013.

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

56

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

• Shifts responsibility to both men and women 53

Synopsis of Progress: The Department has advocated the use of Active Bystander Intervention techniques to prevent sexual assault since the 2008 Prevention Strategy. DoD SAPRO and the Services have created a wide variety of programs and materials that encourage military members to safely intervene when they see situations at risk for sexual assault. Evidence of Progress: A number of findings indicate that Service members are willing and capable of safely intervening when presented with situations they believe to be at risk for sexual assault.

• Key Survey Findings: The Department developed a question for the DEOCS that assessed Service member experience with Bystander Intervention. On the survey, respondents were asked if in the past 12 months, they had observed a situation they believed to be at risk for sexual assault. If they observed a high risk situation, they were then asked what action they took.

o Bystander intervention is high (87%) among Service members who observed

a situation at risk for sexual assault

o About 4 percent of monthly respondents indicate seeing a situation at risk

• Focus Groups: In the Focus Groups fielded by DMDC, the researchers asked participants their willingness to intervene in situations that appeared to be at risk for sexual assault. Many focus group participants indicated that they would step in to prevent potential sexual assaults in a social situation (e.g., a bar) if they saw a “red flag”; others indicated that stepping in would depend on the person and the situation. An additional finding was that focus group participants indicated the willingness to step in regardless of how they are perceived. In professional situations, focus group participants indicated they would also step in if they witnessed inappropriate workplace behaviors. Overall, it was evident that the vast majority of Service members participating in the focus group effort were willing to engage in bystander intervention, regardless of whether in a social or professional situation, without concern of how they would be perceived for doing

53 Ibid.

Staff Sgt. Camesha Rives, 319th Force Support Squadron, decided to become a SAPR VA while stationed Ghedi Air Base, Italy. Her philosophy on sexual assault prevention is it all comes down to being vigilant.

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

57

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

so. This reflects the commitment of fellow Service members to uphold a climate of dignity and respect. Some quotes include: o “If the person looks uncomfortable, you can come up and say, ‘hey, are you

ready to go?’” (E1-E4 Male)

o “Most of us would. If we see a fellow Service member [who] does not want the attention he or she is receiving, most of us would step in and help.” (E1-E4 Male)

o “Any situation that is unfit and wrong… it’s your job to step up and do

something about it.” (E1-E4 Female)

o “I will say one thing, the uniform protects the uniform. They take care of their own.” (E3-E4 Female)

H. Reducing the Annual Occurrence of Sexual Assault Rationale: Regularly measuring the past-year prevalence (occurrence) of sexual assault is an important means of assessing the extent of the problem in a population. Changes in prevalence over time are also important to follow, as such change may provide some indication of the impact of prevention work. However, given the complex nature of the problem and the many challenges associated with measuring the crime, it is difficult to identify with certainty the exact contribution of prevention programming to changes in sexual assault prevalence. Synopsis of Progress: The Department has been using the WGRA since 2006 to follow the past year prevalence of USC, the survey term for the crimes that constitute sexual assault in military law. For Active Duty women, the FY 2014 USC rate is statistically lower than the USC rate found in FY 2012 (4.3 percent versus 6.1 percent, respectively). For Active Duty men, the FY 2014 USC rate is statistically the same as the USC rate found in FY 2012 (0.9 percent versus 1.2 percent, respectively) (Figure 11). Note: Past-year prevalence estimates in this report are primarily drawn from the measure of USC administered in the FY 2012 Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of the Active Duty and as part of the FY 2014 RAND Military Workplace Study (RMWS). Also in FY 2014, RAND developed and administered a past-year prevalence estimate of sexual assault that found statistically similar prevalence rates. However, there are some differences between USC and RAND’s sexual assault measure. These differences are explained in greater detail in RAND’s initial findings (see Annex 1). RAND will be conducting additional analysis this winter and provide greater detail about the similarities and differences of these two measures in DoD’s Annual Report to Congress on SAPR, to be released in April 2015.

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

58

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Evidence of Progress:

Figure 11 – Metric 1a: Past Year Prevalence of USC

I. Partnerships/Collaborations54 Identifying Potential Solutions Rationale: Sexual assault is a societal challenge that affects more than just the U.S. military. Leveraging partnerships and collaborations across various sectors of society provides significant advantages and allows the Department to remain at the cutting edge of the latest research and initiatives regarding sexual assault prevention. Synopsis of Progress: DoD proactively solicited information, identified best and promising practices, consulted subject matter experts, and conducted research on this topic to inform its programs and strategies. In the past year alone, the SAPRO Prevention Team held more than 45 sessions with subject matter experts to identify 54 Any reference to any non-federal entity is not intended to be an endorsement of that entity by DoD.

6.8% 4.4%

6.1% 4.3%

1.8% 0.9% 1.2% 0.9%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

CY06 FY10 FY12 FY14

Un wa

nt ed

S ex

ua l C

on ta

ct P

re va

len ce

R at

e

Calendar Year and Fiscal Year

Metric 1a: Past Year Prevalence of Unwanted Sexual Contact

Women

Men

I am impressed by the scope and focus of DoD’s strategy for addressing this important public health problem. Building a strategy based on what works in prevention holds great promise for achieving positive change.

Dr. James Mercy

Acting Director, Division of Violence Prevention Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

on the 2014-2016 DoD Prevention Strategy

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

59

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

proven and successful prevention practices. Subject matter experts included representatives from sexual assault prevention, victim advocacy, and training organizations; large public universities (e.g., Pennsylvania State University, University of Michigan, the University of Maryland); government agencies (e.g., FBI, CDC, the Peace Corps, United States Institute of Peace); and subject matter experts who have experience working in the DoD environment. In addition, various experts across the board have endorsed the prevention approach DoD has developed, to include the revised Prevention Strategy. The individual Services and the NGB have also reached out to engage with other government and civilian experts to inform their Service-specific programs, and identified best/promising practices to share at the DoD Sexual Assault Prevention Roundtable. Further, DoD SAPR professionals participated at numerous events, exchanged information on panels at conferences, and served as consultants on review boards and task forces focused on sexual assault. Most recently, DoD SAPRO was asked to participate in a consulting role on the White House’s Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault. Over a nine-month period, DoD SAPRO representatives attended meetings and provided recommendations based on DoD best practices to inform the Task Force. Evidence of Progress: Much of the contributions by prevention experts were incorporated into the 2014-2016 Prevention Strategy signed by the Secretary of Defense on May 1, 2014.55 In addition, DoD SAPR program components, climate survey questions, and bystander intervention materials were leveraged by the White House Task Force in “Not Alone: The First Report of the White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault,” that was released in April of 2014.56

55 Available at: www.sapr.mil/public/docs/reports/SecDef_Memo_and_DoD_SAPR_Prevention_Strategy_2014-2016.pdf. 56 Available at: https://www.notalone.gov/assets/report.pdf.

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

60

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

J. Sexual Assault – High Risk Populations Of particular concern to the Department is the demographic age range of 17-24; the majority of victims and many perpetrators are within this age group. Of the 3,337 Unrestricted Reports of sexual assault in the DoD in FY 2013, 65 percent of the victims and 41 percent of the alleged perpetrators were between the ages of 16 and 24.57 While CDC found the rates of sexual assault for military women are no different than rates of sexual assault for women in the civilian sector, it also determined that younger age tended to be a demographic factor that increased risk for sexual assault.58 U.S. universities and colleges are institutions that also have many people in the 17 to 24 age bracket. They also find themselves grappling with the problem of sexual assault: The Campus Sexual Assault Study, prepared for the National Institute of Justice in 2007, found that 19 percent of women reported “experiencing completed or attempted sexual assault since entering college.” The undergraduates attending the Department’s three Service academies – the U.S. Military Academy (USMA), the U.S. Naval Academy (USNA), and the U.S. Air Force Academy (USAFA) – also tend to be within this high-risk demographic for sexual assault. Over the past several years, the Department has placed considerable energy and emphasis on the MSAs SAPR programs. A critical aspect of these ongoing efforts is encouraging cadets and midshipmen to embrace a culture of dignity and respect and instilling in these future leaders the social courage to challenge those who do not. Examples of initiatives the Department has launched to address sexual assault at the MSAs include:

• Enhancing strategic planning to align MSA SAPR strategic plan with Department and Service SAPR plans

• Enhancing program effectiveness by involving cadets and midshipmen in command climate surveys and other assessment tools

• Advancing and sustaining appropriate culture by innovating and implementing

solutions that address concerns of social retaliation among peers, employ direct engagement with leaders of cadet/midshipmen organizations, and providing cadet and midshipmen influencers with the skills to strengthen their ongoing mentorship programs

57 Provisional data indicates similar trending for FY 2014. 58 See the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey at: http://www.sapr.mil/public/docs/research/2010_National_Intimate_Partner_and_Sexual_Violence_Survey-Technical_Report.pdf.

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

61

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

• Enhancing comprehension by developing sexual harassment and assault learning objectives for MSA curricula

• Enhancing alcohol training for cadets and midshipmen

In January 2014, the President and Vice President established the “White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault” in order to develop strategies and recommendations to help prevent campus sexual assault. DoD participated in an advisory role on the Task Force, which featured subject matter experts from the Department of Education, the DOJ, and the White House. In April 2014, the Task Force presented its report, “Not Alone: The First Report of the White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault.” In October 2014, the White House Task Force launched a new public awareness and education campaign known as, It’s on Us. The It’s on Us campaign is aimed at encouraging college students and all members of campus communities to be more engaged with campus sexual assault prevention efforts. The Task Force advocates that college students and all members of the campus community have access to confidential reporting, professional victim advocacy, climate surveys, and prevention initiatives featuring bystander intervention. These recommendations are all included in current policy at the MSAs and throughout the entire Department. Further, all three MSA superintendents attended the launch event at the White House on September 19, 2014. The MSAs have committed to participate in the It’s on Us campaign to augment their existing prevention programs: USMA will:

• Use the campaign and Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention (SHARP) Summit outcomes to drive the way ahead for the entire U.S. Corps of Cadets, led by cadet leadership and the Cadets Against Sexual Harassment and Assault (CASH/A) Executive Committee

• Promote the campaign in a variety of cadet-focused social events and incorporate It’s on Us into monthly training for the 4,400 cadets at USMA

• Integrate the tenets of It’s on Us as key features of the USMA strategic plan and

character development strategy

• Incorporate It’s On Us into The Pointer View (the command information paper) on a quarterly basis and promote it on West Point social media pages

Figure 12 – The White House Task Force It’s On Us campaign

logo

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

62

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

USNA will:

• Introduce It’s On Us to the 4,500-member Brigade of Midshipmen at a Brigade- wide event, as part of an ongoing series of initiatives and events in support of sexual assault prevention

• Integrate It’s On Us into Midshipmen peer education sessions, facilitated by Midshipmen GUIDEs (Guidance, Understanding, Information, Direction, and Education) to promote the campaign at the Company level (groups of about 150 Midshipmen)

• Modify the USNA website and use social media to promote the campaign to the

Brigade of Midshipmen, faculty, and staff

• Create a Midshipmen-led video to promote the campaign, as part of an ongoing sexual assault prevention video series

• Promote It’s On Us at academy football games to further reach the Brigade,

Alumni, and the supporting community USAFA will:

• Strategically engage senior leaders in the Superintendent’s Council to advance It’s On Us throughout USAFA organizations

• Operationally integrate messaging into character and academic curriculum via the Dean of Faculty’s Making Excellence Inclusive Committee, the Respect for Human Dignity Outcome Team, and the Commandant of Cadet’s Center for Character and Leadership Development

• Tactically ensure It’s On Us is woven into the fabric of all ongoing educational and training initiatives by:

o Launching the campaign in coordination with the cadet leadership and PEERs (Personal Ethics and Education Representatives – cadets selected to address culture, climate, and inclusivity concerns)

o Marketing promotional materials from the campaign website and providing each cadet with a hard copy of the It’s On Us Pledge

o Using the base paper and social media to promote campaign materials

including the It’s On Us logo, educational content, and daily tweets

o Integrating It’s On Us into ongoing cadet Active Bystander Intervention training

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

63

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

o Highlighting the campaign during Basic Training, January Anti-Stalking Awareness Month, and April SAAM

K. Conclusion

This deliberate DoD-wide approach to prevention reinforces a climate where sexual assault is seen as unacceptable not just because it is illegal, but because it is counter to core military values. The Department has consistently and steadily augmented the depth and breadth of its approach to the prevention of sexual assault. This conceptual evolution of sexual assault prevention has advanced from essentially a two-dimensional training and awareness campaign to a three-dimensional, adaptable systems approach, synchronized and institutionalized across the Armed Forces, and encompassing multiple elements beyond training. While there is no single “silver bullet” solution, as the President recognized, this innovative prevention strategy allows for new promising practices to be incorporated, assessed, and adapted accordingly.

Prevention is an ongoing effort that must be continued and reinforced across the Total Force, from accession to the last day in uniform. The Department intensified its focus on Primary Prevention to ensure a more comprehensive and strategic approach in its commitment to eliminate sexual assault from its ranks. With a revised Prevention Strategy and the establishment of a collaborative CoP, DoD has demonstrated its commitment to upholding the cultural imperatives of mutual respect and trust, professional values, and team commitment that promote an environment where sexual assault is not tolerated, condoned, or ignored.

Prevention Initiatives – Progress at a Glance

Action Status Defining the problem Complete  Defining prevention Complete  Develop a DoD-specific strategy Complete  Implement strategy and solutions In Progress Promote and sustain organizational prevention initiatives In Progress  Encourage Active Bystander Intervention In Progress  Reduce the annual occurrence of sexual assault In Progress Identify potential solutions Complete   Clear evidence of progress Indications of progress  Progress not evident

There is no silver bullet to solving this problem. This is going to require a sustained effort over a long period of time.

Barack Obama President of the United States

May 16, 2013

III. Prevention (LOE 1)

64

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Sustained prevention initiatives, along with committed leadership engagement and the acceptance of an ethos of dignity throughout the Department, will help to reduce – with the goal of eliminating – sexual assault in the military. Augmentations and enhancements to the Prevention effort serve to increase the likelihood of a more informed military that is intolerant of offensive behavior and a hostile command climate. That said, if and when an incident of sexual assault occurs, the DoD has established a comprehensive Response System that (1) serves to ensure every Unrestricted Report of sexual assault is referred for investigation, (2) holds offenders appropriately accountable, and (3) supports victims who file either Unrestricted or Restricted Reports throughout the process with first-class care provided by fully-trained response personnel. The Response System component of SAPR incorporates the three LOEs below that demonstrate the DoD’s uncompromised commitment to victim support:

• Investigation (LOE 2) • Accountability (LOE 3) • Victim Assistance and Advocacy (LOE 4)

The following three sections will expand on each LOE under the Response System, providing detailed information on the enhancements to the DoD’s capabilities to provide victims with the privacy they desire, the sensitivity they deserve, and the professional response this crime demands.

IV. INVESTIGATION (LOE 2)

65

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

A. Introduction When a victim files an Unrestricted Report, or a third party reports an allegation of a sexual assault, the matter is referred to the Services’ MCIO59 for a professional and independent investigation. Regardless of the severity of an allegation, MCIOs hold primary responsibility for the investigation of all sexual assault allegations under the jurisdiction of the UCMJ. Upon receipt of a criminal allegation, an MCIO has three goals in conducting an investigation:

• Identify what crimes have been committed • Identify who has been victimized • Identify who may be held appropriately accountable for the crime

Per DoD policy, all reports of sexual assault must be referred to the MCIOs for investigation. DoD policy also prohibits commanders from investigating or evaluating the validity of a sexual assault report themselves. Those commanders who receive information about a sexual assault and fail to provide such information to an MCIO may be subject to disciplinary action. The Department employs expert investigative capabilities that enable professional, responsive, and accurate investigations independent of the chain of command – MCIOs are not under the command of the leadership of the installation to which they are assigned. In addition, once an investigation has been initiated, only the Secretary of the Military Department involved may close an investigation. In recent years, MCIOs have sought out and applied scientifically-informed investigative techniques that optimize the recovery of physical and testimonial evidence while mitigating the potential for re- traumatizing a victim.

59 Army Criminal Investigations Division (CID), NCIS, and AFOSI.

Objective: Achieve high competence in the investigation of sexual assault. End state: Investigative resources yield timely and accurate results.

The DoD has done an incredible amount of work in a short amount of time combatting sexual assault and violence against women. We have never seen that kind of change in a civilian community and I just wish more people would recognize that fact.

Joanne Archambault Executive Director of End Violence Against Women

IV. Investigation (LOE 2)

66

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

This section highlights examples of DoD’s significant progress over the past three years with regard to achieving high competence in the investigation of sexual assault and ensuring investigative resources yield timely and complete investigations.

B. Key Highlight Special Victim Investigation and Prosecution (SVIP) Capability Rationale: Available research suggests there is a benefit60 to having a distinct, recognizable group of specially trained investigators, prosecutors, and legal support personnel who collaborate on a regular basis to work sexual assault cases. Given the commonality of criminal behaviors and special investigative techniques required to resolve allegations of child abuse, domestic violence, and sexual assault offenses,61 the Department believes there is substantive benefit to fielding a cadre of experienced professionals that understand the special sensitivities involved in these forms of interpersonal violence.

Synopsis of Progress: As part of the Leadership, Education, Accountability and Discipline (LEAD) Act of 2012 on Sexual Assault Prevention, the Secretary of Defense proposed legislation to Congress that would establish an SVIP capability. This proposal was ultimately incorporated in the NDAA for FY 2013, Section 573, which required the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the Armed Services Committees of the House of Representatives and the Senate describing the plans and timelines for establishing such a capability in each Military Department.

At the request of Undersecretary of Defense (Personnel & Readiness) (USD(P&R)), SAPRO facilitated a working group to develop plans for the implementation of a Department-wide SVIP capability. This working group included representatives from each Military Department, the MCIOs, the NGB, the DoD OGC, and other components within the USD(P&R), including Health Affairs, Reserve Affairs, the Office of Legal Policy, and FAP. The DoD IG also sent a representative to the working group meetings as a consultant to advise on criminal investigative policy matters.

The Department’s SVIP plan was established using the following key principles:

• SVIP will be a capability, not a specific person, unit or team, to provide each of the Military Services flexibility in implementation

• SVIP capability will be standardized and consistent throughout the Department

60 Greeson, M. and Campbell, R. (2013) Sexual Assault Response Teams (SARTs): An Empirical Review of Their Effectiveness and Challenges to Successful Implementation. Trauma Violence and Abuse, 14, 83-95. 61 Sex crimes against children and spouses are not contained in this report because they fall under the purview of DoD FAP.

IV. Investigation (LOE 2)

67

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

• SVIP will be available globally where our DoD members serve and where incidents are investigated and prosecuted, as appropriate

In the case of adult sexual assault, the SVIP process is activated when an Unrestricted Report of a qualifying offense is made to law enforcement personnel. Restricted (confidential) Reports of adult sexual assault or domestic violence do not trigger the SVIP, since the commander and law enforcement are not contacted. Although Victim Witness Assistance Program (VWAP) personnel are part of the SVIP capability, SARCs and VAs are not. However, SARCs and SAPR VAs must be notified of every incident of sexual assault involving Service members. When notified, the SARC or a SAPR VA responds and offers the victim access to a Sexual Assault Forensic Exam (SAFE), advocacy services, as well as facilitates victim access to healthcare (medical and mental health), legal services and victims’ counsel, if eligible. Personnel who comprise the SVIP capability include MCIO investigators, judge advocates (JA), VWAP personnel, and paralegal support personnel, all of whom receive specialized training according to their role. Each Military Service ensures the personnel selected for SVIP cases receive the requisite specialized training on victims’ rights, issues unique to sexual assault, and best practices for navigating victims through the military justice system. To facilitate the continuity of care and advocacy, SVIP personnel collaborate with SAPR Program personnel, including SARCs, SAPR VAs and victims’ counsel when assigned. SVIP legal and investigative representatives participate in monthly sexual assault Case Management Group (CMG) meetings to review individual cases. Further, the specialized training developed for building and sustaining an SVIP program contains a specific focus on the impact of sexual assault trauma on victims, to include its effect on memory and counterintuitive behaviors. Evidence of Progress: The report required by the NDAA for FY 2013 was provided to Congress on December 12, 2013.62 The DoD IG developed policy and procedures for the MCIO SVIP capability in DTM 14-002, The Establishment of SVC within the MCIOs, which was published on February 11, 2014.63

62 Available at: http://www.sapr.mil/public/docs/reports/DoD_SpecialVictimsCapabilities_Report_20131213.pdf 63 Available at: http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/DTM-14-002.pdf. Note: Special Victim Capability has since been re-named the Special Victim Investigation and Prosecution (SVIP) capability so as not to be confused with the Special Victims’ Counsel (SVC) program, which provides attorneys to represent the interests of victims of sexual assault in the military justice process.

SVIP Team Members MCIO Investigators

Judge Advocates Victim Witness Assistance Program Personnel

Paralegal Support Personnel

IV. Investigation (LOE 2)

68

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

The SVIP program is a key enhancement in the Response System as it demonstrates a multidisciplinary, coordinated approach to victim support and offender accountability. This capability adds tremendous value to a system where people are more prepared and sensitive to perform their role which, in turn, can lead to increased victim confidence and satisfaction.

C. Role of the Commander Rationale: Although commanders are essential to the Department’s overall SAPR strategy, DoD policy requires the criminal investigative process to be independent of the chain of command. In other words, commanders may not investigate sexual assaults; that is the job of independent MCIOs. Synopsis of Progress: A commanding officer who receives a report of a sexual assault involving a Service member in his or her chain of command must immediately report it to the assigned MCIO. A commander of a victim or offender may not ignore a complaint or attempt to evaluate its authenticity by conducting his or her own investigation into the matter. These “Commander Directed Investigations” into sexual assault allegations are specifically prohibited by DoD policy. However, during the course of an investigation, a commander has a duty to ensure both the victim and the offender are connected with the appropriate services. Guidance for commanders is published in DoDI 6495.02, SAPR Program Procedures64 and available in the DoD SAPR Policy Toolkit.65 In support of everyone’s safety, commanders may issue military protective orders, which are binding on military members. Commanders are also required to meet monthly with the installation’s CMG. The CMG, which is chaired by the installation commander or the deputy commander, meets on a monthly basis to review individual cases of Unrestricted Reports of sexual assault, facilitate monthly victim updates, direct system coordination, accountability, and victim access to quality services. Throughout the course of the investigation, the commander is required to consult with the victim, and ensure the victim is connected with the appropriate support resources. Commanders also have a responsibility to provide victims with monthly updates on the progress of their cases. Commanders also have a similar responsibility to ensure the accused’s rights are preserved and to provide for the accused’s well-being. Evidence of Progress: The DoD SES asked respondents about support they received from their commander or unit director. Of the 64 percent of respondents that made an Unrestricted Report and spoke to their unit commander/director about the sexual assault:

64 Available at: http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/649502p.pdf. 65 Available at: http://www.sapr.mil/public/docs/miscellaneous/toolkit/COMMANDER_CHECKLIST.pdf.

IV. Investigation (LOE 2)

69

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

• More than two-thirds agreed the unit commander/director supported them (82%), took steps to address their privacy and confidentiality (80%), treated them professionally (79%), listened to them without judgment (78%), and thoroughly answered their questions (70%)

• About three-quarters (73%) indicated that overall they were satisfied with the unit commander/director’s response to the sexual assault

D. Training Enhancements 1. Improving Investigator Training Rationale: Trained investigators, empowered with the latest research on the impact of trauma on memory and recall, are likely to improve the victim’s experience with the military justice system. In addition, highly trained investigators are more likely to benefit from an improved understanding of common offender behaviors and how such behaviors can help them identify important physical and testimonial evidence. Synopsis of Progress: Each of the Military Services has taken steps to refine the training and resources of criminal investigators supporting sexual assault response since the Department launched the SAPR program in 2005. Each year, thousands of investigators participate in specialized training on how to best engage sexual assault victims. In order to determine whether MCIO Sexual Assault Investigation Training was adequately supporting the Department, the DoD IG conducted a review of the MCIO’s sexual assault investigation training.66 Findings revealed that each MCIO received the required initial baseline and periodic refresher training. However, between MCIOs, the training hours devoted to initial baseline training tasks varied, and none measured the effectiveness of refresher training. Additionally, the MCIOs were found to be providing advanced Sexual Assault Investigation Training to assigned criminal investigative personnel who may conduct sexual assault investigations. As a result of the review, the DoD IG recommended the MCIOs form a working group to review (1) initial baseline sexual assault investigation training programs to establish common criteria and minimum requirements, (2) periodic refresher sexual assault investigation training programs to establish common criteria and minimum requirements for measuring effectiveness, and (3) advanced sexual assault investigation training programs to further capitalize on efforts to leverage training resources and expertise. These recommendations have been implemented. Evidence of Progress: The MCIOs are now providing improved sexual assault investigator training in support of their fielding of the SVIP capability. All three MCIOs deliver substantive sexual assault investigation training, among other training focus areas, as part of their foundational investigator courses including advanced training for investigating special victim offenses. All MCIO basic investigator course attendees take

66 Available at: http://www.dodig.mil/pubs/documents/DODIG-2013-043.pdf.

IV. Investigation (LOE 2)

70

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

several written examinations on areas of instruction and must demonstrate a minimum level of mastery in order to graduate. While many of the skills necessary for the investigation of special victim cases are the same as those needed for other criminal investigations – preserving crime scenes, collecting evidence, testifying at trial – SVIP offenses require additional proficiencies, advanced training and techniques, and heightened sensitivity to victims’ needs. MCIO investigators assigned to their Service’s SVIP capability are specifically trained to respond to and investigate all SVIP covered offenses. The selection of MCIO investigators for the SVIP capability is contingent on their completion of specialized training. At a minimum, DTM 14-002 requires this training to cover the following competencies:

• Legal jurisdiction for conducting criminal investigations

• Elements of proof for SVIP covered offenses

• Crime scene management

• Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) collection requirements

• Identifying, obtaining, preserving, and transporting forensic evidence

• Rights of crime victims and available victim and witness assistance, support, and

counseling services available

• Sensitivities associated with child abuse victims, including but not limited to interviewing techniques, SAFE kits, risk factors, and protective orders

• Sensitivities associated with victims of sexual assault, including but not limited to

interviewing techniques, impact of trauma, SAFE kits and medical treatment, counseling, victim support, establishing victim trust and transparency, impact of alcohol and drugs, and protective orders67

After individual investigative agents have completed all the required training, they are certified by their respective MCIO to conduct investigations meeting the SVIP criteria. Additional evidence of progress can be found in the fact that all three MCIOs now train their agents to use trauma-informed interviewing techniques. At the U.S. Army Military Police School (USAMPS), Criminal Investigation Command (CID) agents and Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) agents learn a technique called the Forensic Experiential Trauma Interview (FETI). This new interview technique draws on established practices of child forensic interview protocols, critical incident stress 67 Available at: http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/DTM-14-002.pdf.

IV. Investigation (LOE 2)

71

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

management, and motivational interviewing techniques to help agents work with victims to obtain more information about crimes, potentially leading to improved offender accountability. The principles of the training provide agents with the knowledge and skills to better understand fundamentals of neuroscience, trauma, and effective victim interviewing. Since 2009, more than 1,397 special agents and prosecutors from Army and Navy have taken FETI training as part of the Special Victims Unit Investigations Course. Also, at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC), Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) agents learn a technique called Cognitive Interviewing (CI), which has a long and established research history based on laboratory-tested principles of memory retrieval, knowledge representation, and communication. AFOSI has been using CI to enhance victim recall since the mid-1990s as an alternative to forensic hypnosis. CI instruction and practice has been a part of AFOSI’s Advanced Sexual Assault Investigations course since 2013. AFOSI is also working with one of the founding CI researchers to further update and improve training techniques and its application to sexual assault investigations.

2. Improving Investigative Sufficiency Rationale: It is the Department’s intent to achieve high competence in criminal investigation. Ultimately, these efforts are intended to produce better quality criminal investigations that encourage greater victim participation. Synopsis of Progress: Over the past three years, DoD has implemented a variety of initiatives to improve the investigative process. Directives by the Secretary of Defense, NDAA legislation, policy upgrades, and strategic tasks have resulted in substantive investigative enhancements.

IV. Investigation (LOE 2)

72

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Evidence of Progress: Independent Investigations for Sexual Assault Cases. DoD IG policy, published in January of 2013, requires MCIOs to investigate all Unrestricted Reports of sexual assault under the jurisdiction of military law, regardless of the severity of the allegation.68 Special Victim Investigation and Prosecution (SVIP) Capability. As detailed above, policy for the SVIP capability was published in January 2014.69 The SVIP capability improves investigative sufficiency by requiring a collaborative approach from the initial investigative response. The assigned MCIO investigator must be knowledgeable of SVIP priorities, working collaboratively with specially-trained personnel consisting of JAs, VWAP personnel, and administrative paralegal personnel. Sexual Assault Forensic Exam (SAFE). The Department utilizes pre assembled SAFE kits that include tools to ensure the physical examination process and the collection, handling, analysis, testing, and safekeeping of any bodily specimens and evidence meet the requirements necessary for use as evidence in criminal proceedings. Within the last few years, the Department has revised all aspects of the SAFE to include the contents of the kits, the exam’s availability in Military Treatment Facilities (MTFs), and local agency agreements for military installations without a resident MTF capability. In addition to revising the SAFE Kit, the Department also revised the DD Form 2911, DoD SAFE Report,70 and DoD SAFE Kit instructions for both the victim exam71 and the suspect exam72 to be in line with 2013 DOJ standards.73 Document Retention. As directed by the Secretary of Defense and legislated by Congress, DoD implemented a policy to expand retention of investigative documentation. Current law requires investigative documentation to be held for 50 years for Unrestricted Reports of sexual assault. Previously, documentation retention times varied between Services. While the primary reason for expanding retention time was to provide a means for victims to obtain information about a sexual assault they reported, it may also improve the Department’s ability to investigate “cold” cases should new evidence later become available. On July 11, 2014, the DoD IG concluded a

68 Available at: http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/550518p.pdf. 69 Available at: http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/DTM-14-002.pdf. 70 Available at: http://www.sapr.mil/public/docs/miscellaneous/toolkit/dd_form_2911.pdf. 71 Available at: http://www.sapr.mil/public/docs/miscellaneous/toolkit/DD_Form_2911-Victim_Instructions.pdf. 72 Available at: http://www.sapr.mil/public/docs/miscellaneous/toolkit/DD_Form_2911-Suspect_Instructions.pdf. 73 Available at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ovw/241903.pdf.

A Service member annotates the evidence of assault following an examination of a simulated victim during SAFE training.

IV. Investigation (LOE 2)

73

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

review of the MCIO’s progress in implementing DoD policy on records retention and access to evidence and found the Services to be compliant.74 Evaluation of MCIO Adult Sexual Assault Investigation Policies. On September 16, 2014, the DoD IG concluded an evaluation of the MCIOs’ adult sexual assault investigation policies.75 The purpose of the DoD IG evaluation was to determine whether MCIO policies aligned with DoD and Military Service requirements, with Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE) Quality Standards for Investigations (QSIs), and with accepted law enforcement investigative techniques. The DoD IG found that the MCIOs’ adult sexual assault investigation policies and procedures support each agency’s needs for a thorough sexual assault investigation. The MCIOs have incorporated DoD and Service adult sexual assault investigative requirements into their policies. Although not mandated by DoD, the MCIOs have also incorporated, directly or indirectly, the pertinent CIGIE QSIs relating to conducting criminal investigations, including sexual assault, and those that facilitate a detailed and well-written report of the investigation. The MCIOs’ policies address almost all pertinent International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) recommended investigative actions. The DoD IG also observed policy areas to be considered for improvement related to the use of forensic science agents and addressing victim collateral misconduct during investigations. The DoD IG further recommended the MCIOs evaluate the IACP actions not currently aligned in their policies for their relevance and applicability and consider incorporating them or enhancing those only partially addressed. DNA Collection Requirements for Criminal Investigations. The Department is required to provide DNA samples from service members upon apprehension (the military equivalent of “arrest”) and submit them to the United States Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory (USACIL). USACIL is a fully accredited facility that provides forensic laboratory services to the MCIOs, other DoD investigative agencies, and other Federal law enforcement agencies. USACIL subsequently submits these DNA samples to the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), a database managed by the FBI that is responsible for exchanging information and comparing forensic DNA evidence from violent crime investigations. 74 Available at: http://www.dodig.mil/pubs/documents/DODIG-2014-082.pdf. 75 Available at: http://www.dodig.mil/pubs/documents/DODIG-2014-108.pdf.

Major General Jeffrey J. Snow, SAPRO Director, visits the USACIL lab, Forest Park, Ga., May 2014.

IV. Investigation (LOE 2)

74

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

The DoD IG found the MCIOs had an overall 92 percent compliance rate in submitting required DNA samples to USACIL during the period of June 1, 2010, through October 31, 2012. As a result of the review, the DoD IG recommended the Secretaries of the Military Departments and the Commandant of the USCG take action in accordance with DoDI 5505.14, DNA Collection Requirements for Criminal Investigations,76 to improve their compliance rates for DNA sample submission. Evaluation of DoD Compliance with the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA). On August 29, 2014, the DoD IG concluded an evaluation77 of the Department’s compliance with the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA), established by Title I of the “Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006” (Public Law (P.L.) 109-248). It also evaluated whether the Department effectively accounted for registered sex offenders with access to DoD facilities. The DoD IG found the Department was compliant with SORNA registration requirements. However, DoD IG recommended a number of actions to improve reporting, accountability, and monitoring of registered sex offenders within the Department. Overall USD(P&R) and the Secretaries of the Military Departments agreed with the recommendations and are currently in the process of creating and updating related policy. Review of Investigative Sufficiency of Sexual Assault Investigations. On July 9, 2013, the DoD IG concluded an evaluation of the MCIOs’ sexual assault investigations completed in 2010 to determine whether they completed investigations as required by DoD, Military Service, and MCIO guidance.78 The evaluation focused on whether the MCIOs investigated sexual assaults as required by guiding policies and procedures. The DoD IG found most MCIO investigations (89 percent) met or exceeded the investigative standards. The DoD IG has now agreed to review the MCIOs’ sexual assault investigation on a recurring basis. The review currently underway is looking at MCIO sexual assault investigations completed in 2013. Investigation Length. In support of this report, the Department developed a metric to track the average and median length of a sexual assault investigation, measured from the day the MCIO opens the criminal investigation until the day it provides its final report of investigation to command for legal review (Figure 13). The Department found that in FY 2014 criminal investigations took an average of about four and a half months to complete, up from an average of four months in FY 2013. A shorter investigation is not necessarily a better investigation. Investigation length is dependent upon a number of factors, including the complexity of the crime, the number and location of witnesses to be interviewed, the amount and kinds of evidence to be processed, and the number of agents available to conduct an investigation.

76 Available at: http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/550514p.pdf. 77 Available at: http://www.dodig.mil/pubs/documents/DODIG-2014-103.pdf. 78 Available at: http://www.dodig.mil/pubs/documents/DODIG-2013-091.pdf.

IV. Investigation (LOE 2)

75

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Figure 13 – Metric 5: Investigation Length

E. Oversight

Department of Defense Inspector General The DoD IG provides independent, relevant, and timely oversight of the DoD in support of the warfighter and promotes accountability, integrity, and efficiency. It also advises the Secretary of Defense and Congress while keeping the public informed. The DoD IG is committed to continually improving the quality of the Department’s sexual assault and other violent crime investigations. The DoD IG provides oversight for the Department’s programs and operations related to the investigation of violent crime (including unattended death, sexual assault, serious aggravated assault, and robbery). A cadre of highly trained and experienced criminal investigators assesses effectiveness and efficiency, compliance with policies and procedures, and the need for new or revised policies applicable to the Department’s investigative response to violent crime.

F. Partnerships/Collaborations Collaboration with internal and external agencies and experts is key to ensuring the Department is aware of and taking advantage of new research and promising investigative practices in use elsewhere. While criminal investigations do not fall under the oversight of the DoD SAPR Program, SAPRO works with the Comptroller to reprogram funds to other DoD organizations to support investigative efforts.

Average: 121 Average: 142

Median: 110 Median: 118

0

50

100

150

200

FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17

Metric 5: Investigation Length

Average Investigation Length (Days) Median Investigation Length (Days)

Figure 14 – The DoD IG Seal

IV. Investigation (LOE 2)

76

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Investigation Initiatives – Progress at a Glance

Action Status Field an SVIP Capability in Each Service Complete  Keep victims informed of their case progress In Progress Enhance investigative training In Progress  Improve investigative sufficiency In Progress  Conduct timely investigations In Progress  Clear evidence of progress Indications of progress  Progress not evident

The following key partnerships enhance and inform the Department’s Investigation LOE:

• US Army Military Police School (USAMPS): The Department reprogrammed funds to support additional capacity for USAMPS to provide advanced sexual assault training to criminal investigators and prosecutors from across the DoD and the USCG.

• Defense Forensic Science Center (DFSC): DFSC provides full-service forensic support (traditional, expeditionary, and reach-back) to DoD entities worldwide, and oversees the U.S. Army Criminal Investigations Laboratory (USACIL). DoD SAPRO works with DFSC to ensure that Service SAPR programs are fully informed of the laboratory’s capabilities and programs that support sexual assault. DoD SAPRO also collaborated with USACIL scientists to update the DoD SAFE Kit.

G. Conclusion

In the continued effort to hold offenders appropriately accountable, the Department incorporated best and promising practices that were adopted and/or adapted as a result of collaborations with external organizations. Over the past two years, the Department has substantially enhanced its investigative capabilities. At the direction of the Secretary of Defense, the Department created one of the most important resources related to the Investigation LOE: the SVIP capability. This multidisciplinary approach has fundamentally reshaped and improved the Department’s ability to properly investigate allegations of sexual assault, domestic violence, and child abuse. Drawing from the latest research from both government agencies and civilian organizations, the MCIOs have also implemented scientifically- informed investigative techniques that optimize the recovery of physical and testimonial evidence. All three MCIOs now teach and employ trauma-informed interviewing techniques to mitigate the potential for re-traumatizing the victim.

IV. Investigation (LOE 2)

77

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

While in other sections this report details the significant role of the commander in addressing sexual assault, it is important to note that DoD policy explicitly forbids commanders from directing or influencing the criminal investigative process. This policy, in addition to the other initiatives previously detailed, represents the Department’s unrelenting commitment to the identification and apprehension of sexual assault offenders. The next LOE, Accountability, will demonstrate the steps the Department has taken to hold offenders appropriately accountable.

V. ACCOUNTABILITY (LOE 3)

78

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

A. Introduction Over the past three years, the DoD and Congress have launched several initiatives to ensure offenders are held appropriately accountable for sexual assault, to include increased penalties for convicted offenders, elevating initial disposition authority, mandating administrative separation processing of any member convicted of a sexual assault, and creating an overall better response system for victims. Through these efforts and others, the Department has sent a clear message that the military has no place for sexual assault.

Accordingly, the Department has taken significant and comprehensive steps to address victim safety and confidence when participating in the military justice system. The Department has also been actively engaged to identify areas of improvement and implement enhancements throughout the legal process to reassure victims they will be treated with dignity and respect as they navigate the military justice process. As a result, more victims are stepping forward to report their assaults than ever before, suggesting increased confidence in newly established Department initiatives aimed at the justice system.

B. Key Highlight Special Victims’ Counsel/Victims’ Legal Counsel (SVC/VLC) Rationale: Victim participation and engagement throughout the military justice process is key to holding offenders appropriately accountable. However, sexual assault victims are often reluctant to report and engage the system. As a means to provide advice and advocacy, as well as empower victims to participate in the justice system, the Department created the groundbreaking SVC/Victims’ Legal Counsel program (VLC).79 SVCs are Military Service JAs who provide independent legal advice and representation to victims of sexual assault and other serious criminal offenses, protecting their rights and empowering them to successfully navigate the military justice system in order to bring perpetrators to justice. 79 The Air Force and Army use the term Special Victims’ Counsel, while the Navy and Marine Corps use VLC. In the interest of clarity, the DoD section will refer to the SVC/VLC as simply “SVC.”

Objective: Achieve high competence in holding offenders appropriately accountable. End state: Perpetrators are held appropriately accountable.

A command where the victims will be taken care of and the report will be taken seriously is what we call a non-permissive climate. Offenders in that climate know things are going to be difficult. They’re going to be held appropriately accountable.

Major General Gary Patton, former SAPRO Director

V. Accountability (LOE 3)

79

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

These specialized attorneys are assigned to victims to represent the rights of the victim and act independent of the prosecutor. Synopsis of Progress: Launched as a pilot program by the Air Force in January 2013, the SVC initiative provided Airmen, and other eligible individuals who reported they were a victim of sexual assault, the opportunity to be assigned a military attorney for legal and emotional support – at the Air Force’s expense and at no cost to the victim.

The SVC’s role was to advise victims on the investigative and military justice processes, protect the rights afforded to these victims, and empower them to participate in the military justice process. The pilot program was a tremendous success, and resulted in the Air Force being recognized by the DOJ with the Federal Service Award, which honors individuals and organizations for their direct service to victims of federal, tribal, and military crime.80

Due to the overwhelmingly positive feedback from victims involved in the pilot program, the Secretary of Defense directed the Secretaries of the Military Departments in August 2013 to establish a Special Victims’ Advocacy Program in each of their Departments. Each of the remaining Services established initial operating capability to provide similar legal services to victims by November 1, 2013, and all Service programs were fully operational with their respective programs by January 1, 2014. Independently, the USCG Judge Advocate General (JAG) established an SVC program for the USCG on July 12, 2013. Section 1716 of the NDAA for FY 2014, enacted on December 26, 2013, required SVC programs across the Department, ensuring the requisite funding and resourcing to sustain the capability. Victims of sexual assault are now assigned an SVC within 48 hours (when practicable) of the SVC program office receiving a request.

80 DoJ website https://ovcncvrw.ncjrs.gov/Awards/AwardGallery/gallerysearch.html

U.S. Air Force Special Victims’ Counsel Program receives the 2014 Federal Service Award.

Witnesses who had been assigned special victim counsel told the Panel that their special victim counsel were critical to their ability to understand the process and participate effectively as witnesses against their accuser.

Report of the Response Systems to Adult Sexual Assault Crimes Panel June 2014

V. Accountability (LOE 3)

80

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Evidence of Progress. The SVC program continues to receive support from the victims it was created to serve, as well as endorsements from Service members who hear about the new program.

• DoD SES:81 The 2014 SES asked respondents a variety of questions about their experiences and satisfaction with SVCs. o Of the 68% of respondents who used a SVC:

 A large majority (93%-97%) agreed the SVC treated them professionally

(97%), listened to them without judgment (96%), supported them (96%), and thoroughly answered their questions (93%)

 The majority (90%) indicated they were satisfied with the services provided by the SVC

• SAPR Focus Groups: Focus group

participants indicated SVCs might be a helpful resource for sexual assault survivors: o “Because they have somebody to talk to and understand and help them

through it legally and emotionally. Somebody that’s on their side regardless.” (E1-E4 Female)

o “I think it will help people from feeling lost because there’s someone there that can answer those questions legally. The emotional support is a great thing, but if you decide to prosecute, you’re going to have so many questions, you’re going to have so much there that is unanswered and how stressful that could be. And just to have someone there dedicated to answering those questions, tell you where this could go or could not go is a great resource.” (E3-E4 Male)

• In an assessment of the SVC program, the Response Systems to Adult Sexual Assault Crimes Panel (RSP), an independent federal advisory committee mandated by Congress, found the SVC program to go “far beyond any currently found in civilian jurisdictions, state or federal.” 82 In interviews with military survivors of sexual assault, the RSP found that “witnesses who had been assigned an SVC told the Panel that their SVC were critical to their ability to understand the process and participate effectively as witnesses against their accuser.” 83 When comparing the military’s full range of systems and procedures

81 The complete methodology and analysis of responses for the DoD SES are attached as Annex 2 to this report. 82 RSP pg. 7; Available at: http://responsesystemspanel.whs.mil/Public/docs/Reports/00_Final/00_Report_Final_20140627.pdf 83 RSP pg. 27; Available at: http://responsesystemspanel.whs.mil/Public/docs/Reports/00_Final/00_Report_Final_20140627.pdf.

Survivor regarding SVC: “My SVC told me he would protect my rights and DID. He kept me informed,

was very capable and really great.”

V. Accountability (LOE 3)

81

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

to support and protect sexual assault victims to civilian systems, the RSP found that the “military uses best practices in its support of victims and that these systems compare favorably with the civilian systems.”84

The SVC program has also received accolades from subject matter experts in the field, as they recognize the important role the SVC plays in offender accountability. It has promoted respect and dignity for sexual assault victims while also facilitating their meaningful participation in the military justice system. SVCs have an incredible impact on the lives of the victims they work with.

As the Department continues to take steps to address sexual assault in the military, the SVC program exists as compelling evidence that Department initiatives are having meaningful results. While the SVC program has existed for less than a year, the positive impact it has had on survivors has been highly encouraging. Nonetheless, the Department recognizes the SVC program is still evolving. In order to better address the needs of victims, the Department must build on the program’s initial success and ensure every SVC is properly trained with sufficient legal experience.

C. Fielding a Special Victim Investigation and Prosecution (SVIP) Capability

Rationale: As noted in the preceding section, the Department believes there is substantive benefit to fielding a cadre of experienced professionals who understand the special sensitivities involved in interpersonal violence.

Synopsis of Progress: The preceding Investigation LOE section described the development of the SVIP between the years 2012 and 2014. Special training 84 Ibid.

After a lengthy investigation process and trial where my client had to take the stand and talk about this incredibly personal and invasive thing that happened to her…her husband approached me. He told me how much having me there meant to his wife. That she felt she had a voice in the system and the court listened to her, that she had someone to call with questions, that someone was in her corner. He thanked me, then took a step back and saluted me, not because customs and courtesies required it, but as a sign of gratitude. It was an incredibly moving moment and it was then that I realized this program isn’t about outcomes, it is about people – victims’ rights are not about ensuring a conviction, they are about promoting respect, dignity, and meaningful participation in the justice system.

Captain Sarabeth Moore, SVC assigned to Fairchild Air Force Base, Wash.1

V. Accountability (LOE 3)

82

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

requirements also apply to judge advocates, VWAP personnel, and paralegals working in the SVIP capability.

Evidence of Progress: The report required by the NDAA for FY 2013 was provided to Congress on December 12, 2013.85 The Office of Legal Policy developed policy and procedures for SVIP legal personnel in DTM 14-003, DoD Implementation of SVC Prosecution and Legal Support, which was published on February 12, 2014.86

D. Training Enhancements The DoD has dedicated significant resources to provide legal personnel involved in the military justice system with training to enhance their ability to work with victims of sexual assault, understand impact of trauma on memory, and to practice courtroom skills often used in support of sexual assault cases. Enhanced SAPR training for attorneys, paralegals, and victim-witness assistance personnel incorporates these important elements along with the traditional SAPR-related training components, thus ensuring a more prepared and skilled cadre of legal professionals.

E. Role of the Commander Under the Accountability LOE, the role of the commander is to hold all offenders appropriately accountable and uphold the integrity of the military justice system. 1. Elevation of Initial Disposition Authority Rationale: In 2012, to strengthen the role of the commander, as well as to provide additional checks in balances, the Secretary of Defense directed that initial disposition authority for the most serious sexual assault cases be given only to commanders in the grade of O-6 or higher, who possess at least Special Court-Martial convening authority. Synopsis of Progress. Upon completion of a criminal investigation, the MCIO conducting the investigation provides a report documenting its evidentiary findings to the subject’s military commander and the servicing staff JA for review and legal action, as appropriate. However, for the crimes of rape, sexual assault, nonconsensual sodomy, and attempts to commit these crimes, a convening authority who is at least a special court-martial convening authority and in the grade of O-6 or higher retains initial

85 Available at: http://www.sapr.mil/public/docs/reports/DoD_SpecialVictimsCapabilities_Report_20131213.pdf. 86 Available at: http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/DTM-14-003.pdf.

Lower level unit commanders do not have authority to decide what, if any, disciplinary action should be

taken in the most serious sexual assault crimes. The senior commanders who do have such authority will

often have no personal knowledge of either the accused or the victim.

V. Accountability (LOE 3)

83

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

disposition authority. This means that lower level unit commanders do not have authority to decide what, if any, disciplinary action should be taken in the most serious sexual assault crimes. The senior commanders who do have such authority will often have no personal knowledge of either the accused or the victim.87 This policy allows more seasoned officers to make the initial decision regarding case disposition, and ensures sexual assault cases receive the high-level attention they deserve. Evidence of Progress. On April 20, 2012, the Secretary of Defense signed a memorandum putting this policy into effect beginning on June 28, 2012.88 The policy put forth in the memo was subsequently incorporated into the March 28, 2013 re- issuance of DoDI 6495.02, SAPR Program Procedures.89

2. Improving Victim Confidence in the Military Justice System Rationale: Victims of crime play a central role in the military justice system. As such the Department has a responsibility to demonstrate that, when a victim makes a report of sexual assault, the matter will be taken seriously, investigated appropriately, and adjudicated based on the available evidence. Synopsis of Progress: At the direction of the Secretary of Defense, the Department has been actively engaged in a series of initiatives to build victim confidence in the military justice system, improve reporting of sexual assault, and provide for opportunities for victims to take a more active role in the justice process. Congress has also legislated its own changes to the military justice system with provisions in the NDAAs for FYs 2012, 2013, and 2014.

87 RSP page 126; Available at: http://responsesystemspanel.whs.mil/Public/docs/Reports/00_Final/00_Report_Final_20140627.pdf. 88 Available at: http://www.dod.gov/dodgc/images/withhold_authority.pdf. 89 See page 42 of the Instruction at: http://www.sapr.mil/public/docs/instructions/DoDI_649502_20140212.pdf.

V. Accountability (LOE 3)

84

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Evidence of Progress: In addition to the previously described SVC Program and the withholding of initial disposition authority for sexual assault crimes, there have been a number of initiatives enacted to further improve victim confidence in the military justice system. For example, in the NDAA for FY 2014 there were 16 separate military justice provisions, reflecting the most sweeping change to the UCMJ since 1968. New military justice initiatives enacted since 2012 include:

• Assessing Response Systems: The RSP delivered a report on June 27, 2014,90 and made a total of 132 recommendations in the areas of victim services; victim rights; the role of the commander in the military justice process; and the investigation, prosecution and adjudication of sexual assault. The Department is currently reviewing the 132 recommendations to determine an appropriate action for each one.

• Ensuring Victims’ Rights: The Secretary directed91 the Services to develop a method, in coordination with the Joint Service Committee (JSC) on Military Justice, to incorporate the rights afforded to victims through the Crime Victims’ Rights Act into military justice practice, to the extent appropriate. Congress provided assistance on this initiative in Section 1701 of the NDAA for FY 2014, by amending the UCMJ to include crime victims’ rights. The Department is on track to recommend to the President the appropriate changes to the Manual for Courts-Martial by late December 2014. Additionally, victims will have the right to have trial counsel or victim counsel present when being interviewed by the defense (Section 1704), and the right to submit post-trial matters for consideration by the convening authority (Section 1706).

• Enhancing Pretrial Investigations: The Secretary of Defense directed92 the Secretaries of the Military Departments to require that judge advocates serve as investigating officers for all Article 32 hearings on sexual assault offense charges. On December 3, 2013, the Secretaries of the Military Departments reported they had enacted policy to comply with this directive. Section 1702 of the NDAA for FY 2014 further limited the scope of the Article 32 hearing, and retitled it as a “preliminary hearing.” This change takes effect for offenses committed on or after December 26, 2014. Section 1702 also limited a convening authority’s discretion to disapprove findings, and to disapprove, commute, or suspend, in whole or in part, the sentence adjudged in a court- martial. The investigating officer, whenever practicable, will be a JA and equal or greater in rank to the other counsel involved in the case. All victims (military and civilian) will have the right to decline to testify.

90 Available at: http://responsesystemspanel.whs.mil/Public/docs/Reports/00_Final/00_Report_Final_20140627.pdf. 91 See SECDEF Memorandum at: http://www.sapr.mil/public/docs/news/SECDEF_Memo_SAPR_Initiatives_20130814.pdf. 92 See SECDEF Memorandum at: http://www.sapr.mil/public/docs/news/SECDEF_Memo_SAPR_Initiatives_20130814.pdf.

V. Accountability (LOE 3)

85

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

• Additional military justice provisions legislated by the FY 2014 National Defense Authorization Act include:

o Section 1703 – Added sexual assault to the list of offenses with no statute of

limitations (rape was already an offense without a statute of limitations).

o Section 1705 – Required that only a general court-martial be used for certain sex offenses, and mandated a dishonorable discharge or dismissal if convicted of those sex offenses.

o Section 1708 – Eliminated the accused’s character and military service as

factors to be considered by the commander when making a case disposition decision under the UCMJ.

o Section 1744 – Required the Service Secretaries to review sex offense cases

in which a Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) recommended referral to court-martial, but the convening authority elected not to do so. Even in cases in which the SJA and convening authority agree the case should not be referred to court- marital, the next higher convening authority must also review the case.

o Section 1745 – Requires personnel records be annotated if a Service member

was convicted by a court-martial, received non-judicial punishment, or adverse administrative action for a sex-related offense. Whenever the Service member transfers into a new unit, the new commander must then review this information.

• SES Information: Of the 64% of respondents who made an Unrestricted Report and spoke to their unit commander/director in response to the sexual assault: o More than two thirds agreed the unit commander/director supported them

(82%), took steps to address their privacy and confidentiality (80%), treated them professionally (79%), listened to them without judgment (78%), and thoroughly answered their questions (70%)

o About three-quarters (73%) indicated that overall they were satisfied with the unit commander/director’s response to the sexual assault

• SAPR Focus Group Information: Focus group participants indicated there has been a positive shift in DoD’s handling of sexual assault and harassment: o “Across the board, we get inspections, Equal Opportunity (EO) officers

who’ve been put into place that help us understand SARC training, where, in the past, that didn’t happen.” (E7-E9 Mixed Group)

V. Accountability (LOE 3)

86

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

o “Our last leader said, ‘anything like this happens, it’s going up to the General/Admiral level.’ I see all over the media, they’re afraid things are just getting swept under the rug in-house with commanding officers. But that’s kind of the policy now is it goes up, it’s going to be above him so he doesn’t make that decision.” (E5-E6 Male)

3. Impacts of UCMJ Reform Proposals The commander’s authority to refer charges to court-martial is an essential component of holding offenders appropriately accountable. However, recent legislative proposals have called for a reduction in the Commander’s ability to prosecute these crimes. In analyzing such proposals, the RSP found that:

Congress should not further limit the authority of convening authorities under the UCMJ to refer charges for sexual assault crimes to trial by court-martial beyond the recent amendments to the UCMJ and DoD policy. After reviewing the practices of Allied militaries and available civilian statistics, and hearing from many witnesses, the Panel determined the evidence does not support a conclusion that removing convening authority from senior commanders will reduce the incidence of sexual assault, increase reporting of sexual assaults, or improve the quality of investigations and prosecutions of sexual assault cases in the Armed Forces.93

93 RSP page 6-7; Available at: http://responsesystemspanel.whs.mil/Public/docs/Reports/00_Final/00_Report_Final_20140627.pdf.

V. Accountability (LOE 3)

87

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

While many of the initiatives launched by the Department still need time to be completely integrated into the SAPR strategy and also must be thoroughly evaluated, preliminary evidence is proving that properly trained commanders are ensuring offenders are held appropriately accountable.

4. Handling of Sexual Assault Cases Since FY 2009, the number of sexual assault cases where courts-martial charges were preferred increased by 81 percent, from 21 percent of cases in 2009 to 38 percent of cases in FY 2014 (Figure 15). Also, the proportion of cases where command action was not possible decreased from 43 percent to 27 percent over the same period. While more time is needed to identify the specific initiatives that have led to these positive trends, they reflect a concerted effort by the Department to ensure that all levels of leadership have the resources, training, and capabilities needed to better address and respond to sexual assault allegations.

Figure 15 – Non-Metric 1a: Command Action for Alleged Military Offenders under DoD Legal Authority

F. Partnerships/Collaborations The vast majority of the men and women serving in the Armed Forces have never committed a crime, and even fewer have ever committed a crime as serious as sexual assault. For individuals who do commit or attempt to commit sexual assault, the Department has worked aggressively to provide commanders with the resources they

43% 40%

35%

34% 27% 27% 21%

27% 32% 35%

39% 38%

18% 13%

12% 9% 10% 12%

11% 12% 8% 7% 6% 8% 7% 6%

13% 14% 18% 16%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

FY09 N=1971

FY10 N=1925

FY11 N=1518

FY12 N=1714

FY13 N=2149

FY14 N=2419

Pe rc

en t o

f S ub

jec ts

C on

sid er

ed b

y Mi

lit ar

y C om

m an

de rs

fo r A

ct io

n

Fiscal Year

Non-Metric 1a: Command Action for Alleged Military Offenders under DoD Legal Authority

Command action not possible Court-martial charge preferred (Initiated) Nonjudicial punishments (Article 15 UCMJ) Administrative discharges and actions Action for non-sexual assault offense

V. Accountability (LOE 3)

88

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

need to hold them appropriately accountable, and has worked closely with civilian organizations and other government agencies to improve offender accountability, as appropriate.

1. Collaboration with Civilian Organizations The Department’s responsibility for holding offenders appropriately accountable does not end after disposition. Instead, the Department has made several efforts to ensure that sexual offenders do not have the opportunity to repeat their offense. These efforts include:

• Publicizing the punishments for misconduct or criminal offenses

• Processing for administrative separation any member convicted of a sexual assault but not adjudged a punitive discharge as part of their sentence

• Revision of the list of UCMJ offenses for which sex offender notification is required

• Managing sex offender registration and notification upon discharge from DoD confinement facilities

For offenders held in a military correctional facility who are required to register as a sex offender, the Department provides written notice five days prior to their release to the chief law enforcement officer of the State, territory, or local jurisdiction in which the prisoner will reside, as well as to the State or local agency responsible for the receipt or maintenance of a sex offender registration in that area. The Department also notifies the United States Marshals Service Sex Offender Targeting Center.

2. External Observations of the Military Justice System While the DoD has taken a significant interest in measuring the effectiveness of its strategy for preventing and responding to instances of sexual assault, the Department has also worked with independent entities in order to validate its approach.

a. Response Systems to Adult Sexual Assault Crimes Panel (RSP) One of the RSP’s primary responsibilities was to compare civilian and military rates of sexual assault cases. During its review, the RSP found that in some civilian jurisdictions, responding police officers or detectives can determine an allegation is “unfounded,” that is, false or baseless, and close a case before a prosecutor ever receives it. In such instances, the case closed as “unfounded” is not accounted for in civilian prosecution rates. In contrast, the Services track every reported sexual assault from report through disposition, including reports to authorized officials who are not affiliated with law enforcement agencies. Further, the RSP stated that “because the military collects much more detailed data on every reported sexual assault than civilian

V. Accountability (LOE 3)

89

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

jurisdictions, attempting to compare military and civilian prosecution rates for sexual assaults is difficult at best, and misleading at worst.”94

b. Academic Analysis Another outside observer to speak favorably regarding the Department’s efforts is Associate Dean for Academic Affairs at the George Washington University Law School, and retired judge advocate colonel in the Army, Dr. Lisa M. Schenck. When comparing the military and civilian justice systems in an analysis of the Department’s SAPR program, Dr. Schenck writes:

Using inflammatory language and misleading statistics some attack the prosecution and conviction rates in the Military Services without realizing that other prosecution entities such as the Department of Justice, the Department of Education, and the three largest states by population do not use survey data to calculate such results. When the same criteria are used for calculation of prosecution and conviction rates, the military justice system’s rates are comparable to major civilian prosecution entities for the same types of offenses.95

Dr. Schenck also discusses the importance of having commanders retain the responsibility of convening authority in sexual assault cases. Specifically, Dr. Schenck argues that those who call for removing the convening authority’s power to punish military personnel who commit sexual assault do not “consider what the Supreme Court recognized forty years ago – ‘the military has… by necessity, developed laws and traditions of its own during its long history.’” Further, Dr. Schenck summarizes the issue by saying, “Critics should understand that the focus should not be on prosecution rates when the facts involving the particular offense at issue are unknown.”96

94 RSP page 4; Available at: http://responsesystemspanel.whs.mil/Public/docs/Reports/00_Final/00_Report_Final_20140627.pdf. 95 Available at: http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/students/groups/osjcl/files/2014/06/7.-Schenck2.pdf. 96 Ibid.

V. Accountability (LOE 3)

90

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Accountability Initiatives – Progress at a Glance

Action Status Field an SVC/VLC Program Complete  Field an SVIP Capability in Each Service Complete  Withhold Initial Disposition Authority for the Most Serious Sexual Assault Cases to Senior Commanders Complete 

Improve Victim Confidence the Military Justice System In Progress  Clear evidence of progress Indications of progress  Progress not evident

G. Conclusion

Holding offenders appropriately accountable promotes unit cohesion, trust, and values that define the U.S. military. The Department’s policy to elevate initial disposition authority enables disciplinary decisions to be made by more experienced commanders. This helps to ensure that cases are adjudicated based on relevant evidence, and not on any previous “good standing” or personal relationships. Furthermore, having these cases remain within the chain of command allows the Department’s leaders to retain responsibility and accountability for addressing this critical issue.

The Department also recognizes the vital role survivors play in maintaining good order and discipline within the force. However, participating in criminal proceedings can be exceedingly difficult for survivors, given that recalling memories about a sexual assault can sometimes be as traumatic as the crime itself. For this reason, the Department has taken several steps to afford victims with a network of professionals for support and protection. The Department’s groundbreaking SVC program provides survivors with a dependable resource that is specially trained to represent their legal interests – a service with overwhelmingly positive survivor reviews.

The highest levels of leadership within the Department, from the Secretary of Defense to the Joint Chiefs, are working to promote a command climate free from sexual assault. Commanders at all levels have the responsibility to propagate that climate and encourage every member of the military to embrace their role in promoting safety. The Department’s success is largely measured by its ability to hold offenders appropriately accountable, but just as important is the Department’s ability to provide quality care for the survivors of this heinous crime. The next LOE, Advocacy and Victim Assistance, will describe the various resources that the Department provides to survivors.

VI. ADVOCACY/VICTIM ASSISTANCE (LOE 4)

91

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

A. Introduction Until sexual assault is eliminated from our ranks, DoD is dedicated to supporting and empowering victims of sexual assault to heal, restore their lives, and participate as desired in the military justice process. Given that many sexual assaults in the military occur between fellow Service members, professionals throughout DoD work diligently with survivors to overcome the violation of trust and destruction of confidence brought about by the crime. The full spectrum of available support and care gives victims options about how they choose to heal – physically, emotionally, and professionally. While the number of sexual assault reports to DoD remains outnumbered by the number of incidents estimated to occur annually, a record number of victims in FY 2013 and FY 2014 came forward to make reports. Given that the past-year prevalence (occurrence) of sexual assault decreased from FY 2012 to FY 2014, the Department views this increased reporting behavior as an indicator of growing confidence in the DoD response system. DoD SAPR policies are designed to help victims exercise their rights, as well as provide them with a professional response, effective treatment, legal support, and a voice in the military justice process. The Department’s programs and initiatives are setting new expectations about what should be the national standard for victim services and assistance. DoD requires that medical care and SAPR services be gender-responsive, culturally competent, and recovery-oriented. Particularly noteworthy program enhancements over the past three years include:

• The establishment and expansion of the Safe Helpline, which provides 24/7 anonymous support to the DoD community worldwide

• The establishment of the SVC and incorporation of victims’ rights into military law

• The professional certification of all DoD SARCs and SAPR VAs

Objective: Deliver consistent and effective victim support, response and reporting options. End state: DoD provides high quality services and support to instill confidence and trust, strengthen resilience, and inspire victims to report.

The victims are not only human beings; they’re fellow Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines. We cannot let them down.

Chuck Hagel U.S. Secretary of Defense

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

92

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Use of Terms “victim” and “survivor”

Although many advocates prefer to use the term “survivor” to describe an individual who has been sexually

assaulted, the term “victim” is also widely used. This document uses the

terms interchangeably and always with respect for those who have been

subjected to these crimes.

These initiatives were not only designed to help victims become more confident in the response system, they were developed to be responsive to victim feedback. Unprecedented leadership support of the SAPR program over the past three years has made clear the expectation that each victim of sexual assault is to be treated with respect, dignity, and sensitivity.

Establishing a Robust Sexual Assault Response System Rationale: The Department established the initial response system in 2005 with the creation of the SAPR Program. The DoD has since modified the system several times to remain responsive to victim needs and feedback, to comply with legislated changes, and to verify that the system works as it was designed. Civilian research indicates that victims who report their sexual assault are more likely to engage in care and services. Consequently, making victims confident that the response system will work for them is an important aspect of the Department’s approach: a system serves no one if its users are reluctant to engage it. According to survivors, the primary barrier to reporting a sexual assault is the concern of having their privacy compromised. A victim’s confidence that his or her privacy will be respected begins with hearing from leadership at all levels that those who report a sexual assault will be taken seriously and treated with dignity.97 Using victim feedback and expert advice, the Department works continuously to formulate policies and initiatives that protect victim privacy, provide a variety of reporting methods, address safety, and make support resources readily available. Synopsis of Progress: In response to expert recommendations in the 2004 Care for Victims of Sexual Assault Task Force, DoD instituted a policy in 2005 that offered a confidential reporting option for military victims who wanted to maintain their privacy and still seek help and services following an assault. As a result, military victims of sexual assault have two reporting options: Restricted and Unrestricted (see Figure 16). Providing reporting options was a significant step towards empowering victims to make decisions about their own recovery process, as well as the ability to pursue justice according to their individual preference and comfort level.

97 More information in the Role of the Commander section on page 107.

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

93

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Figure 16 – Reporting option available to sexual assault victims.

Restricted Reporting. This option allows victims of sexual assault to report the crime to specified individuals who can connect the victim with medical care, victim advocacy, counseling, and legal advice without notifying command or law enforcement officials of the victim’s identity. SARCs, SAPR VAs, and healthcare personnel can receive a Restricted Report. Additionally, victims’ communications with SARCs, SAPR

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

94

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

VAs, mental health counselors, chaplains, and SVC are also privileged under military law. For purposes of public safety and command responsibility, the SARC/SAPR VA notifies the senior installation commander that an assault has occurred and provides details about the incident while preserving the identity of the victim. This gives the command an opportunity to adjust policies and procedures to improve public safety. Restricted Reporting provides victims with personal space, time, and increased control over the release and management of their personal information. It empowers them to seek relevant information and support to make informed decisions about whether to participate in a criminal investigation. Even if the victim chooses not to pursue an official investigation, this additional reporting avenue gives commanders a clearer picture of sexual assault allegations within their command.

Further, it enhances commanders’ ability to address the safety, well-being, and mission readiness of all unit members. If a victim decides to pursue an investigation, he or she always has the option to convert from a Restricted to Unrestricted Report. For this purpose, a victim may also elect to undergo a SAFE for documentation and collection of evidence of the crime. If the victim hasn’t converted a report from Restricted to Unrestricted within a year, the SARC contacts the victim and notifies him or her that the SAFE materials will be kept for an additional four years. The victim also has the ability to convert the report at any time. Unrestricted Reporting. This option is the traditional approach to crime reporting. An Unrestricted Report allows the victim to obtain all available care and support, as well as immediately participate in the military justice process. Unrestriced Reports also initiate mandatory investigations. Medical care, victim advocacy, counseling, and legal advice can be accessed, but the victim also participates in an official investigation of the allegation and any military justice action that may follow.

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

95

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

An Unrestricted Report can be made with any of the following:

• SARC • SAPR VA • Health care personnel • Chain of command • Law enforcement

Upon notification of a Restricted or Unrestriced Report of a sexual assault allegation, the SARC will immediately assign a SAPR VA. At the victim’s discretion or request, he or she may undergo a SAFE. If an Unrestricted Report is filed, DoD policy requires that commanders brief victims monthly on the status of the case throughout the course of the investigation. In addition, commanders are required to keep details regarding the incident limited to only those personnel who have a legitimate need to know. Evidence of Progress:

• Reporting Data (Figure 17).98 Reporting data is drawn from DSAID. It reflects information about reports of sexual assault received in FY 2014. Data for FY 2013 and preceding years is drawn from the DoD’s Annual Reports to Congress.

o Reports of Sexual Assault over Time. The Department put policies in place in 2005 to encourage greater reporting of sexual assault. However, it wasn’t until recently, with the unprecedented leadership attention to the crime that the number of sexual assault reports increased substantially. Starting in FY 2013 and continuing through FY 2014, the Department has seen an unprecedented increase in the level of sexual assault reporting. The total number of reports received in FY 2013 (5,518) and FY 2014 (5,983) are over 50% greater than the number of reports received in FY 2012 (3,604). Given the underreported nature of sexual assault, the Department believes this increase in reporting is likely due to greater victim confidence in the response system. Some may be concerned that the increase in reporting may be due to an overall increase in crime. While this is possible, it is unlikely. In fact, the estimated past-year prevalence (occurrence) of USC99 decreased for women and stayed about the same for men between FY 2012 and FY 2014. Using a new measure of sexual assault that more precisely aligns with the language in the UCMJ, the RMWS confirmed that overall past-year prevalence rates of sexual assault decreased for women and stayed about the same for men between FY 2012 and FY 2014.

98 Additional information about sexual assault reporting can be seen in both the Statistical Data section of this report, as well as the Metrics Section, which are Appendix C and B, respectively. 99 USC is the Workplace and Gender Relations Survey term for a range of sexual crimes – that include sexual assault – in SAPR policy.

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

96

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Figure 17 – Metric 12: Reports of Sexual Assault, FY 2007 to FY 2014.

o Reports for Matters Occurring Before Military Service. Each year, the Department receives several hundred reports from military members about an incident they experienced before entering service. Similar to FY 2013, about 9% of the reports received by SARCs and SAPR VAs in FY 2014 were for pre-service incidents. In years FY 2012 and prior, a very small proportion of reports were in this category. Reports from these survivors indicate they felt sufficiently confident in the response system to help them with something from their past.

o Conversions from Restricted to Unrestricted Reports. Survivors who make a Restricted Report may convert their report to an Unrestricted Report at any time and may participate in the military justice process. This year, a record 19% of Restricted Reports received in FY 2014 converted. An additional 47 Restricted Reports initially made in FY 2013 and prior years also converted to Unrestricted Reports during FY 2014. On average, victims took about 34 days to convert their reports.

• SES. Respondents (just over 150) were asked to provide information on their awareness of SAPR resources prior to his/her report of sexual assault. The

2846 3109

3472 3327 3393 3604

5518 5983

2243 2466 2758 2579 2640 2788

4225 4501

603 643 714 748 753 816 1293 1482

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Nu mb

er of

R ep

or ts

Fiscal Year

Metric 12: Reports of Sexual Assault Over Time

DoD Total Reports

DoD Unrestricted Reports

DoD Reports Remaining Restricted

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

97

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

majority of respondents were aware of the resources DoD SAPRO offers sexual assault survivors.100

o More than three-quarters of respondents indicated that prior to the assault, they were aware of SARCs (82%), chaplain services to survivors of sexual assault (80%), medical care to survivors of sexual assault (78%), Uniform Victim Advocates (UVAs)/VAs (78%), and mental health counseling/care for survivors of sexual assault (77%)

o Approximately half of respondents indicated that prior to the assault, they were aware of SAFEs (62%), the DoD Safe Helpline (54%), and their installation 24-hour helpline (49%)

o About one-third of respondents indicated that prior to the assault, they were aware of the local civilian 24-hour helpline (33%) and SVC or VLC (29%)101

o The vast majority of respondents (99%) indicated they interacted with a SARC and/or a UVA/VA (SARC 95% and UVA/VA 82%) as a result of the sexual assault

o More than two-thirds of respondents indicated, as a result of the assault, they spoke to a mental health provider (71%)

o Approximately half of respondents (49%) indicated they interacted with a medical provider. Of the 24% of respondents who received medical care at a military medical treatment facility: A large majority agreed the provider maintained their confidentiality (94%), explained the steps in the exam to them (90%), supported them (89%), treated them professionally (89%), did not rush them to make decisions (86%), thoroughly answered their questions (85%), performed exams appropriate for the reason for their visit (84%), and listened to them without judgment (80%).

o Less than one-third of respondents (31%) indicated they interacted with a chaplain as a result of the assault

o For those respondents who made an Unrestricted Report, about two-thirds indicated, as a result of the assault, they spoke to their immediate supervisor (66%), their senior enlisted advisor (65%), or their unit commander/director (64%)

o One of the ways the Department measures progress is whether respondents who report a sexual assault would recommend others report as well. Nearly three quarters of all respondents (73%) indicated, based on their overall experience of reporting, that yes they would recommend others report their

100 As survey eligibility was based on the timeframe of the report, not the timeframe of the assault, some sexual assault resources may not have been available to a survivor at the time of his/her sexual assault. Data presented excludes those who indicated a resource did not exist at the time of the assault. 101 This new resource provides legal counsel for a military survivor of sexual assault and was established across DoD in FY 2014.

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

98

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

sexual assault, whereas 14% of respondents indicated no and 13% were unsure if they would recommend others report their sexual assault.

• DoD Focus Groups. Some focus group participants indicated that survivors might choose to make an Unrestricted Report because they believe their report would be handled appropriately and the perpetrator would be held accountable.

o “I think especially with all the awareness, people are more confident that their reports are going to be taken seriously. If you go report something, it’s going to be taken seriously and seen through the end and thoroughly investigated.” (O2-O3 Male)

o “I think the more everyone talks about it the easier it is for people to get help.” (E3-E4 Female)

o “It’s not some hush-hush topic anymore and I believe that a lot of the commanders are moving in a positive way with actually protecting the individual instead of making them feel as if they’re like a troublemaker or they put unnecessary action or unnecessary paperwork or attention towards the unit.” (E3-E4 Female)

• DEOCS Analysis. While there is no item that specifically addresses victim confidence on the DEOCS, respondents are asked to rate on a four-point scale their unit leadership’s support for the SAPR program, their leadership’s encouragement for victims to report a sexual assault, and their leadership’s efforts to create an environment where victims feel comfortable reporting.

For analysis purposes, ratings for these three items are combined into a four-point scale index. On average across the Department in FY 2014, service members consistently rated their leadership’s support for sexual assault quite favorably.

Men (3.6 on a 4.0 scale) tended to rate their leadership higher than women (3.4 on a 4.0 scale). Junior enlisted members and NCOs (3.5 on a 4.0 scale) tended to rate their leadership lower than did the more senior ranks (3.7 on a 4.0 scale).

Figure 18 – An informational poster about SAAM.

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

99

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Underreporting of sexual assaults affects the Department’s ability to provide services to the victim, as well as hinders the ability to take action against an alleged offender. Each year the Department publishes its annual report that assesses the number of reported sexual assaults and the number of subjects with victims who decline to participate in the justice process (Figure 19).

Figure 19 – Metric 8: Percentage of Subjects with Victims Declining to Participate in the Military Justice Process

10% 17%

12% 11% 9% 10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

FY09 N=1971

FY10 N=1925

FY11 N=1518

FY12 N=1714

FY13 N=2149

FY14 N=2419

Pe rc

en ta

ge o

f S ub

jec ts

w ith

Vi

ct im

s D ec

lin in

g to

P ar

tic ip

at e i

n th

e M ilit

ar y J

us tic

e S ys

te m

Fiscal Year

Metric 8: Percentage of Subjects with Victims Declining to Participate in the Military Justice Process

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

100

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

B. Key Highlights 1. DoD Safe Helpline 2. Special Victims’ Counsel/Victims’ Legal Counsel (SVC/VLC) 3. DoD Sexual Assault Advocate Certification Program (D-SAACP)

Of the many initiatives and programs instituted over the past three years in support of victims, three are noteworthy for their innovation and victim-centric premise:

• World-wide, 24/7 Victim Support (DoD Safe Helpline, Safe Helproom and

Self-Care Mobile App). This support network is available 24/7 to victims and survivors of sexual assault via a website, online helpline, chatroom, telephone helpline and mobile app.

• Personalized and specialized legal support known as the Special Victims’ Counsel (or Victims’ Legal Counsel). In this innovative program, lawyers play more than an advisory role. In addition to providing legal advice, they also represent victims through a confidential attorney-client relationship throughout the investigation and prosecution process.

• Professionalization and certification of victim first responders. In close

collaboration with National Advocate Credentialing Program (NACP), DoD created a credentialing program for SARCs and VAs known as D-SAACP.

1. DoD Safe Helpline Creating a Crisis Support Capability Rationale: Some victims of sexual assault – especially male victims – find it easier to first confide in an anonymous person rather than a loved one. A crisis support line allows a survivor to speak to someone who is impartial and trained to listen and help. In addition, an online presence allows help-seekers to learn about available support and services without having to directly engage anyone. Synopsis of Progress: In April 2011, the Department launched the DoD Safe Helpline as part of its commitment to deliver consistent and effective victim support and response. As a support service for members of the DoD community affected by sexual assault, the Safe Helpline provides live, one-on-one crisis intervention and information to the worldwide DoD community. Safe Helpline offers confidential, anonymous, secure help via five distinct services (website, online helpline, chatroom, telephone helpline, and mobile app), which are available worldwide — providing victims with the help they

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

101

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

I was feeling very down and depressed tonight but after talking with your staff I’m feeling a thousand times better… I honestly believe your staff just helped save my life.

Safe Helpline user

need anytime, anywhere. DoD Safe Helpline is operated through a DoD contract by the non-profit organization RAINN.102 Safe Helpline takes a victim-centered, trauma-informed approach to all aspects of its service provision. Services provided include a broad range of support to the user, whether it is immediately following an assault or years after. The DoD Safe Helpline staff members receive highly specialized training on topics including crisis intervention, the neurobiology of trauma, working with survivors in the military and meeting the unique needs of male survivors. Many men find talking to staff first makes it easier to tell friends and family later. Additionally, the Safe Helpline website provides a list of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) designed to answer issues specific to male victims of sexual assault. To provide appropriate referrals to all survivors, Safe Helpline maintains a robust referral database. The database includes information for each Service’s SARCs, military police, legal personnel (e.g., JAG and SVC), medical and mental health providers, and chaplains. It also contains referral information for civilian affiliate sexual assault service providers and DVA resources. The database has also been enhanced for those planning a transition out of military service, providing VA, DoD, Department of Labor (DOL), and civilian resources for counseling, benefits, housing, transitions and employment.

Safe Helpline is built on an innovative communications infrastructure that integrates security and anonymity at every level of operation. Several features have been built in to provide this unique support. Before using online Safe Helpline services, users are provided an easy-to-read statement of the privacy policy and terms of service. Users are required to “Accept” this statement before entering the site. Relevant information on privacy and technology safety are layered throughout online sessions, ensuring users take the necessary steps to

102 Safe Helpline can be accessed at: www.safehelpline.org and by mobile at m.safehelpline.org for mobile devices. RAINN is the nation’s largest anti-sexual violence organization. In 2006, RAINN launched the nation’s first secure web-based support service, the National Sexual Assault Online Hotline. Their Hotline provides users with live, one-on-one help online through an instant-messaging type format. The Justice Department named the Online Hotline as a model for using technology to help victims. Since 1994, RAINN’s hotlines have helped over two million people affected by sexual violence.

RAINN Director Scott Berkowitz, gives Secretary of Defense Hagel a tour of the Safe Helpline facility, April 2014.

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

102

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

protect communications, as desired. In 2012, Safe Helpline expanded its capabilities by fielding the Safe Helpline Mobile Application (app), designed specifically for military sexual assault survivors. Available to adult Service members of the DoD community, including transitioning Service members (TSMs),103 the app enables mobile device users to access critical resources and manage the short and long-term effects of sexual assault. The new app offers four key features:

• Find Support – Users connect with live sexual assault professionals via phone or anonymous online chat from their mobile devices. Users can also navigate transition- related resources for Service members leaving the military (e.g., disability assistance, medical benefits, housing help, and employment assistance), or search for resources near their base or installation.

• Learn – Users learn key concepts in sexual assault prevention and recovery. Users can learn what to do in the event of a sexual assault, the common mental health effects of sexual assault, and risk reduction tips.

• Plan – Users receive assistance in creating and implementing a recovery plan.

Users are provided with a means to assess their current symptoms and can create self-care plans. Based on responses, the user is provided with a customized self-care plan with a list of suggested resources and exercises.

• Exercises – Users are led through breathing, stretching, and visualization

techniques that can reduce anxiety, stress, depression, and symptoms of post- traumatic stress.

Figure 20 – Safe Helpline Mobile App Screen short – from left to right, main navigation screen, “Learn” screen, “Create a Self Care Plan” screen, and “Exercises” screen

103 A TSM is defined by the DOL as an individual in active duty status (including separation leave) who registers for employment services and is within 24 months of retirement or 12 months to separation.

Safe Helpline employees save quotes from phone calls to post on their quote board and share with one another.

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

103

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

In 2013, DoD added a groundbreaking online victim support resource to Safe Helpline called the Safe HelpRoom. This chatroom allows military sexual assault survivors to connect with one another in a moderated and secure online environment. Moderators are trained to facilitate the interactions in the Safe HelpRoom, as well as to ensure participants receive the information and/or help they seek. The benefits of accessing peer support include survivors feeling less lonely, isolated, or judged. Speaking with peers can lead to improved coping skills, a greater sense of adjustment, and reduced stress. Survivors report that they appreciate receiving practical advice and information about treatment options from peers. Also, an online forum overcomes barriers to assistance that some victims face because it is free, anonymous, and available anywhere there is an internet connection. Evidence of Progress: Since its creation in April 2011, Safe Helpline has worked closely with Services and SARCs to increase visibility on bases and installations. Several indicators point to increased visibility and use of Safe Helpline.

• New Website Visitors. The Safe Helpline website uses Google Analytics to measure usage. This data indicates the safehelpline.org website had a 45% increase in new website visitors from FY 2013 – FY 2014 (Figure 21), and a 251% increase from FY 2012 to FY 2014. Analyses of statistical findings indicate that Safe Helpline’s leveraging of technology and its online presence makes it particularly responsive and accessible for users. Increased visibility is essential so that victims can access help and get information when and where they need it. Website visitors may directly search the Safe Helpline database of SARCs and other first responders in order to find referral and contact information. The number of searches increased by 264% from FY 2012 to FY 2013, and by 214% from FY 2013 to FY 2014. Across all three FYs, there were a total of 45,446 database searches. This increase indicates the service is a reliable source of valuable information, and the DoD is meeting a critical need.

• Increased Online and Telephone Helpline Usage. From FY 2013 to FY 2014, the total number of Safe Helpline phone user contacts increased by 70.5%, and the total number of online user contacts increased by 31%. In FY 2014, 5,990 phone users and 2,636 online users contacted Safe Helpline. The most frequently discussed topics for both male and female users were reporting options, emotional and social consequences of the assault, and mental health services. In FY 2014, nearly half of users who discussed a sexual assault event also discussed

The 2013 President’s Innovation Award given to the DoD Safe

Helpline App.

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

104

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

some barriers to reporting. The most frequently discussed barriers included not wanting anyone to know, feeling uncomfortable making a report, and fear of retaliation.

• Award for Safe Helpline Mobile App. The Safe Helpline Mobile App received

the 2013 American Telemedicine Association’s Presidential Innovation Award for best use of technology.

Figure 21 – Quarterly, first-time Safe Helpline website visits, FY 2012 to FY 2014.

Note: Safe Helpline may be accessed worldwide by anyone. The number of quarterly website visits does not have any correspondence or relationship to the number of victimizations in a given quarter. Fluctuations in visit numbers varies with Safe Helpline publicity, with most visits coming after a national advertisement or public service announcement airing.

2. Special Victims’ Counsel/Victims’ Legal Counsel (SVC/VLC) As a fundamental change in protecting the rights of the victim throughout the legal process, the SVC program trains military lawyers to represent sexual assault victims through the full spectrum of legal issues they may face, including the investigation and military justice processes. There are currently more than 185 SVCs providing support to victims across the Services. As mentioned previously in the Accountability LOE, the SVC program was launched as an Air Force pilot program in January 2013. It was quickly instituted by the other Services by January 2014. As a direct support mechanism for victims, the SVC is

34,616

41,997

41,511

69,447

26,198 28,528

44,983

31,047

4,022 7,276 8,912

23,189

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

N um

be r o

f F irs

t-T im

e Sa

fe H

el pl

in e

Vi si

ts

FY14

FY13

FY12

The men and women who volunteered to serve this great nation deserve the very best and the focus of our program is to give that level of care to our Airmen.

Lieutenant General Richard C. Harding former Judge Advocate General of the Air Force

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

105

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

the first of its kind to provide Service members and their family members who are victims of sexual assault their own attorney, free of charge. The Air Force JAG and his staff created the SVC with input from civilian advisors, in particular Meg Garvin, the Executive Director of the National Crime Victim Law Institute. “The SVC program is a tremendous step forward. The system is difficult enough to navigate for professionals; asking survivors to navigate it in the midst of trauma is simply nonsensical. And yet we know that being heard, securing privacy and reclaiming agency are each critical to recovery from an assault. So, if survivor’s rights are to have meaning and the system is to be just, providing rights to victims and providing attorneys to protect those rights are critical first steps,” says Garvin. Survivors who completed the SES reported the extent to which they were satisfied with the services provided by their SARC, VA, UVA and Special Victim’s Counsel/Victim’s Legal Counsel (SVC). As illustrated in Figure 22, the vast majority of survivors expressed satisfaction with the services provided by their SARCs, VAs/UVAs, and SVCs.

Figure 22 – Metric 7: Victim Experience – Satisfaction with Services Provided by SVCs, SARCs, and VAs/UVAs

a. Survivor Satisfaction with Reporting, Investigation and Prosecution Process As a primary objective for the Department, survivor satisfaction is paramount. The Department continuously monitors feedback provided by victims and survivors.104 Based on survivor feedback, the Department takes appropriate action to remedy gaps in 104 Feedback is captured through climate surveys, the SES, SARC/VA anecdotal feedback, bi-annual Survivor Meeting with the SAPRO director and the Workplace and Gender Relations Survey.

84%

88%

89%

90%

6%

5%

6%

7%

10%

8%

5%

3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Overall satisfaction with UVA N=83

Overall satisfaction with VA N=40

Overall satisfaction with SARC N=136

Overall satisfaction with SVC/VLC N=98

Metric 7: Victim Experience- Satisfaction with Services Provided by SVCs/VLCs, SARCs, and VAs/UVAs

Satisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Dissatisfied

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

106

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

the process. If a systemic issue is identified, action is initiated to generate policy or enhance existing policy. As displayed in Figure 23, 69% of victims who completed the SES reported that they were, to a large or moderate extent, kept informed of their case’s progress.

Figure 23 – Metric 10: Victim Experience – Victim Kept Regularly Informed of the Military Justice Process

3. DoD Sexual Assault Advocate Certification Program (D-SAACP) Professionalizing Sexual Assault Victim Advocates Rationale: Critical to successful advocacy and victim assistance are trained and knowledgeable professionals who are known and available to Service members and whose services and programs inspire victim reporting. Since 2005, each person covered under DoD SAPR policy who reports a sexual assault is offered the assistance of a SARC and SAPR VA. SARCs and SAPR VAs address victims’ safety needs, explain the reporting options, describe the services available, and assist with accessing resources as well as navigating the military criminal justice process. SARCs and SAPR VAs offer a specialized skill set and expertise to prepare victims for the road ahead and will advocate on behalf of a victim at every step along the way. Further, SARCs and SAPR VAs advise commanders and assist with sexual assault prevention and awareness training. SAPR professional certification signals to survivors that SARCs and SAPR VAs have the requisite level of knowledge and training to assist them in their recovery. Synopsis of Progress: Starting in FY 2011, the Department105 contracted with NOVA, which collaborated with the NACP106 to develop a formalized certification process to 105 In accordance with section 584 of the NDAA for FY 2012

48% 21% 18% 13%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Accurate up-to-date information on case status

N=109

Metric 10: Victim Experience- Victim Kept Regularly Informed of the Military Justice Process

Large extent Moderate extent Small extent Not at all

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

107

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

standardize the expectations and capabilities of SARCs and SAPR VAs across the Services. The Department incorporated industry best practices while working with NACP to address the unique needs of military victims. D-SAACP ensures that regardless of a victim’s location, he or she will have access to the same high-level standard of support. This program consists of three prongs: a credentialing infrastructure for SARCs and SAPR VAs; a research-based Competencies Framework; and the evaluation and oversight of SARC and SAPR VA training. D-SAACP professionalization addresses several areas, including:

• Improving the quality of response to sexual assault victims. Certification communicates to Service members and external stakeholders that the Department has a victim response approach consistent with national victim advocacy standards.

• Recognizing how SARCs and SAPR VAs contribute to unit readiness by creating a climate of trust and mutual respect. Certified SARCs and SAPR VAs address victim recovery needs and often assist commanders with restoring a healthy climate, thereby mitigating sexual assault’s negative effects on a unit.

• Communicating to military leadership that victim advocacy is a specialized skill

set. By involving them in the selection of SARCs and SAPR VAs, commanders better understand the role and importance of the sexual assault advocacy function, and they gain confidence in the capabilities of their SARCs and SAPR VAs.

• Demonstrating to Service members that victim advocacy leads to professional

development. Maintaining a certification requires SARCs and SAPR VAs to engage in continuing education and development that enhances teamwork and interpersonal skills, which in turn can increase their readiness to participate in a broader range of missions.

Evidence of Progress:

• Certifications Completed. Since the

program was launched in FY 2012, over 22,000 SARCs and SAPR VAs have been

106 NACP is a voluntary, national credentialing body for victim rights advocates and providers of crime victim services. Subject- matter experts from national and state victim assistance organizations in the NOVA extensive network, built on 40 years of work in the field of advocacy, bring specialized knowledge and years of hands-on victim service experience to the credentialing body in order to best meet the needs of the field. NOVA administers the D-SAACP through a contract with DoD. NOVA is the oldest and largest national organization of its kind in the world. Established in 1975, NOVA’s mission is to champion dignity and compassion for those harmed by crime and crisis. NOVA was central and catalytic to the launch of the NACP in 2003 and is the secretariat for this allied professional credential today. NOVA coordinates a network of best-practice subject-matter expertise on crime victimization and trauma mitigation training. This coordination includes identifying certification standards and requirements. NOVA also facilitates the processing, review and approval of national advocate credentialing applications for NACP.

To date, over 22,000 DoD SARCs and SAPR VAs have been D-SAACP

certified.

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

108

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

certified through the D-SAACP process. This program raises the bar of sexual assault victim advocacy and exceeds industry standards in its requirements, which results in high quality victim assistance and increases victims’ confidence in their access to professional SARCs and SAPR VAs. The SARCs and SAPR VAs play a vital role in supporting a victim from reporting through recovery, and proper training and professionalization of their role improves the quality of victim support and response.

• SES. Respondents who indicated they spoke to/interacted with a SARC or a

UVA/VA as a result of the sexual assault were asked about their satisfaction with these resources.

o Experiences with the SARC. The majority of respondents agreed their SARC

treated them professionally (96%), thoroughly answered their questions (95%), supported them and listened to them without judgment (both 94%), did not rush them to make decisions (91%), and advocated on their behalf when needed (89%).

o Experiences with the SAPR VA. Of the 27% of respondents who interacted with a SAPR VA, the majority of respondents agreed their VA treated them professionally and supported them (both 92%); listened to them without judgment, thoroughly answered their questions, and advocated on their behalf when needed (all 90%); and did not rush them to make decisions (87%).

o Experiences with the Unit VA (UVA). Of the 58% of respondents who interacted with a UVA, the majority of respondents agreed their UVA treated them professionally (93%), supported them and listened to them without judgment (both 92%), did not rush them to make decisions (88%), thoroughly answered their questions (86%), and advocated on their behalf when needed (84%).

o Extent of Assistance Provided by the SARC or UVA/VA. Of the 99% of respondents who used a SARC or a UVA/VA, more than half indicated, to a large extent, that the SARC or UVA/VA assisted them with referral to other services (62%), managing other services and concerns related to sexual assault (61%), keeping them informed throughout the process (59%), follow- up services or case status (58%), and dealing with mental health services (56%). Between 15%-20% indicated they were assisted to a moderate extent, between 9%-14% indicated they were assisted to a small extent, and between 10%-13% indicated they were not at all assisted.

o Satisfaction with Services Provided by SARC and UVA/VAs. Overall, the

large majority of survivors (between 84%-89%) were satisfied with the services they received from their SARC, UVA, and VA and would likely recommend other survivors meet with these individuals after experiencing a sexual assault.

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

109

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Survivor Summits with the SAPRO Director

Since 2010, SAPRO’s Director has invited survivors of sexual assault to participate in small- group discussions about their experiences, known as Survivor Summits. In one-on-one conversations, the director hears first-hand experiences about the challenges and successes experienced by sexual assault survivors. The meetings are a priority of SAPRO’s Director and have become a semiannual event. Participation in the meetings is completely voluntary; the personal information of attendees is not shared. Military Services send a survivor representative to D.C. to engage in one-on-one discussion about how the process can be improved and what roadblocks can be cleared for victims.

 Of the 95% of respondents who interacted with a SARC, 89% indicated that overall they were satisfied with the services provided by the SARC, and 91% indicated they would be likely to recommend another survivor meet with one

 Of the 27% of respondents who interacted with a VA, 88% indicated that overall they were satisfied with the services provided by the VA

 Of the 58% of respondents who interacted with a UVA, 84% indicated that

overall they were satisfied with the services provided by the UVA

 Of the 82% of respondents who interacted with a UVA or a VA, 83% indicated they would be likely to recommend another survivor meet with one

C. Role of the Commander Engaging Leaders in Victim Assistance Rationale: Commanders’ behaviors, priorities, counsel, and initiatives set expectations and tone for the entire unit. Commanders are responsible for ensuring all Service members under their command are fully informed of the reporting avenues and resources available to victims of sexual assault. In order to effectively promote and engage in the SAPR program, commanders require preparatory training and clearly defined roles. Synopsis of Progress: Since 2005, DoD policy has identified a number of command responsibilities to ensure the SAPR Program functions as designed. As the SAPR Program has expanded during the ensuing years, so have the commander’s responsibilities. However, victim feedback gathered by DoD SAPRO indicated military commanders differed significantly in the level of knowledge and understanding of their programmatic responsibilities. In FY 2012, the Secretary of Defense directed that DoD SAPRO conduct an assessment of the Services’ pre- command SAPR training programs for officers and senior enlisted members selected for command or leadership positions. The assessment found the quantity and

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

110

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

quality of training varied greatly among the Services. Given these findings, the Secretary directed the Services to work collaboratively with DoD SAPRO to develop common criteria and learning objectives during FY 2013 for pre-command SAPR courses. In FY 2014, DoD SAPRO reviewed the revised pre-command courses and will be reporting its findings to the Secretary in early FY 2015. Because commanders are responsible for good order and discipline within their units, victim assistance is an inherent part of their leadership responsibilities. Continued and expanded leadership involvement in the SAPR Program sends a clear, two-part message: Sexual assault has no place in the US Armed Forces; however, should it occur, command encourages victims to select one of the reporting options and get the help they need. Evidence of Progress: Some of the ways that DoD policy requires commanders to directly support victim assistance include:

• Select SARCs/SAPR VAs. Commanders are responsible for identifying and selecting mature, responsible, and trustworthy personnel to serve as unit SARCs and SAPR VAs. The Department created the D-SAACP Commander’s Guide107 to explain SARC and SAPR VA roles and duties, demonstrate the value of their specialized skill sets, and guide careful selection of personnel.

• Evaluate requests for expedited transfer of a victim and/or the accused. The Department implemented policy across the Services to provide commanders with balanced options to eliminate victims’ continued contact with their accused offenders through expedited transfers. A commander is able to administratively reassign or transfer Service members who have been victims of sexual assault or who are accused of committing a sexual offense based on a credible report.108

• Initiate the SAIRO Report. On September 30, 2014, the Department issued DTM 14-007 – SAIRO Report. The SAIRO Report provides general officer or flag officer (GO/FO) level commanders with oversight within eight calendar days over the local response to an Unrestricted Report. It is triggered by the filing of a DD Form 2910 (by a SARC) or an independent investigation (initiated by NCIS) of a sexual assault. The report details steps taken to address victim care, safety, and other matters. The report was developed as a means to increase visibility of incidents to senior leaders and enhance system accountability.

• Issue Military Protective Orders. Should the accused pose a threat to the victim,

the commander may issue a protective order requiring the accused to stay away from the victim.

107 Available at: http://sapr.mil/public/docs/d-saacp/D-SAACP_Commanders_Guide_20140514.pdf 108 Section 582 of NDAA for FY 2012; Section 1712 and 1713 of the NDAA for FY 2014

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

111

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

• Attend CMG Meetings. Commanders with victims or subjects involved in Unrestricted Reports of sexual assault must meet monthly with the installation commander and representatives from helping agencies, criminal investigators, and judge advocates to discuss progress in the case. Commanders must then provide victims with monthly updates in their cases.

D. Training Enhancements Expanding Training to Gain and Maintain Proficiency Rationale: New and evolving policies require the acquisition of new skill sets and bases of knowledge. In addition, first responders and service providers need initial and refresher training to keep their skills at a high level of proficiency. Synopsis of Progress: The Department sets training requirements in policy. The Military Services determine how to implement and train on those requirements. In addition, the Department can develop and provide no cost proficiency training for SAPR personnel. Evidence of Progress:

• Sexual Assault Healthcare Provider Training. In 2013, the Department issued policy requiring the Surgeons General of the Military Departments to use the DOJ’s A National Protocol for Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examinations as the standards for forensic examination of victims of sexual assault.109 The Surgeons General must also implement processes that provide sexual assault patients with priority treatment as emergency cases in military treatment facilities. Periodic training and education on the standards for healthcare personnel on safeguarding a victim’s Restricted Report are also being established.

• Advanced Training Course for Certified SARCs and SAPR VAs. DoD SAPRO and the Military Services collaborated with the DOJ Office of Justice Programs (OJP), OVC during 2013 to develop an advanced training course for SARCs and SAPR VAs. The 20-hour online course, Advanced Military Sexual Assault Advocate Training (AMSAAT), provides advanced sexual assault victim advocacy skills training by leveraging gaming technology to produce an interactive, online environment designed specifically for a military audience. This training is housed at OVC. Course participation authorization is limited to D- SAACP-certified SARCs and SAPR VAs as the course is intended to expand upon skills learned during initial training. The AMSAAT curriculum is based on OVC Training and Technical Assistance Center (TTAC) learning development best practices and DoD policy, and incorporates key elements of the DoD’s SARC and SAPR VA Training Competencies Framework (see “Improved Victim Services: Developed Standardized Core Competencies and Learning Objectives

109 DOJ (2004). A National Protocol for Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examinations. Washington, DC: DOJ.

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

112

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Specifically for SARCs and SAPR VAs,” below). Specifically, course participants learn how to:

o Better comprehend a survivor’s perspective o Understand the intricacies in his/her role as an advocate for victims of sexual

assault in a military setting o Provide crisis management support in complex or particularly sensitive cases o Fully understand the ethical implications of an advocacy role o Train other Service members for sexual assault awareness

The course provides an advanced training option for SARCs and SAPR VAs that counts toward the DoD certification requirement for continuing education credits.

• Standardized Core Competencies and Learning Objectives Specifically for SARCs and SAPR VAs. DoD SAPRO, in conjunction with the Military Services, developed standardized core competencies and learning objectives specifically for SARCs and SAPR VAs in 2013. Each core competency is based upon mandates from DoDI 6495.02 and incorporates the D-SAACP framework. DoDI 6495.02 requires that SAPR training leverage adult learning theory, which includes interaction and group participation.110 DoDI 6495.02 also requires SAPR VA training be scenario-based, interactive, and provide for instructor- critiqued role play wherein a trainee SAPR VA offers crisis intervention to a sexual assault victim.111 The SARC and SAPR VA core competencies include:

o Apply the SAPR program to aid victims of sexual assault o Demonstrate awareness of the impact of sexual assault on victims o Respond to victim reports and manage crises effectively o Coordinate services and advocate for victims o Conduct prevention activities o Communicate effectively o Facilitate education and training o Uphold ethical standards o Manage the SAPR program at the installation level

Learning objectives are defined for each of the above core competencies. Considerations and recommendations applying adult learning theory concepts and learning strategies are also included for each of the nine core competencies. The core competencies and learning objectives fulfill the requirements outlined in the guidance issued by the Acting USD(P&R) in September 2013 directing the Military Departments to implement standardized core competencies and learning objectives in courses conducted in FY 2014. The core competencies and

110 DoDI 6495.02, Enclosure 10, 2.a.(2), “SAPR Program Procedures,” Incorporating Change 1, February 12, 2014. Available at http://www.sapr.mil/index.php/dod-policy/directives-and-instructions. 111 DoDI 6495.02, Enclosure 10, 7.b.(2), “SAPR Program Procedures,” Incorporating Change 1, February 12, 2014. Available at http://www.sapr.mil/index.php/dod-policy/directives-and-instructions.

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

113

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

learning objectives also meet the NDAA for FY 2012 requirements (sections 584 and 585) that the Military Departments provide consistent SAPR training to all members of the Armed Forces and DoD civilian employees.112

E. Partnerships/Collaborations Improving Outcomes for Survivors Rationale: In order to provide victims with comprehensive care, DoD researches and collaborates with external organizations, government agencies, civilian advocacy organizations, and renowned experts in the field of sexual assault and trauma to incorporate best practices and improve response capabilities. Synopsis of Progress: Since the 2004 Care for Victims of Sexual Assault Task Force, the Department has actively employed collaboration with other federal agencies and organizations as a means to enhance policies and programs. Evidence of Progress:

• DOJ’s OVC. The “Strengthening Military-Civilian Community Partnership to Respond to Sexual Assault Training Program” is a two-day interactive and collaborative training program sponsored by the DOJ’s OVC that encourages civilian rape crises centers to establish partnerships with local military installations in order to more effectively respond to the needs of sexual assault victims in the military. The course development was a collaborative effort between the DOJ/OJP/OVC, the Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape (PCAR), the Military Services, and DoD SAPRO. The training was initially developed by PCAR with grant funding by OVC and has been expanded over the last three years by OVC. In FY13, OVC TTAC revised and updated the training materials, conducted a train-the-trainers event in Washington, DC to develop a cadre of 50 local VAs to present the training program in communities across the United States, and conducted three initial regional trainings in areas

112 The complete reference of core competencies and learning objectives for SARCs and SAPR VAs can be found at http://www.sapr.mil/public/docs/prevention/SAPR_SARC-VA_20130808.pdf.

This groundbreaking partnership between the Office for Victims of Crime and the Department of Defense Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office makes state-of-the-art training available to sexual assault response coordinators and victim advocates who serve victims on military installations.

Joye E. Frost Director, DoJ’s Office for Victims of Crime

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

114

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

near military installations (San Diego, CA; Columbia, SC; and Salemburg, NC). With the knowledge gained through this training process, civilian VAs will be able to serve as knowledgeable resources for military victims who choose to seek services off the military installations throughout the United States. Training participants gain information and skills related to: o On-installation resources, including the SARC, the military’s point of contact

for coordinating care

o Military culture and the unique needs of military victims

o Steps towards successful collaborations, including the importance of writing Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) between their community-based program and local military installations to define roles, formalize agreements, and ensure the longevity and continuity of such agreements

• DVA. The DoD signed an agreement with the DVA to establish procedures to

telephonically transfer sexual assault victims at risk for self-harm from the Safe Helpline to the Veterans Affairs Suicide Prevention Hotline. DoD and DVA also work to provide for a thorough and coordinated transfer process for survivors transitioning from active military service to the VA’s Veterans Service Coordinators. A critical component of an effective transfer is accurate and complete sexual assault documentation sharing and victim access. The SARCs are also responsible for reminding victims of sexual assault resources available to them during separation.113

• CDC. As previously noted in the Prevention LOE, the CDC played a central role in helping the DoD develop the 2014-2016 Prevention Strategy. In addition, the CDC and the DoD are jointly developing the 2016 National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, to better understand risk and protective factors for sexual assault posed by military service or affiliation.

• The Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Center for

Deployment Psychology (CDP). DoD SAPRO instructs deploying mental health providers at bi-monthly courses held by the CDP on how to work with the SAPR program in deployed environments.

F. Preventing Retaliation and Ostracism of Victims Making Sexual Assault Reports

Rationale: Victims who are considering filing an Unrestricted Report of sexual assault often look to the experiences of other survivors as an indicator of how they will be treated. In order to encourage continued reporting and engagement with the response 113 DoDI 6495.02

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

115

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

system, victims must be confident that they will be treated with respect and not blamed or retaliated against as a result of reporting a sexual assault. Synopsis of Progress: In FY 2014, each Service implemented new regulations against retaliation and ostracism associated with reporting crime.114 Retaliation includes taking or threatening to take an adverse personnel action or withholding or threatening to withhold a favorable personnel action, with respect to a member of the Armed Forces because the member made a protected communication (e.g., filed a report of sexual assault). Additionally, retaliation includes social ostracism and such acts of maltreatment committed by peers of the victim or by other persons because the member made a protected communication. Violation of Service regulations could result in criminal prosecution under the UCMJ under Article 92 – Failure to Obey Orders or Regulation. In addition, victims can avail themselves of the following resources to report retaliation or ostracism:

• Report to their commander, facilitated by SARC or SVC • Request an Expedited Transfer • Request a Safety Transfer, if they fear violence • Request a Military Protective Order • File a Military Equal Opportunity (MEO) Complaint • Report to a SARC at a different installation, facilitated by DoD Safe Helpline • Report to a commander outside their Chain of Command • Report to the DoD IG, invoking whistle-blower protection

Evidence of Progress:

DEOCS Results. Respondents were asked to rate their unit climate on a four-point scale with regard to whether unit members would label a person making a sexual assault report a troublemaker, the alleged offender(s) or their associates would retaliate against the person making the report, or if the career of the person making the report would suffer. These items are combined into a four-point index for analysis, with 1 being less favorable and 4 being most favorable. Overall, DEOCS respondents had favorable impressions of their command climates, in that they did not perceive these indicators of retaliation to be very likely in their units. On average, men (3.5 on a 4.0 scale) rated their command climates more favorably than women (3.4 out of 4) (Figure 24), and junior enlisted members and NCOs (3.4 out of 4) rated their climates less favorably than all other more senior ranks (3.7 out of 4) (Figure 25). While these ratings are rather favorable, they may not be fully representative of the entire force as the monthly DEOCS results are drawn from the convenience sample of respondents taking the survey each month. In addition, these results likely reflect the perceptions of the majority of Service members who have not experienced a sexual assault. As indicated

114 ALNAV 030/14, “Subj: Retaliation Against Members of the Armed Forces Reporting a Criminal Offense”; Air Force Guidance Memorandum to AFI 36-2909, Professional and Unprofessional Relationships; Army Directive 2014-20 (Prohibition of Retaliation Against Soldiers for Reporting a Criminal Offense).

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

116

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

by the results of the RMWS and the SES that follow, a significant portion of victims perceived some kind of social and/or professional retaliation associated with reporting.

Figure 24 – Metric 9a: Perceptions of Victim Retaliation – Command Climate Perspective by Gender

Figure 25 – Metric 9a: Perceptions of Victim Retaliation – Command Climate Perspective by Rank

• DoD Surveys of Active Duty Personnel. In FY 2012, the Workplace and Gender Relations survey found that of the women who experienced USC and reported it

3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4

1

2

3

4

Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.M ea

n Cl

im at

e I nd

ica to

rs o

f R et

ali at

io n

2014

Metric 9a: Perceptions of Victim Retaliation – Command Climate Perspective by Gender

Men Women

Le ss

fa vo

ra bl

e

M or

e fa

vo ra

bl e

3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7

1

2

3

4

Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.M ea

n C

lim at

e I nd

ica to

rs o

f R et

ali at

io n

2014

Metric 9a: Perceptions of Victim Retaliation – Command Climate Perspective by Rank

Jr. Enlisted/NCO All Remaining Ranks

Le ss

fa vo

ra bl

e

M

or e

fa vo

ra bl

e

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

117

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

to a military authority, 62% indicated they perceived some form of retaliation as a result of reporting the situation.115 Specifically: o 31% perceived social retaliation only o 26% perceived a combination of professional retaliation, social retaliation,

administrative action, and/or punishments o 3% perceived professional retaliation only o 2% perceived administrative action only o 38% did not perceive any retaliation

• In FY 2014, the RMWS found that of women who experienced a sexual assault

and reported it to a military authority, 62% indicated they perceived some form of retaliation as a result of reporting the situation (Figure 26). Specifically116: o 53% perceived social retaliation o 32% perceived professional retaliation o 35% perceived administrative action o 11% perceived a punishment for infraction o 38% did not perceive any retaliation

The Department is extremely concerned about the persistent high rate of perceived retaliation endorsed by these survey respondents. Because the survey is confidential and the identities of the respondents are not known to the Department, there is no way to determine if the behavior being perceived by respondents is in fact directly related to the reporting of a sexual assault or for some other reason not known to the respondent. Nevertheless, these results indicate that even though the Department has taken specific action to assess and address this problem, more must be done to prevent retaliation.

Figure 26 – Metric 9b: Perceptions of Professional and Social Retaliation – Victim Perspective

115 Data were not reportable for men. 116 Respondents to the RMWS study could perceive more than one type of retaliation.

11%

35%

53%

32%

62%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Punishment for infraction

Adverse administrative action

Social retaliation

Professional retaliation

Any type or retaliation

Percentage of women who reported a sexual assault and perceived retaliation

Metric 9b: Perceptions of Professional and Social Retaliation- Victim Perspective

Respondents could select

more than one type of

retaliation

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

118

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

• SES. The Department continues to express concern over the potential for retaliation against survivors who make reports of sexual assault, the Department fielded several questions on this topic in the SES. Respondents were asked about their experiences with two types of retaliation: social retaliation (e.g. ignored by coworkers, blamed for situation) and professional retaliation117 (e.g., loss of privileges, transferred to less favorable job) (Figure 27).118 o Of the 80% of respondents who made an Unrestricted Report, 59% indicated

they perceived social retaliation and 40% indicated they perceived professional retaliation since they reported their sexual assault119

o However, despite a large portion of survivors perceiving either social or professional retaliation, nearly three quarters of all respondents (73%) indicated, based on their overall experience of reporting, that yes, they would recommend others report their sexual assault, whereas 14% of respondents indicated no and 13% were unsure if they would recommend others report their sexual assault

Figure 27 – Metric 9c: Perceptions of Professional and Social Retaliation – Victim Perspective

117 This measure captures behaviors aligned with professional retaliation and is of concern to the Department policy office. This may not directly align with the legal definition of “retaliation.” In addition, this measure does not allow for identification of who perpetrated the retaliation (e.g., commander, immediate supervisor, etc.). Additional information will be collected in 2015 to better understand the experiences of survivors who experience social and/or professional retaliation. 118 Results from DMDC’s 2012 WGRA indicated some respondents did not want to report their sexual assault because they were afraid of possible social and/or professional retaliation. 119 Due to rounding to the nearest point, some percentages in Figure 27 may not add up to 100%.

9%

20%

10%

12%

20%

27%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Professional retaliation N=108

Social retaliation N=111

Metric 9c: Perceptions of Professional and Social Retaliation- Victim Perspective

Small extent Moderate extent Large extent

6% Professional only 27% Social only 33% Both 34% Neither

59% retaliation to any extent

40% retaliation to any extent

Social

retaliation N=111

Professional retaliation

N=108

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

119

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

While the results of the SES cannot be generalized to all victims of sexual assault, there is considerable consistency between these results and the findings from the RMWS, noted previously. These findings are further evidence that despite significant effort from the Department, social and professional retaliation remain an area of concern for survivors. As this appears to be an aspect of the SAPR program that has not improved over the past few years, the Department will take specific action to address this problem more fully in FY 2015.

G. Expanding Existing Policies to Better Meet Victims’ Needs Rationale: Victim assistance policy must evolve to remain relevant to survivors.

• Synopsis of Progress: Since 2005, DoD has expanded existing policies with the goal of providing comprehensive care and wraparound support for victims. While many of the policy enhancements were based on feedback from victims, other additions were made at the direction of DoD leadership and Congress. One means by which SAPRO obtains feedback is through Survivor Summits with the SAPRO Director (previously mentioned in the “ Role of the Commander” section).

Evidence of Progress:

• Extended Records Retention Period. With the reissuance of the DoDI 6495.02 in FY 2013, the Department implemented policy for the extended retention of DD Form 2910, Victim Reporting Preference Statement, and DD Form 2911, DoD SAFE Report, when requested by a victim making a Restricted Report.120 However, Congress expanded this requirement in the FY 2014 NDAA, by mandating the retention of these forms for 50 years in all Restricted Reports, regardless of whether it is requested by the victim. The Department’s SAPR policy is currently being updated to reflect this requirement.121

• Updated Security Clearance Guidance Supporting Victims of Sexual Assault. In 2013, the Director of National Intelligence issued new guidance to support victims of sexual assault who hold or wish to hold a government security clearance. Question 21 on Standard Form 86, “Questionnaire for National

120 DoDI 6495.02, Paragraph 4.p.(2), “SAPR Program Procedures,” Incorporating Change 1, February 12, 2014. Available at http://www.sapr.mil/index.php/dod-policy/directives-and-instructions. 121 Section 586 of the NDAA for FY 2012, Section 577 of the NDAA for FY 2013, and Section 1723 of the NDAA for FY 2014.

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

120

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Security Positions,” asks whether the applicant has in the last seven years consulted a health care professional regarding an emotional or mental health condition or if they were similarly hospitalized. The following language was added to Question 21.2: “Please respond to this question with the following additional instruction: Victims of sexual assault who have consulted with a health care professional regarding an emotional or mental health condition during this period strictly in relation to the sexual assault are instructed to answer No.” The added exemption came after a comprehensive review, in consultation with the members of Congress, DoD, other Federal agencies, and victim advocacy groups. Prior to this guidance, some victims may have been reluctant to seek mental health counseling for fear they may have had to disclose the counseling on their security clearance application.

• Sensitive Position Screening. In September 2013, the Services conducted a Sexual Assault Stand-down122 to review the credentials and qualifications of current-serving recruiters, SARCs, and SAPR VAs. The Services completed that review, with some Services expanding the review beyond the required categories of personnel and the specified criteria. As a measure to ensure appropriate personnel are assigned to sensitive positions, Secretary Hagel issued a directive in April 2014 to establish rigorous screening standards for personnel in sensitive positions. Proposed recommendations for future standards for SARC and SAPR VA screening and selection were approved by Secretary Hagel in June 2014 and policy changes are underway. Secretary Hagel determined a position is “sensitive” if it puts one in close proximity to a vulnerable person, e.g. a trainee or sexual assault victim.

• Involuntary Separation. In 2013, the Department updated instructions for

enlisted and officer separations that allow a victim, who made a report of sexual assault and is subsequently recommended for involuntary separation, to request GO/FO review of the circumstances of and grounds for the involuntary separation. This affords victims with a thorough explanation for why they are being removed from military service, a matter of particular importance for victims who believe their involuntary separation was initiated in retaliation for making a report of sexual assault.

122 A “stand-down” is a day that minimal mission operations are maintained but the primary focus of the day is defined and prioritized by leadership.

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

121

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

H. Conclusion

While there is more work to be done, the Department has made significant and lasting progress in expanding the services for survivors of sexual assault. This has been done through a significantly strengthened commitment to provide assistance wherever and whenever the victim may need it, most notably through the DoD Safe Helpline, the SVC program, and the professionalization of SARCs and SAPR VAs. The Department works diligently to expand the types of resources available to survivors, and has greatly enhanced the training for healthcare providers, SARCs, chaplains, and other support personnel who work directly with victims of sexual assault. Commanders are being held accountable for improvements to command climates that further victim trust and confidence. Additionally, the Department is actively coordinating victim assistance efforts with other federal agencies and civilian organizations to expand and improve available support options. The Department has collaborated closely with the DOJ’s OVC to provide advanced SAPR training for SARCs and SAPR VAs, and with the NACP to develop a standardized certification process to further professionalize SAPR program personnel. These collaborations exist not just to create consistency for the Department’s victim assistance efforts, but to better provide services for survivors of sexual assault across the world.

The Department is focused on providing the resources and flexibility needed to ensure every survivor of sexual assault has access to the services they require. Each survivor has different needs, expectations, and distinctive and deeply personal methods of recovery. To address survivors’ individual needs, the Department has developed a wide range of services and resources. Understanding the effectiveness of these

Advocacy & Victim Assistance Initiatives – Progress at a Glance

Action Status Establish a robust response system Complete  Create a crisis support capability Complete  Field a SVC/VLC Program Complete Professionalize Sexual Assault VAs Complete  Engage Commanders in Victim Assistance In Progress Expand existing policies to better meet victim needs In Progress  Expand training to gain and maintain proficiency In Progress  Leverage partnerships and collaboration to improve survivor outcomes In Progress 

Prevent retaliation and ostracism of victims making reports In Progress   Clear evidence of progress Indications of progress  Progress not evident

VI. Advocacy/Victim Assistance (LOE 4)

122

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

services and identifying shortfalls is a critical aspect of the Department’s strategy, and is covered in more detail under the next LOE: Assessment.

VII. Assessment (LOE 5)

123

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

A. Introduction The objective of the Assessment LOE is to incorporate responsive, meaningful, and accurate systems of measurement and evaluation into every aspect of the Department’s SAPR program. This includes effectively standardizing, measuring, analyzing, and assessing program progress. DoD SAPRO is the single point of responsibility for policy and oversight of the SAPR program within the Department. DoD SAPRO employs both qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods, including scientific research, data analysis, focus groups, and on-site assessments to evaluate the Department’s SAPR program and monitor its effectiveness.

Just as SAPRO serves as the overarching authority on assessment across the Department, each Service also performs its own set of internal assessments and inspections. SAPRO also supports outside assessments of the SAPR program by other agencies, such as the GAO, the US Commission on Civil Rights, and the DoD IG. Over the past several years, the Department has made several efforts to streamline the assessment process, culminating in two significant initiatives: a revolutionary new data management system, DSAID, and the first standardized survivor experience survey ever conducted by the Department.

B. Key Highlights 1. The Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database (DSAID) 2. Survivor Experience Survey (SES)

1. Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database (DSAID) The NDAA for FY 2009 directed the DoD to develop a centralized, case-level database for the collection and maintenance of information regarding sexual assaults involving a member of the Armed Forces.

Objective: Effectively standardize, measure, analyze and assess program progress. End state: DoD incorporates responsive, meaningful, and accurate systems of measurement and evaluation into every aspect of SAPR.

Sexual assault in the ranks is going to make – and has made – the military less effective than it can be. It is dangerous to our national security and it strikes at the heart and core of who we are.

Barack Obama President of the United States

May 16, 2014

VII. Assessment (LOE 5)

124

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

In accordance with this directive, the Department created DSAID, a secure, web-based database designed for reporting and case management of sexual assaults committed by or against Service members.123 DSAID captures case information input by Military Service and NGB SARCs about both restricted (without Personal Identifying Information (PII)) and unrestricted sexual assault reports, enhances a SARC’s ability to provide comprehensive and standardized victim case management, enables properly trained legal officers to input and validate case disposition data, supports Service SAPR program management, provides improved oversight of how sexual assault cases are managed, and enables the Department to meet Congressional reporting requirements.

While MCIO databases remain the systems of record for Unrestricted Reports, the MCIO systems “push” information into DSAID via a secure interface to ensure data standardization across the Department. DSAID may only be accessed by D-SAACP certified SARCs, Service legal officers, and PMs. DSAID’s internal architecture prevents anyone but Service SARCs and PMs from seeing active sexual assault cases.

a. Recent DSAID Enhancements When DSAID achieved initial operating capability in FY 2012, the first users were the Air Force and the NGB. DSAID became fully operational in FY 2013 and added Navy and Marine Corps SARCs. In FY 2014, Army SARCs were brought into the system. The Department will integrate USCG SARCs into DSAID in FY 2015.

Other enhancements to DSAID since FY 2013 include:

• Expanding expedited transfer functionality to capture more information and allow for the tracking of multiple transfers

• Modifying functionality for SARCs to upload a scanned image of a DD Form 2910, Victim Reporting Preference Statement, for Unrestricted Reports, enhancing availability of documentation to assist survivors in obtaining a record copy of the form

• Implementing a reporting functionality for Service SAPR PMs to generate

quarterly and annual Service reports, MSA reports, and customized data queries

• Implementing a web-based, self-guided training solution for SARCs and SAPR PMs consisting of simulations demonstrating DSAID’s capabilities

Given the great interest in case outcome information, the Department created a centralized case disposition module to streamline the capturing and reporting of case outcomes across the Military Services. Implemented by the Department in FY 2014, this enhancement enables Service legal officers to validate subject case dispositions entered by SARCs, track subject case outcomes, and record subject punishment information as applicable. The Department aggregates and analyzes this data to

123 Available at: http://responsesystemspanel.whs.mil/Public/docs/Reports/00_Final/00_Report_Final_20140627.pdf.

VII. Assessment (LOE 5)

125

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

support Department metric and non-metric information, and inform SAPR policy. This module also assists in the reporting of the several thousand case synopses appended to the Department’s Annual Report to Congress each year, as required by legislation. The Department has certified DSAID for compliance with all security requirements and is accredited for operation by the Designated Approval Authority Representative. SAPRO continues to enhance DSAID according to internal and external requirements, while collaborating with the system developer and the Military Services throughout the full system development lifecycle.

b. Future Plans for DSAID While DSAID is not designed to be a criminal intelligence database or a threat detection system, the data captured by DSAID and the system’s capabilities can be used for trend analysis and other informational purposes. In furtherance of this additional functionality, the Department has designed an enhanced reporting capability and a means for the secure storage and retrieval of DD Form 2910 and 2911 in Restricted Reports for deployment in FY 2015.

2. Survivor Experience Survey (SES) While the Department has worked diligently to improve its sexual assault support and services, until recently it had no standardized means for obtaining feedback from survivors using those resources. In creating the SES, the Department worked hard to ensure survivors were able to provide anonymous assessments of their experience with the Department’s SAPR resources. In developing this first survivor survey, the DoD worked jointly with the DoD IG and the Service SAPR programs, two of which had previously piloted victim survey efforts in their Services. Survivors of sexual assault are asked to provide feedback on their experiences with SAPR victim assistance personnel, the military health system, service providers, and other areas of support. The SES is designed to be an on-going, voluntary, anonymous survey that will be deployed to survivors in two phases.

a. Phase I: The Survivor Experience Survey (SES) The first phase of the SES was facilitated by SARC invitations to survivors 30-150 days after filing either a restricted or Unrestricted Report. Only results from SES Phase I are included in this report. SES Phase I is designed to assess the needs of survivors in the first few months after reporting, their satisfaction with services received, and their evaluation of the interactions they had with responders (e.g., SARCs, VAs, medical personnel). SES Phase I is also designed to capture perceptions of command climate, confidence in the response system in general, and how their needs could be better met.

b. Phase II: The Military Justice Experience Survey (MJES) Currently under development for fielding in FY 2015, the MJES will invite survivors making Unrestricted Reports to provide feedback about their experience with the military justice process after their case has reached final disposition. This will allow the Department to hear about survivor experiences with the investigative process, court proceedings, if applicable, and other items not addressed in the SES.

VII. Assessment (LOE 5)

126

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

C. Key Assessment Tools 1. Scientific Surveys of the Military Population Conducting and reviewing sexual assault-related research is a crucial part of the assessment LOE. The following surveys conducted by the Department and other Government Agencies helps identify factors pertaining to sexual assault and can also serve as the data source and foundation for future sexual assault program enhancements.

a. The Workplace and Gender Relations Surveys (WGRS) DMDC is responsible for conducting two Department-wide Workplace and Gender Relations Surveys (WGRS) to gather data related to military sexual assault: the WGRA and the Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of Reserve Component Members (WGRR). For both the WGRA and the WGRR, DMDC subscribes to survey methodology best practices promoted by the American Association for Public Opinion Research, and the techniques used by DMDC are those commonly used by other organizations that conduct surveys, such as the Census Bureau, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and Gallup.124 As mandated by Congress, the WGRA and WGRR are each conducted biennially, with the WGRA occurring in even years and the WGRR in odd years.125

The WGRS process is used by the Department to collect useful public health information in order to evaluate readiness, assess the health of the force, identify patterns and trends in behavior, understand barriers to reporting and factors related to retaliation, direct prevention and response efforts to sexual assault and sexual harassment, and assess victim satisfaction. The 2012 WGRA126 consisted of 94 questions on all facets of job satisfaction and gender relations, including a number of questions regarding unwanted gender-related behaviors, gender discriminatory behaviors, and USC.127 In order to calculate the estimated past-year prevalence rate for sexual assault, USC was defined in the WGRA as intentional sexual contact that was against a person’s will or which occurred when the person did not or could not consent, and includes completed or attempted sexual intercourse, sodomy (oral or anal sex), penetration by an object, and the unwanted touching of genitalia and other sexually-related areas of the body.

The WGRA was originally designed in the 1990’s as a public health survey to research attitudes and perceptions about gender-related issues, estimate the level of sexual harassment and USC, and identify areas where improvements are needed by surveying a random population of Active Duty personnel. Since 2006, the Department has 124 Available at: http://www.sapr.mil/public/docs/research/WGRA_Survey_Fact_Sheet.pdf. 125 Pursuant to the requirement in section 570 of the FY 2013 NDAA, the WGRA and WGRR will be conducted alternatively every two years beginning in FY 2014. 126 Available at: http://www.sapr.mil/public/docs/research/2012_workplace_and_gender_relations_survey_of_active_duty_members- survey_note_and_briefing.pdf. 127 Note: The RAND Corporation administered part, but not all, of the WGRA survey questions in 2014. See Annex 1.

VII. Assessment (LOE 5)

127

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

incorporated questions and calculated survey data about USC, using such questions to estimate past-year prevalence rates of USC, unwanted gender related behaviors (i.e., sexual harassment and sexist behavior), and gender discriminatory behaviors and sex discrimination. Knowing these trends, the survey results provide the DoD with insight into the overall readiness and health of the force.

Given the significant interest in the results of the 2012 WGRA, the leadership of the Senate Armed Services Committee requested that Secretary Hagel externalize the 2014 WGRS for an outside review. Consequently, the Department contracted with the RAND Corporation to conduct an independent assessment, and if necessary, update of the Department’s survey methodology and to administer the 2014 WGRS.

b. The RAND Corporation Military Workplace Study (RMWS) In early 2014, DoD asked the RAND National Defense Research Institute to conduct an independent assessment of sexual assault, sexual harassment, and gender discrimination in the military. The RMWS invited close to 560,000 service members to participate in a survey fielded in August and September of 2014. RAND created and simultaneously administered two versions of the survey. One version employed DMDC’s prior form questions about sexual assault (USC) and sexual harassment, allowing for some level of comparison with previous years’ survey data. The other version used a newly developed measure to estimate past year prevalence of sexual assault and sexual harassment. These newer items were designed to closely track with the legal language describing the crimes that constitute sexual assault in the UCMJ for Article 120 and Article 80 crimes. The survey measures of sexual harassment and gender discrimination, which together are referred to as sex-based equal employment opportunity (EEO) violations, use criteria drawn directly from the UCMJ and federal civil rights law. Specifically, the RMWS measures:

• Sexual assault, which captures three mutually exclusive categories: penetrative, non-penetrative, and attempted penetrative crimes

• Sex-based EEO violations, which consist of: o Sexually hostile work environment—a workplace characterized by pervasive,

unwelcome sexual advances, verbal or physical conduct that offends service members

o Sexual quid pro quo—incidents in which someone misuses their power or influence within the military to attempt to coerce sexual behavior in exchange for a workplace benefit

VII. Assessment (LOE 5)

128

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

o Gender discrimination—incidents in which service members are subject to mistreatment on the basis of their gender that affects their employment conditions

Recognizing that DoD is also interested in trends in sexual assault, sexual harassment, and gender discrimination, RAND fielded a portion of the 2014 surveys using the same measures as previous DoD surveys on this topic. RAND’s top-line results for both measures are included as Annex 1 to this report. These results are likely to generate many questions about the details regarding the sexual assaults and EEO violations estimated to have occurred in FY 2014, as well as about differences in estimates produced by the prior form and the new questionnaire. The RAND team will continue to analyze these and other topics in the winter of 2014–2015. Reports summarizing the findings from these analyses will be released in late spring 2015.

c. The Service Academy Gender Relations Survey (SAGR) The Service Academy Gender Relations Survey (SAGR) is conducted by DMDC every two years, as required by Section 532 the NDAA for FY 2007, and is administered at all three of the Military Service Academies. The survey is completely voluntary, anonymous, and covers topics such as the estimated past-year prevalence of USC and sexual harassment, reporting and training, and the characteristics of unwanted sexual and gender-related behaviors. Given the large number of surveys administered to cadets and midshipmen each year, Congress agreed to help the Department minimize cadet and midshipman survey fatigue by alternating surveys with focus groups, every other year.

During the survey years, DMDC uses scientific, state of the art statistical techniques to draw conclusions from random, representative samples of the MSA student populations. A cornerstone of DMDC’s methodology is the use of complex sampling and weighting procedures to ensure accuracy of estimations to the full student population at each MSA. The use of scientific sampling and weighting methods to construct population estimates are the same methods used by all federal statistical agencies (e.g., the Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics), private survey organizations (e.g., RAND, WESTAT, and RTI), and well-known polling organizations (e.g., Gallup, Pew, and Roper).128

d. DEOMI Organizational Climate Survey (DEOCS) The DEOCS provides commanders with a unique opportunity to receive feedback from their unit on a wide variety of topics, including the unit’s perceptions of command support of the SAPR program. The DEOCS is a confidential, command-requested organization development survey focusing on issues of EO and organizational effectiveness (OE).129 The questionnaire focuses on four primary areas: MEO, Civilian EEO, OE, Perceptions of Discrimination/Sexual Harassment, and SAPR. A team of analysts, located at DEOMI, receives the raw DEOCS data from service members on a

128 Available at: http://www.sapr.mil/public/docs/research/2013_SAGR_Focus_Group_Report.pdf. 129 Available at: https://www.deocs.net/DocDownloads/FrequentlyAskedQuestionsJuly2014.pdf.

VII. Assessment (LOE 5)

129

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

continuous basis, with approximately 300,000 individual survey responses obtained from about 2,000 units per month. The results from the survey are provided to the requesting Commander and the Commander’s supervisor.

In FY 2013, DoD SAPRO worked with the Services and DEOMI to field SAPR climate questions on the DEOCS. The most recent version of the DEOCS, known as DEOCS 4.0 and launched in January 2014, contains seven measures assessing SAPR climate:

• Perceptions of Safety refers to members’ feelings of safety from being sexually assaulted where they currently live and perform their work/duties

• Chain of Command Support refers to members’ perceptions of the extent to which command behaviors are targeted towards preventing sexual assault and creating an environment where members feel comfortable reporting a sexual assault

• Publicity of SAPR Information refers to the extent to which members perceive

that SAPR-related information and resources are publicly displayed and openly communicated

• Unit Reporting Climate refers to the extent to which members perceive that the

chain of command would take appropriate actions to address an Unrestricted Report of sexual assault and the extent to which social and professional retaliation would occur if a sexual assault were reported

• Perceived Barriers to Reporting Sexual Assault refers to the type and frequency

of barriers to reporting sexual assault that individuals perceive within their unit/organization

• Unit Prevention Climate refers to individuals’ intentions to act if they were to

observe a situation that may lead to a sexual assault

• Restricted Reporting Knowledge measures individuals’ knowledge of the Restricted Reporting option

The DEOCS has been available to commanders for several years as a tool to help assess their unit climate. However, prior to FY 2013, there was no standardized approach to the administration of the DEOCS across Services. In addition, not all Services used the DEOCS. However, this changed in FY 2013 when the Secretary of Defense directed military commanders to conduct an annual climate assessment of their units, or within 120 days of assuming command. Congress codified this requirement in Section 572 of the NDAA for FY 2013. Results from the DEOCS play a primary role in assisting commanders with the assessment process. Additionally, in an effort to enhance commander accountability and improve insight into command climate, the Secretary of Defense further directed that the results of the surveys be provided to the next level up in the chain of command within 30 days of receipt of results. While the

VII. Assessment (LOE 5)

130

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

requirement to conduct the survey is not optional, taking the survey is voluntary for military and civilian personnel.

The Department is using consolidated DEOCS results from across the Services to determine assessment methodologies of SAPR program effectiveness. The DEOCS generates significant data that are helpful at the unit level. However, while significant, the sum total of DEOCS results from across the Services is not representative of the entire military population, and therefore, the Department is cautious about generalizing DEOCS results to the total force. Nonetheless, the DEOCS and climate assessments have become integral to a continuous feedback process the Department has instituted to drive organizational change. Additionally, SAPRO and DEOMI have collaborated to include SAPR-related resources in DEOMI’s Commanders Toolkit130 to address survey- identified shortcomings and provide strategies for improvements.

2. Focus Groups Focus Groups are integral to the assessment of the Department’s overall SAPR program. They provide important qualitative feedback that enhances the understanding of quantitative trends seen in surveys. The DoD leverages focus groups to better capture how Service members in the field perceive policies and programs.

a. Bi-Annual Military Service Academy (MSA) Focus Groups Similar to DMDC’s survey methodology that follows accepted industry practices, DMDC’s focus group methodology employs a standard qualitative research approach to collect subjective details from participants on a limited number of topics. The methodology used in the most recent MSA focus groups, conducted in 2013, follows the same principles used in the previous three focus group cycles. The methodology for the 2013 focus groups was replicated for each session at each Academy. Although the results cannot be generalized to the population of the MSAs, they provide insights into issues and ideas for further consideration.131

b. 2014 Department of Defense Report of Focus Groups on Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (2014 FGSAPR)

The goal of this focus group effort was to engage military members across the Department in small group discussions on issues related to sexual assault to inform this report to the President. These discussions were designed to capture sentiments regarding how recent changes in sexual assault policies and programs have impacted military members and their workplace environments, as well as address the military’s climate of sexual assault response and prevention. Participants in the study were not asked to talk about personal experiences of sexual assault, but rather to share their insights and perspective on these important issues. This is the only formal qualitative assessment of this population across the entire Department, including Active Duty and Reserve component members.

130 DEOMI’s Commander’s Toolkit available at: http://www.deomi.org/CommDirectorInfo/index.cfm. 131 Available at: http://www.sapr.mil/public/docs/research/2013_SAGR_Focus_Group_Report.pdf.

VII. Assessment (LOE 5)

131

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

DMDC’s focus group methodology employs a standard qualitative research approach to collect subjective details from participants on a limited number of topics. The methodology for the 2014 FGSAPR was consistent across locations. Although the results cannot be generalized to the population of military members, they provide insights into issues and ideas for further consideration. Participation in the 2014 FGSAPR was voluntary and participants were selected at random at each installation. Additional information about the FGSAPR methodology is included in DMDC’s report, which is Annex 3 to this report.

3. Annual Reports Part of SAPRO’s responsibility in assessing the Department’s SAPR program is to publish reports that present information on recent progress, initiatives, and summaries of SAPR efforts. While this document marks the first time the Department has provided a report directly to the President, the Department annually publishes two reports in order to inform Congress, stakeholders, the public, and the men and women in uniform about progress in sexual assault prevention and response.

Since 2004, the Department has consolidated sexual assault statistical data and programmatic information from the Military Services in the Annual Report on Sexual Assault in the Military. Since 2009, at the recommendation of the GAO, the Department has used the Annual Report as its means to conduct oversight of Service policies and programs. Consequently, the data provided in the Annual Report serve as the foundation and catalyst for future progress in sexual assault prevention, training, and victim care. The Annual Report is also fundamental to measuring the accountability goals of the Department, as they require detailed information from each of the Military Services regarding their respective SAPR efforts.

The Department provides the Annual Report to Congress each year, as mandated by section 577 of the NDAA for FY 2005, as amended by section1602 of the NDAA for FY 2011. While Congress has established a number of reporting requirements that address statistical data about reports of sexual assault by and against Service members and the outcomes of those cases, the Department also requires the Services to report on their activities and policy enhancements made during the year. The Department also chooses to include the results of the latest research to provide a fuller picture of progress in sexual assault prevention and response. The Department reports on the FY cycle (October 1 – September 30) and is required to provide the report to Congress no later than April 30 each year. The FY 2014 Annual Report will be provided to Congress in April 2015.132

a. Assessment of Sexual Harassment and Violence at the U.S. Military Service Academies

Section 532 of the NDAA for FY 2007 requires an assessment by academic program year on the effectiveness of the policies, training, and procedures at USMA, USNA, and USAFA with respect to sexual harassment and violence involving Academy personnel. 132 Published Annual Reports are available at: http://www.sapr.mil/index.php/annual-reports.

VII. Assessment (LOE 5)

132

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

This annual report provides data on reported sexual assaults involving cadets and/or midshipmen, as well as policies, procedures, and processes implemented in response to sexual harassment and violence during the academic program year. The Department has published an MSA report each of the past eight years.133

D. Conclusion

The continual assessment of the Department’s SAPR program is essential to identifying effective programs and initiatives as well as areas that need improvement. Through surveys, focus groups, and other qualitative and quantitative methods of assessment, the Department collects important data that are used to enhance the SAPR program at all levels. For the very first time, this assessment includes data from the DoD SES, which offered military survivors of sexual assault the opportunity to provide their perspective and opinions on how well the Department responded. The Department’s investment in DSAID, the centralized database that collects and stores case information and outcomes, enables the Services and SAPRO to capture data and provide enhanced case management in a standardized way.

The Department is also committed to increasing transparency through its Assessment LOE. By annually publishing details of the Department’s SAPR efforts, along with statistics on the number of cases of sexual assault, the Department wants to clearly convey that reducing sexual assault – with the goal to eliminate it – is a priority for the Department. As new programs, initiatives, and policies are implemented, the

133 Published Assessments are available at: http://www.sapr.mil/index.php/annual-reports. Note: Cadets from the Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) are dispersed throughout colleges and universities around the United States. Until they enter active duty, ROTC cadets and midshipmen do not fall under the SAPR program. However, each of the Services has included SAPR as part of its ROTC training curricula.

Assessment Initiatives – Progress at a Glance

Action Status Develop and administer a DoD-wide survey for sexual assault survivors Complete 

Align all Military Service sexual assault data into one common database Complete 

Validate & improve survey methodology and analysis of yearly sexual assault data In Progress

Expand sexual assault questions on DEOCS to capture installation-level feedback Complete 

 Clear evidence of progress Indications of progress  Progress not evident

VII. Assessment (LOE 5)

133

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Department will maintain and expand its assessment functions in an effort to better evaluate the SAPR program and ultimately refine its effectiveness.

VIII. CONCLUSION & WAY AHEAD

134

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

The Department’s goal is to reduce, and ultimately eliminate, sexual assault from the Armed Forces. The crime is a detriment to the welfare of men and women in uniform and is antithetic to military values. Because there is no single “silver bullet” solution, combatting it requires sustained persistence and innovation, coupled with a multidisciplinary approach across the DoD SAPR five LOEs.

DoD is committed to the prevention of sexual assault and has worked diligently to define the scope of the problem and take appropriate steps to field solutions that will affect lasting organizational change. As illustrated over the past three years in the implementation of more than 100 SAPR NDAA requirements; the ongoing implementation of 41 SAPR initiatives directed by the current and prior Secretaries of Defense; and the enduring measurement and evaluation of SAPR reforms in meeting intended outcomes, the Department has demonstrated significant progress in its unequivocal commitment to eradicating sexual assault.

While these accomplishments are notable, the DoD’s work is not complete, as leadership and Service members alike realize there’s still much to be done. To this end, the Department remains focused on sustaining a climate in which sexual assault is seen as unacceptable not just because it is a crime, but because it is counter to the Department’s core values.

Through innovative practices and emphasis on primary prevention the Department continues its commitment to excellence in response to and care for survivors. The Department is resolved to increasing satisfaction and confidence in the system and lessening the stigma associated with reporting. In addition, DoD is dedicated to maintaining the advancements employed regarding timely, thorough, and efficient investigative and legal processes in its aim to hold offenders appropriately accountable.

Senior leaders have provided unprecedented leadership engagement on sexual assault prevention and response, employing a proactive communication posture with clear and consistent messaging. Through approaching survivors for feedback, collaborating with external partners and experts, working with Congressional and White House leaders, and sharing best and promising practices throughout the Services, DoD continues to seek inventive and inspiring methods to inform and augment the DoD SAPR program. This approach has allowed DoD to put the problem of sexual assault into sharp focus. Unfortunately, that same level of clarity in prescribing lasting solutions has evaded all who have sought it out to date.

Nonetheless, the Department is advancing the national conversation on sexual assault prevention. Additional research and evaluation are necessary in order to refine and optimize existing approaches, as well as discover opportunities for improvement. Ultimately, DoD will uphold an environment intolerant of sexual assault, where all members are leaders who take prompt action to correct behaviors counter to the core

VIII. Conclusion & Way Ahead

135

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

military values of trust, dignity, and respect. Beyond 2014, the Department will continue its concerted endeavor to sustain and enhance ongoing and new SAPR efforts, and to identify and close gaps.

136

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Acknowledgments

DoD SAPRO could not have accomplished this mission without the leadership, vision, and valuable experience of countless individuals who have a great passion to eliminate sexual assault from the DoD and care for its victims. Members of the DoD SAPRO team who brought vast personal and professional experience to bear in reviewing and analyzing the current policies and programs regarding sexual assault, led by DoD SAPRO Director Major General Jeffrey J. Snow (USA), include: Dr. Nathan Galbreath (USAF Ret.), Senior Executive Advisor Dr. Allison S. Greene-Sands, Report Lead Colonel Litonya Wilson (USA), Deputy Director Colonel James “JR” Twiford (USAF), Chief Of Staff Anita M. Boyd, MHS Dr. Suzanne M. Holroyd Bette M.S. Inch, MSCP, CA Heather D. Pope-Turner Diana M. Rangoussis, Esq. Edward Rushin, (USN Ret.) Darlene Sullivan, (USA Ret.) The DoD SAPRO team was aided by contractors from Booz Allen Hamilton who provided invaluable contributions to the overall effort. These individuals, led by Elizabeth Talbot, provided support in developing data collection tools, collecting and analyzing data, and providing detailed policy and program research and editorial support: Dr. Stephen Axelrad Maren P. Barney Kristal L. DeKleer Dr. Dina Eliezer Dr. Aubrey J. Hilbert Gregory M. Matthews Erin McCarthy Sean Mullins Alexander “Zandy” Schorsch Additional contract support provided in the development and deployment of DSAID was led by Kyra Williams from Booz Allen Hamilton and James Green from ASM Research. DoD SAPRO would like to thank the Military Departments, the NGB, OGC, IG, ODMEO, DMDC, and USCG for their continued support, advice, and contribution to this project.

Provisional Statistical Data on Sexual Assault

Provisional Statistical Data on Sexual Assault

Fiscal Year 2014

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND ON DOD SEXUAL ASSAULT DATA ……………………………………………………… 1 What It Captures ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 1

Reports of Sexual Assault ………………………………………………………………………… 1 Subject Dispositions ………………………………………………………………………………… 2

Who It Describes …………………………………………………………………………………………… 4 When It Happened …………………………………………………………………………………………. 4 How It Is Gathered …………………………………………………………………………………………. 5

Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database …………………………………………………. 5 RAND’s Military Workplace Survey (RMWS) ……………………………………………….. 6 Survivor Experience Survey (SES) …………………………………………………………….. 6 Command Climate Survey (DEOCS) ………………………………………………………….. 7

Why It Is Collected …………………………………………………………………………………………. 7 PROVISIONAL OVERVIEW OF REPORTS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT MADE IN FY 2014 ……………… 8 FY 2014 UNRESTRICTED REPORTS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT ……………………………………….. 14 Crimes Alleged in Unrestricted Reports …………………………………………………………… 14 Investigations of Unrestricted Reports …………………………………………………………….. 15 Sexual Assault Subject Dispositions in FY 2014 ………………………………………………. 16 Military Subjects Considered for Disciplinary Action ………………………………………….. 18 Military Justice …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 21

Courts-Martial for a Sexual Assault Offense ………………………………………………. 21 Nonjudicial Punishment ………………………………………………………………………….. 24 Administrative Discharges and Adverse Administrative Actions ……………………. 25 Probable Cause Only for a Non-Sexual Assault Offense …………………………….. 26 Subjects Outside DoD Legal Authority ……………………………………………………… 28

Provisional Demographics of Victims and Subjects in Completed Investigations …… 30 Sexual Assaults Perpetrated by Foreign Nationals against Service Members ………. 32 Demographics of Unrestricted Reports in CAIs ………………………………………………… 32 Demographics of Restricted Reports in CAIs …………………………………………………… 33 FY 2014 RESTRICTED REPORTS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT …………………………………………… 33 Demographics of Restricted Reports of Sexual Assault …………………………………….. 34 FY 2014 SERVICE REFERRAL INFORMATION ………………………………………………………… 35 FY 2014 EXPEDITED TRANSFERS ……………………………………………………………………… 36

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

ii

LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Reports of Sexual Assault and Investigations Completed in FY 2014 …………. 8 Exhibit 2: Total Reports of Sexual Assault Made to the Department — Unrestricted

Reports and Restricted Reports, FY 2007 – FY 2014 …………………………………….. 10 Exhibit 3: Comparison of Victim-Driven Accounting to Case-Driven Accounting of

Unrestricted Reports, CY 2004 – FY 2014 ……………………………………………………. 10 Exhibit 4: Service Member Victims in DoD Sexual Assault Reports for Incidents that

Occurred in Military Service, CY 2004 – FY 2014 ………………………………………….. 11 Exhibit 5: Estimated Number of Service Members Experiencing Unwanted Sexual

Contact Based on Past-Year Prevalence Rates versus Number of Service Member Victims in Reports of Sexual Assault for Incidents Occurring During Military Service, CY 2004 – FY 2014 …………………………………………………………………………………… 12

Exhibit 6: Victim Reporting Rates of Sexual Assault by Military Service, FY 2007 – FY 2014 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 13

Exhibit 7: Offenses Originally Alleged in Unrestricted Reports of Sexual Assault, FY 2014 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 15

Exhibit 8: FY 2014 Subjects Outside DoD Legal Authority …………………………………….. 16 Exhibit 9: Dispositions of Subjects Under DoD Legal Authority, FY 2014 ………………… 19 Exhibit 10: Percentage of Military Subjects with Misconduct Substantiated, Command

Action Precluded, and Command Action Declined, FY 2009 – FY 2014 ……………. 20 Exhibit 11: Breakdown of Disciplinary Actions Taken Against Subjects for Sexual

Assault Offenses, FY 2007 – FY 2014 …………………………………………………………. 21 Exhibit 12: Dispositions of Subjects Against Whom Sexual Assault Court-Martial

Charges were Preferred, FY 2014 ………………………………………………………………. 23 Exhibit 13: Dispositions of Subjects Receiving Nonjudicial Punishment, FY 2014 …….. 25 Exhibit 14: Dispositions of Subjects for Whom There was Only Probable Cause for

Non-Sexual Assault Offenses, FY 2014 ……………………………………………………….. 27 Exhibit 15: Subjects Investigated for Sexual Assault by the Department Who Were

Outside Its Legal Authority, FY 2009 – FY 2014 ……………………………………………. 28 Exhibit 16: Subjects with Unfounded Allegations in Completed DoD Investigations of

Sexual Assault, FY 2009 – FY 2014 ……………………………………………………………. 29 Exhibit 17: Total Reports of Sexual Assault in CAIs: Unrestricted Reports and Restricted

Reports, FY 2008 – FY 2014 ………………………………………………………………………. 31 Exhibit 18: Reports of Sexual Assault in CAIs: Comparison of Victim-Driven and Case-

Driven Accounting of Unrestricted Reports, FY 2007 – FY 2014 ……………………… 32 Exhibit 19: Total Number of Reports that Were Initially Made as Restricted, the

Remaining Number of Restricted Reports, and the Number of Reports that Converted, FY 2007 – FY 2014 …………………………………………………………………… 34

Exhibit 20: Average Number of Service Referrals per Service Member Victim of Sexual Assault, FY 2007 – FY 2014 ……………………………………………………………………. 35

Exhibit 21: SAFEs Reported by the Military Services involving Service Member Victims, FY 2007 – FY 2014 …………………………………………………………………………………… 36

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

iii

LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Sample Sizes for DEOCS Respondents ………………………………………………….. 7 Table 2: Sexual Assault Offenses Punishable by the Uniform Code of Military Justice

(UCMJ) ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 14 Table 3: Military Subject Dispositions in FY 2014 ………………………………………………… 18 Table 4: Demographics of Victims in Completed Investigations ……………………………… 30 Table 5: Demographics of Subjects in Completed Investigations ……………………………. 31 Table 6: Demographics of Victims in Restricted Reports ………………………………………. 34 Table 7: Expedited Transfers and Denials, FY 2012 – FY 2014 …………………………….. 36

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

1

PROVISIONAL STATISTICAL DATA ON SEXUAL ASSAULT

BACKGROUND ON DOD SEXUAL ASSAULT DATA What It Captures Reports of Sexual Assault

• The Department uses the term “sexual assault” to refer to a range of crimes, including rape, sexual assault, nonconsensual sodomy, aggravated sexual contact, abusive sexual contact, and attempts to commit these offenses, as defined by the UCMJ. When a report is listed under a crime category in this section, it means the crime was the most serious of the infractions alleged by the victim or investigated by investigators. It does not necessarily reflect the final findings of the investigators or the crime(s) addressed by court-martial charges or some other form of disciplinary action against a subject.

• Pursuant to reporting requirements levied by Congress, DoD sexual assault data capture the Unrestricted and Restricted Reports of sexual assault made to the Department during a Fiscal Year (FY) that involves a military subject and/or a military victim.

• In the context of the DoD statistics that follow, an Unrestricted Report of sexual assault is an allegation by one victim against one or more suspects (referred to in the Department as “subjects of investigation” or “subjects”) that will be referred for investigation to a Military Criminal Investigation Organization (MCIO; called CID, NCIS, or AFOSI for Army, Navy/Marine Corps, and Air Force, respectively). The number of Unrestricted Reports is based on data entered into the Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database (DSAID) by Sexual Assault Response Coordinators (SARCs). These data are supported by additional information about the incident “pushed” into DSAID from MCIO information systems.

• Data on Restricted Reports are limited, because these are reports of sexual assault made to specified parties within the Department (e.g., SARC, SAPR VA, or healthcare provider) that allow the report to remain confidential, while also enabling the victim to seek care and services. Given the victim’s desire for confidentiality, these reports are not investigated and victims are not required to provide many details about these sexual assaults. As a result, the SARC only records very limited data about the victim and the offense in DSAID. Subject identities are not requested or maintained by the Department for Restricted Reports entered into DSAID.

• The Department’s sexual assault reporting statistics include data about sexual contact crimes by adults against adults, as defined in Articles 120 and 125 of the UCMJ and Article 80, and attempts to commit these offenses. These data do not include sexual assaults between spouses or intimate partners that fall under the purview of DoD Family Advocacy Program (FAP), nor do these data include sexual harassment which falls under the purview of EO. While most victims and subjects in the following data are aged 18 or older, DoD statistics also capture some victims and subjects aged 16 and 17. Service members who are approved for early enlistment prior to age 18 are included in this category. Since the age of

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

2

consent under the UCMJ is 16 years, military and civilian victims aged 16 and older are included if they do not fall under FAP’s purview.

• The number of sexual assaults reported to DoD authorities in a given fiscal year does not necessarily reflect the number of sexual assaults that occurred in that fiscal year. − Civilian research indicates victims only report a small fraction of sexual

assaults to law enforcement. For example, of the 1.1 million U.S. civilian women estimated to have experienced nonconsensual vaginal, oral, or anal penetration in 2005, only about 173,800 (16 percent) said they reported the matter to police. For the estimated 301,000 U.S. civilian college-aged women who experienced nonconsensual vaginal, oral, or anal penetration, only about 34,615 (11.5 percent) indicated they reported it to the police.1 The definition of sexual assault used in this college sample refers to penetrating crimes only. Consequently, it captures fewer crimes than DoD’s definition of sexual assault, which encompasses both penetrating and contact (non-penetrating) sexual offenses as well as attempts to commit these offenses.

− This civilian reporting behavior is mirrored in the U.S. Armed Forces. Over the past eight years, the Department estimates that fewer than 15 percent of military sexual assault victims report the matter to a military authority. However, in FY 2014 the Department estimates that over 20 percent of Service members made a report of sexual assault for an incident that occurred during military service.

Subject Dispositions Once the investigation of an Unrestricted Report is complete, Congress requires the Military Services to provide the outcome of the allegations against each subject named in an investigation. These are called “subject dispositions.”

• The Department holds those Service members who have committed sexual assault appropriately accountable based on the available evidence. − Legal authority for the Department is limited to Service members who are

subject to the UCMJ and, therefore, its military justice jurisdiction. Except in rare circumstances, a civilian is not subject to the UCMJ for the purpose of court-martial jurisdiction or other military justice discipline. In FY 2014, there were no such civilians tried by a court-martial for allegedly perpetrating sexual assault.

• Each year, the Department lacks jurisdiction over several hundred subjects in its investigations. These are the civilians, foreign nationals, and unidentified subjects who are reported to have sexually assaulted Service members.

• Local civilian authorities in the United States and our host nations overseas hold primary responsibility for prosecuting U.S. civilians and foreign nationals, respectively, for allegedly perpetrating sexual assault against Service members.

1 Kilpatrick, D., Resnick, H., Ruggiero, K., Conoscenti, L., & McCauley, J. (2007). Drug-Facilitated, Incapacitated, and Forcible Rape: A National Study. Washington, DC: DOJ. Publication No.: NCJ 219181. Available at http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/219181.pdf.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

3

• In a number of cases each year, a civilian authority or host nation will assert its legal authority over a Service member. This typically occurs when Service members are accused of sexually assaulting a civilian or foreign national, or when a Service member sexually assaults another Service member in a location where the state holds primary jurisdiction.

• A civilian authority, such as a state, county, or municipality, may prosecute Service members anytime they commit an offense within its jurisdiction. In some cases, the civilian authority may agree to let the military exercise its UCMJ jurisdiction over its members. Service member prosecutions by civilian authorities are made on a case-by-case and jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis.

• A host nation’s ability to prosecute a Service member is subject to the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) between the United States and the foreign government. SOFAs vary from country to country.

• Upon completion of a criminal investigation, the MCIO agent conducting the investigation provides a report documenting its evidentiary findings to the subject’s military commander and the servicing staff judge advocate for review and legal action, as appropriate. However, for crimes of rape, sexual assault, nonconsensual sodomy, and attempts to commit these crimes, a senior military officer who is at least a special court-martial convening authority and in the grade of O-6 (Colonel or Navy Captain) or higher retains initial disposition authority. − The special court-martial convening authority is responsible for determining

what initial disposition action is appropriate, to include whether further action is warranted and, if so, whether the matter should be resolved by court- martial, nonjudicial punishment, administrative discharge, or other adverse administrative action. The special court-martial convening authority’s initial disposition decision is based upon his or her review of the matters transmitted, any independent review, and consultation with a judge advocate. Subordinate unit commanders may provide their own recommendations regarding initial disposition to the convening authority.  Commanders at all levels of responsibility do not make disposition

decisions in isolation. Military attorneys assist commanders in identifying the charges that can be made, the appropriate means of addressing such charges, and the punishments that can be administered if supported by the evidence.

 There are many cases each year when disciplinary action is not possible due to legal issues or evidentiary problems with a case. For instance, when the investigation fails to show sufficient evidence of an offense to prosecute or when the victim declines to participate in the justice process, a commander may be precluded from taking disciplinary action against a subject.

 In the data that follow, when more than one disposition action is involved (e.g., when nonjudicial punishment is followed by an administrative discharge), the subject disposition is only reported once per subject. Dispositions are reported for the most serious disciplinary

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

4

action taken, which in descending order is: preferral of court-martial charges, nonjudicial punishment, administrative discharge, and other adverse administrative action.

Who It Describes • Unrestricted and Restricted Reports capture sexual assaults committed by and

against Service members. However, there are instances in which people outside of the U.S. Armed Forces commit sexual assault against a Service member or can be sexually assaulted by a Service member. Information describing these victims and subjects is also included in the following statistics.

• Prior to FY 2014, an Unrestricted Report of sexual assault included one or more victims, one or more subjects, and one or more crimes. With the advent of the Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database (DSAID)2, the Department has greater visibility over victim reporting. Therefore, starting in the current fiscal year, one Unrestricted Report includes only one victim, but could still include multiple subjects.

• Restricted Reports, by policy, have always involved one victim per reported incident. − No Personally Identifying Information (PII) is entered into DSAID or

maintained for alleged subjects. − Subsequent to a change in DoD policy in 2012, military dependents (aged 18

and over) may make Restricted Reports of sexual assault. By law, the official statistics provided to Congress are limited to those reports of sexual assault that involve Service members as either a victim or a subject. Consequently, Restricted Reports by adult military dependents alleged to involve a Service member (other than spouse or intimate partner) as the offender are now included in the Department’s annual statistics. Restricted Reports by adult military dependents that did not involve a Service member are recorded, but not included in statistical analyses or reporting demographics.

• Available demographic information on victims and subjects in Unrestricted Reports is only drawn from completed investigations, and from victim information in Restricted Reports, as recorded in DSAID.

When It Happened • Information about the sexual assault reports made in FY 2014 is drawn from

reports received by DoD between October 1, 2013 and September 30, 2014. However, additional time trend information is included for the years noted. The quantity and types of information captured by the Department has grown over the years.

• The data that follow are a snapshot in time. In other words, the following information describes the status of sexual assault reports, investigations, and subject dispositions on September 30, 2014 (the last day of FY 2014).

2 Additional information on DSAID’s data collection and reporting process is described below in the “How It Is Gathered” section (p.5).

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

5

− Many investigations extend across FYs. For example, it often takes several months to investigate a report of sexual assault. As a result, those investigations that were opened toward the end of the FY typically carry over into the next FY.

− Subject dispositions can also extend across FYs. As a result, a substantial portion of dispositions are “pending” or not yet reported at the end of the year. The Department tracks these pending dispositions and requires the Military Services to report on them in subsequent years’ reports.

− Under the Department’s SAPR policy, there is no time limit as to when someone can report a sexual assault to a SARC or an MCIO. Consequently, in any given year, the Department may not only receive reports about incidents that occurred during the current year, but also incidents that occurred in previous years.

• Reports made for sexual assaults that occurred prior to a Service member’s enlistment or commissioning are also received by the Department. When a report of this nature occurs, the Department provides care and services to the victim, but may not be able to punish the offender if he or she is not subject to military law. Department authorities may assist the victim in contacting the appropriate civilian or foreign law enforcement agency.

• The definition of “sexual assault” in the UCMJ has changed several times over the last several years: − For incidents that occurred prior to the changes made to the UCMJ on

October 1, 2007, the term “sexual assault” referred to the crimes of rape, nonconsensual sodomy, indecent assault, and attempts to commit these acts.

− For incidents that occurred between October 1, 2007 and June 27, 2012, the term “sexual assault” referred to the crimes of rape, aggravated sexual assault, aggravated sexual contact, abusive sexual contact, wrongful sexual contact, nonconsensual sodomy, and attempts to commit these acts.

− For incidents that occur on or after June 28, 2012, the term “sexual assault” refers to the crimes of rape, sexual assault, aggravated sexual contact, abusive sexual contact, nonconsensual sodomy, and attempts to commit these acts.

How It Is Gathered Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database

• In years prior to FY 2014, the Department’s sexual assault data were drawn from incident information collected by SARCs and official investigations conducted by MCIO agents. DoD SAPRO aggregated data provided by the Services in order to perform subsequent DoD-level analyses.

• As of FY 2014, the Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database (DSAID) collects and reports information for DoD and the Services. For each report of sexual assault, SARCs are now required to use DSAID to enter information about the victim and incident. Additionally, DSAID interfaces with MCIO information systems, which “push” additional information about subjects and offense specific information into DSAID. MCIO information systems retain the system of record

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

6

for all Unrestricted Reports they investigate. Service-appointed legal officers enter and validate subject case disposition information into DSAID.

• The transition to DSAID alters the way in which sexual assault data are reported in two key ways: − Unrestricted Reports were previously recorded as the number of sexual

assault cases, as organized by the MCIOs. Thus, one case did not necessarily correspond to one victim report. Starting in FY 2014, DSAID accounts for each individual report of sexual assault, such that each report corresponds to one victim. As mentioned previously, Restricted Reports, by policy, have always involved one victim per reported incident.

− In past FYs, Service affiliation of subjects and victims referred to the Service to which they belonged. Beginning in FY 2014, using DSAID, affiliation of subjects and victims refers to the Service affiliation of SARCs handling the case. This shift will provide valuable insight into the resources each Service expends to respond to reports of sexual assault. However, as in past years, when discussing subject dispositions, affiliation is based on the subjects’ Service.

• As in prior FYs, the USD (P&R) submitted data calls to the Military Departments to collect the required statistical and case synopsis data. DoD SAPRO aggregates and analyzes these data.

RAND’s Military Workplace Survey (RMWS) • Prior to 2014, the Department assessed the prevalence of unwanted sexual

contact through the Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of Active Duty Members (WGRA) and Reserve Component Members (WGRR), administered by the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC).

• In 2014, the Department agreed to a request from the leadership of the Senate Armed Services Committee to arrange for an independent assessment of sexual assault prevalence in the DoD. In accordance with this request, the RAND Corporation (RAND) was contracted to administer the Military Workplace Study (RMWS), which will serve as the 2014 WGRA.

• RAND created and administered two versions of the survey. One version of the survey employed DMDC’s prior measure of unwanted sexual contact to estimate the past-year prevalence of sexual assault in the DoD, allowing for trend analysis with previous years’ data (WGRA form administered by RAND). The other survey version (RMWS form) employed a newly developed measure of sexual assault that was designed to more closely match offense language and definitions in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

• See Annex 1 for a full description of the survey methods Survivor Experience Survey (SES)

• The Survivor Experience Survey (SES) was developed at the direction of the Secretary of Defense. The first of its kind in the United States, the goal of the 2014 SES was to learn about the overall reporting experiences from all current uniformed military members, 18 years of age or older, who made a Restricted or Unrestricted Report for any form of sexual assault, and made their report at least

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

7

30 days prior to survey completion, but after 1 October 2013. Survey items were constructed to be Service-specific so as to match the experience of the survivor.

• The SES is a voluntary, anonymous, web-based survey. SARCs invited survivors that met recruitment requirements to take the survey. If survivors chose to participate, they answered questions about their sexual assault reporting experiences and satisfaction with sexual assault prevention and response services.

• See Annex 2 for a full description of the survey methods. Command Climate Survey (DEOCS) In FY 2012 and FY 2013, DoD SAPRO worked with the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI) and Service representatives to develop questions to help assess SAPR climate for unit commanders. In January of FY 2014, as the old survey was phased out, a new version of the DEOCS survey went into the field with newly developed SAPR questions. Due to this gradual roll-out method, sample sizes in January were too small to pass the reportable threshold. Therefore, figures for FY 2014 span from February to September 2014. A total of 596,593 respondents completed the SAPR questions on the DEOCS from the beginning of data collection (February 2014) through the end of the period analyzed (September 2014).

Table 1: Sample Sizes for DEOCS Respondents February-September 2014

Sample size (N) 596,593 Males 507,575 Females 89,018 Junior Enlisted 112,232 NCO 321,960 Remaining Ranks (E7-E9, W1-W5, O1 & Above) 162,401

Why It Is Collected • Congress requires data about the number of sexual assault reports and the

outcome of the allegations made against each subject. • The Department also collects these data to inform SAPR policy, program

development, and oversight.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

8

PROVISIONAL OVERVIEW OF REPORTS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT MADE IN FY 2014 This section closely follows the flow chart shown in Exhibit 1. Points on the flow chart are labeled with a letter that corresponds to the information in the text that follows. Note: For incidents that occur on or after June 28, 2012, the term “sexual assault” refers to the crimes of rape, sexual assault, aggravated sexual contact, abusive sexual contact, nonconsensual sodomy, and attempts to commit these acts.

Exhibit 1: Reports of Sexual Assault and Investigations Completed in FY 2014

Reports Remaining Restricted FY 2014: 1482 Reports

Reports of Sexual Assault Received in FY 2014: 5983 Reports

Unrestricted Reports FY 2014: 4501 Reports

Investigation

Completed at End of Fiscal Year?

Yes No

Criminal Investigation New Investigations Initiated in FY 2014: 3586 Victims in investigations: 4127 Subjects in investigations: 4370

Investigations Completed in FY 2014: 3818 (2271 from FY 2014;

1547 from years prior to FY 2014)

3818 completed investigations involved

4353 Subjects

Investigations Pending: >1315 cases

1315 FY 2014 Cases + TBD Pre-FY 2014 Cases

A

B C

D

E F G

3520 Subjects of investigation

with disposition information to

report in FY 2014

J

Unrestricted Reports: Referred but investigation not possible

130

Unrestricted Reports: Investigative data forthcoming

197

Subjects in investigations completed

Pre-FY 2014, with disposition information

to report in FY 2014 (TBD)

Subjects in investigations

completed in FY 2014, with disposition

information to report in FY 2014 (TBD)

H I

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

9

In FY 2014, the Military Services received a total of 5,983 reports of sexual assault involving Service members as either victims or subjects (Exhibit 1, Point A, and Exhibit 2), which represents an 8 percent increase from the reports made in FY 2013. Although many of these reports may be about incidents that occurred in FY 2014, some incidents may have occurred in prior years. Of the 5,983 reports, 513 (or approximately 9 percent) were made for incidents that occurred before the victim entered into military service.

• The Military Services received 4,501 Unrestricted Reports involving Service members as either victims or subjects (Exhibit 1, Point B and Exhibit 2), a 7 percent increase from FY 2013. Of the 4,501 Unrestricted Reports, 125 (3 percent) were made for incidents that occurred before the victim entered military service.

• The Military Services initially received 1,824 Restricted Reports involving Service members as either victims or subjects, a 22 percent increase from FY 2013. Three hundred and forty-two (342; 19 percent) of the initial Restricted Reports later converted to Unrestricted Reports. These 342 converted Restricted Reports are now counted with the Unrestricted Reports. There were 1,482 reports remaining restricted at the end of FY 2014 (Exhibit 1, Point C and Exhibit 2). Of the 1,482 reports remaining Restricted, 388 (26 percent) were made for incidents that occurred before the victim entered military service. Per the victim’s request, the reports remaining restricted were confidential and were not investigated. The identities of the subjects were not officially recorded with Restricted Reports.

• As stated above, the accounting method for Unrestricted Reporting changed for the first time this year with the advent of DSAID. Therefore, each Unrestricted Report corresponds to one victim. The Department has always reported the number of victims in Unrestricted Reports, but until the advent of DSAID, it had no way of independently collecting this information without the MCIOs’ assistance. DSAID now provides the Department with data directly entered by the SARC. Exhibit 2 presents the revised number of Unrestricted Reports from FY 2007 to FY 2014. Exhibit 3 compares the past method of capturing Unrestricted Reports (case-driven accounting) to the DSAID method (victim- driven accounting).

How many sexual assault reports were made in FY 2014?

5,983 Reports (4,501 Unrestricted Reports +

1,482 Reports Remaining Restricted)

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

10

Exhibit 2: Total Reports of Sexual Assault Made to the Department — Unrestricted Reports and Restricted Reports, FY 2007 – FY 2014

Exhibit 3: Comparison of Victim-Driven Accounting to Case-Driven Accounting of Unrestricted Reports, CY 2004 – FY 2014

2846 3109

3472 3327 3393 3604

5518 5983

2243 2466 2758 2579 2640 2788

4225 4501

603 643 714 748 753 816

1293 1482

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Nu m

be r o

f R ep

or ts

Fiscal Year

Total Reports to DoD

Unrestricted Reports

Reports Remaining Restricted

2243 2466 2758 2579 2640 2788

4225 4501

1700 2047 2277 2085

2265 2516 2410 2439 2558

3768

0 327

670 603 643 714 748 753 816 1293 1482

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

CY04 CY05 CY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Nu m

be r o

f R ep

or ts

Calendar and Fiscal Year

Unrestricted Reports (Victim-Driven Accounting)

Unrestricted Reports (Case-Driven Accounting)

Reports Remaining Restricted

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

11

Of the 5,983 reports received by the Department, with each report representing one victim, there were a total of 5,121 Service member victims of sexual assault. In FY 2014, 3,357 Service members made an Unrestricted Report and 321 Service members initially made a Restricted Report, but later converted to an Unrestricted Report, for a total of 3,678 Unrestricted Reports by Service members. One thousand four hundred and forty-three (1,443) Service members made and maintained Restricted Reports. Research shows that reporting the crime is the primary link to getting most victims medical treatment and other forms of assistance.3 The Department’s SAPR policy encourages increased reporting of sexual assault, works to improve response capabilities for victims, and works with and encourages victims to willingly participate in the military justice process. This year, there was an 8 percent increase in reporting of sexual assault involving military members as victims and/or subjects over FY 2013. Based on prior, past-year prevalence rates of sexual assault and other factors, the Department attributes this increase in reporting to more victims coming forward to report a crime, and not due to an overall increase in crime.4 In fact, FY 2014 results of the RAND Military Workplace Study indicate that past-year prevalence of sexual assault decreased for women and stayed about the same for men, as compared with FY 2012 rates. Exhibit 4 demonstrates the increase in the number of Service member victims making reports of sexual assault from Calendar Year (CY) 2004 to FY 2014. The reports were for incidents occurring while in military service.

Exhibit 4: Service Member Victims in DoD Sexual Assault Reports for Incidents that Occurred in Military Service, CY 2004 – FY 2014

3 DOJ (2002). Rape and Sexual Assault: Reporting to Police and Medical Attention, 1992–2000. Washington, DC: Rennison, Callie Marie. 4 Since FY 2007, there has been an overall upward trend in reporting behavior.

Of the 5,983 victims, how many were Service members? 5,121 Service member victims.

Who were the other victims? The remaining 862 victims were U.S. civilians, foreign nationals, and others who were not on active duty with

the U.S. Armed Forces.

1275 1774

2289 2223 2340 2454 2532 2639

2828

4113 4608

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

CY04 CY05 CY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Nu m

be r o

f S er

vic e M

em be

rs

Calendar and Fiscal Year

Service Member Victims in Reports of Sexual Assault to DoD Authorities for Incidents that Occurred in Military Service (Unrestricted and Restricted)

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

12

Exhibit 5: Estimated Number of Service Members Experiencing Unwanted Sexual Contact Based on Past-Year Prevalence Rates versus Number of Service Member Victims in Reports of Sexual

Assault for Incidents Occurring During Military Service, CY 2004 – FY 2014

Notes: 1. This graph depicts the estimated number of Service members who experienced USC in the past year (based on the past-year prevalence rates from the WGRA form administered by RAND), versus the number of Service member victims in actual reports of sexual assault made to the DoD in the years indicated. Note that although 5,121 Service member victims made sexual assault reports in FY 2014, 513 of them made a report for events that occurred prior to their entry into military service. This leaves 4,608 making a report for an incident that occurred during military service. 2. The 2,289 Service member victims in Unrestricted and Restricted Reports of sexual assault to DoD authorities in CY 2006 accounted for approximately 7 percent of the estimated number of Service members who may have experienced unwanted sexual contact (~34,200) that year, as calculated using data from the 2006 WGRA. 3. The 2,532 Service member victims in Unrestricted and Restricted Reports of sexual assault to DoD authorities in FY 2010 accounted for approximately 13 percent of the estimated number of Service members who may have experienced unwanted sexual contact (~19,300) that year, as calculated using data from the 2010 WGRA. 4. The 2,828 Service member victims in Unrestricted and Restricted Reports of sexual assault to DoD authorities in FY 2012 accounted for approximately 11 percent of the estimated number of Service members who may have experienced unwanted sexual contact (~26,000) that year, as calculated using data from the 2012 WGRA. 5. The 4,608 Service member victims in Unrestricted and Restricted Reports of sexual assault to DoD authorities in FY 2014 accounted for approximately 24 percent of the estimated number of Service members who may have experienced unwanted sexual contact (~19,000) that year, as calculated using data from the WGRA form, administered by RAND for the first time.

Women: 6.8% Men: 1.8% ~34,200

Women: 4.4% Men: 0.9% ~19,300

Women: 6.1% Men: 1.2% ~26,000

Women: 4.3% Men: 0.9% ~19,000

1275 1774

(~7%)

2289 2223 2340 2454

(~13%)

2532 2639

(~11%)

2828 4113

(~24%)

4608

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

CY04 CY05 CY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Nu m

be r o

f S er

vic e M

em be

rs

Calendar and Fiscal Year

Estimated Number of Service Members Experiencing Unwanted Sexual Contact Using WGRA Methodology

Service Member Victims in Reports of Sexual Assault to DoD Authorities For Incidents that Occurred in Military Service (Unrestricted and Restricted)

(%)= Percentage of estimated Service members accounted for in Unrestricted and Restricted Reports to DoD

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

13

Exhibit 5 demonstrates the difference between the estimated numbers of Service members who indicate experiencing unwanted sexual contact (USC), based on the WGRA form administered by RAND. The “gap” in reporting narrowed this year, given the increase in reports of sexual assault. The Department assesses the increase in reports as unlikely to have resulted from increased crime, given historical and current prevalence rates and other factors. The Department expects that the “gap” between the survey-estimated number of Service members experiencing USC and the number of Service members accounted for in actual sexual assault reports can be reduced in two ways:

• Over time, prevention initiatives are expected to reduce past-year prevalence rates of USC, as measured by the prevalence surveys like the RAND Military Workplace Study (RMWS) or WGRA. As rates decrease, the estimated number of Service members who experience USC in a given year should also decrease.

• Over time, initiatives that encourage victims to report and improve the military justice system are expected to increase the number of Service members who choose to make an Unrestricted or Restricted Report.

Although reports to DoD authorities are unlikely to account for all USC estimated to occur in a given year, it is the Department’s intent to narrow the gap between prevalence and reporting in order to reduce the underreporting of sexual assault in the military community. Exhibit 6 shows the rates of victim reporting by Military Service during the past eight FYs. Victim reporting rates are calculated using the number of Service member victims in Unrestricted and Restricted Reports and active duty Military Service end strength for each year on record with DMDC.

Exhibit 6: Victim Reporting Rates of Sexual Assault by Military Service, FY 2007 – FY 2014

1.6 1.7 1.9 1.8 1.9

2.1

3.4

3.9

2.4 2.5 2.6

2.4 2.5 2.3

3.6

4.1

1.1 1.3

1.6 1.6 1.6 2.1

3.2

3.7

0.9 0.8 1.3 1.1

1.3 1.7

3.8 4.1

1.4 1.5 1.4 1.6 1.6 2.0

2.9

3.6

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Vi ct

im R

ep or

ts P

er 10

00 S

er vic

e M em

be rs

Fiscal Year

Overall DoD Army

Navy

Marine Corps Air Force

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

14

FY 2014 UNRESTRICTED REPORTS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT Data from Unrestricted Reports are collected and reported to the Department by SARCs and MCIOs. In FY 2014, there were 4,501 Unrestricted Reports of sexual assault involving Service members as either the subject or victim of a sexual assault (Exhibit 1, Point B); 3,678 (82 percent) of the 4,501 Unrestricted Reports involved Service members as victims. Each year, the majority of sexual assault reports received by MCIOs involve the victimization of Service members by other Service members.

Crimes Alleged in Unrestricted Reports The DoD SAPR program uses the term “sexual assault” to refer to the range of crimes in military law that constitute contact sexual offenses between adults. Since 2004, there have been three versions of Article 120, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), which defines some of those crimes. Table 2 depicts how the UCMJ’s characterization of “sexual assault” has been revised over time.5

Table 2: Sexual Assault Offenses Punishable by the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)

Sexual Assault Offenses Prior to FY 2008 FY 2008 to

June 27, 2012 June 28, 2012 to

Present Rape (Article 120)    Sexual Assault (Article 120) N/A N/A  Aggravated Sexual Assault (Article 120) N/A  N/A Aggravated Sexual Contact (Article 120) N/A   Abusive Sexual Contact (Article 120) N/A   Wrongful Sexual Contact (Article 120) N/A  N/A Nonconsensual Sodomy (Article 125)    Indecent Assault (Article 134)  N/A N/A Attempts to commit (Article 80)   

In the 4,501 Unrestricted Reports made to the Department in FY 2014, the majority of offenses alleged were in three categories: rape; aggravated sexual assault/sexual assault; and abusive sexual contact. MCIOs categorize Unrestricted Reports by the most serious offense alleged in the report, which may not ultimately be the same offense for which evidence supports a misconduct charge,

5 Since June 28, 2012, misconduct addressed by the offense “Aggravated Sexual Assault” is captured by the offense “Sexual Assault”. Likewise, misconduct previously addressed by “Wrongful Sexual Contact” is now captured by the offense “Abusive Sexual Contact.”

Why show a reporting rate? A reporting rate allows for the

comparison of reports across groups of different sizes. Reporting rates also

allow for year after year comparisons, even when the total number of people in

a group has changed.

What crimes are alleged in most reports?

Most Unrestricted Reports of sexual assault involve three

crimes: rape, aggravated sexual assault/sexual

assault, and abusive sexual contact.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

15

if any. Exhibit 7 shows the proportions of offenses as originally alleged in Unrestricted Reports in FY 2014.

Exhibit 7: Offenses Originally Alleged in Unrestricted Reports of Sexual Assault, FY 2014

Investigations of Unrestricted Reports According to DoD policy, all Unrestricted Reports must be referred for investigation by an MCIO. However, reports received for incidents prior to military service usually cannot be investigated by MCIOs when the alleged offender is not subject to military law. In FY 2014, MCIOs initiated 3,586 sexual assault investigations (Exhibit 1, Point D). The length of an investigation depends on a number of factors, including:

• The offense alleged; • The location and availability of the victim, subject, and witnesses; • The amount and kind of physical evidence gathered during the investigation; and • The length of time required for crime laboratory analysis of evidence.

Depending on these and other factors, investigation length may range from a few months to over a year. For example, the average length of a sexual assault investigation in FY 2014 was 4.7 months. Consequently, sexual assault investigations and their outcomes can span multiple reporting periods. Of the 3,818 sexual assault investigations completed during FY 2014 (Exhibit 1, Point F), 2,271 were opened in FY 2014 and 1,547 were opened in years prior to FY 2014.

• The outcomes of 1,315 ongoing sexual assault investigations that were opened in FY 2014 but not completed by September 30, 2014, along with the outcomes of pre-FY 2014 investigations that were not completed by the end of FY 2014, will be documented in future reports (Exhibit 1, Point E).

MCIOs reported that 49 of the 4,353 subjects in investigations completed in FY 2014 had a previous investigation for a sexual assault allegation.

Note: Percentages listed do not sum to 100% due to rounding of percentages to the nearest whole point.

Rape 20%

Aggravated Sexual Assault/ Sexual Assault

21%

Aggravated Sexual Contact

3%

Abusive Sexual Contact

38%

Wrongful Sexual Contact

(Eliminated 2012) 1%

Non-Consensual Sodomy

1%

Attempts to Commit Offenses

2%

Offense Data Not Available

13%

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

16

Sexual Assault Subject Dispositions in FY 2014 Congress requires the Department to report on the dispositions (outcomes) of the sexual assault allegations made against Service members. At the end of FY 2014, there were 3,520 subjects with disposition information to report (Exhibit 1, Point J). The goals of a criminal investigation are to identify which crimes have been committed, who has been victimized, and who may be held accountable for the crime. The Department seeks to hold those Service members who have committed sexual assault appropriately accountable based on the available evidence. However, in order to comply with Congressional and White House reporting requirements, the Department’s sexual assault data represent a twelve-month snapshot in time. Consequently, at the end of FY 2014, some subject dispositions were still in progress and will be reported in forthcoming years’ reports. The 3,520 subjects from DoD investigations for whom dispositions were reported in FY 2014 included Service members, U.S. civilians, foreign nationals, and subjects that could not be identified (Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 8, Point J).

Exhibit 8: FY 2014 Subjects Outside DoD Legal Authority

Did DoD

Consider Action Against Subject?

Subject Died or Deserted 12 Subjects

Allegations Unfounded by Legal Review After Criminal Investigation 551 Subjects

Offender is Unknown 291 Subjects

Subject is a Civilian or Foreign National 184 Subjects

Civilian/Foreign Authority Exercised Jurisdiction Over Service Member Subject 63 Subjects

Sexual Assault Investigation Subjects That Can Be Considered for Possible Action by DoD Commanders: 2419 Subjects

Was the report

against the subject unfounded?

Yes: 551

Subjects No

Was the

subject outside DoD’s legal authority?

Yes: 487

Subjects

K

L

M

N

O P

3520 Subjects of Investigation with Disposition Information to

Report in FY 2014

J

Yes

No: 1101

Subjects

No

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

17

A key difference between the civilian and military legal systems is that in the civilian system, a prosecuting attorney may review the evidence and, if appropriate, file charges against all identified suspects within the attorney’s area of legal authority. However, for the vast majority of cases in the military justice system, commanders are limited to taking legal or disciplinary action against only those Service members who are subject to the UCMJ. Each year, the Department lacks jurisdiction over several hundred subjects in its sexual assault reports/investigations. In FY 2014, the Department could not consider taking action against 1,101 subjects because the allegations of sexual assault against them were unfounded, because the subjects were outside of the Department’s legal authority (for example, they could not be identified, they were civilian or foreign nationals or they had died or deserted), or because the subjects were Service members being prosecuted by a civilian/foreign authority. When at the end of a criminal investigation a legal review of the available evidence indicates the individual accused of sexual assault did not commit the offense, the offense did not occur, or the offense was improperly reported as a sexual assault, the allegations against the subject are considered to be unfounded. As a result, no action is taken against the accused.

• Allegations against 551 subjects were deemed unfounded (false or baseless) by a legal review after criminal investigation in FY 2014 (Exhibit 8, Point K).

The Department’s legal authority extends only to those persons subject to the UCMJ. As a result, 487 subjects of DoD investigations fell outside its authority for disciplinary action:

• There were 291 subjects who remained unidentified despite a criminal investigation (Exhibit 8, Point L).

• The Department could not take action against 184 civilians or foreign nationals because they were not subject to military law (Exhibit 8, Point M).

• Twelve subjects died or deserted before disciplinary action could be taken against them (Exhibit 8, Point N).

While a Service member is always under the legal authority of the Department, sometimes a civilian authority or foreign government will exercise its legal authority over a Service member who is suspected of committing a crime within its jurisdiction. This year, a civilian or foreign authority addressed the alleged misconduct of 63 Service member subjects (Exhibit 8, Point O).

Can the Department take action against everyone it investigates?

No. In FY 2014, the Department could not take action against 1,101 subjects because they were outside the Department’s legal

authority, a civilian/foreign authority exercised jurisdiction over a Service

member subject, or the allegations of sexual assault against them were unfounded.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

18

Military Subjects Considered for Disciplinary Action In FY 2014, 2,419 subjects investigated for sexual assault were Service members under the authority of the Department (Exhibit 9, Point P, and Table 3). However, legal factors sometimes prevent disciplinary action from being taken against some subjects. For example, commanders were unable to take disciplinary action against 600 of these military subjects because there was insufficient evidence of an offense to prosecute, the victim declined to participate in the military justice process, or the statute of limitations had expired (Exhibit 9, Point U and Table 3).

Table 3: Military Subject Dispositions in FY 2014

Military Subjects in Sexual Assault Cases Reviewed for Possible Disciplinary Action 2,419 Evidence Supported Commander Action 1,764 Sexual Assault Offense Action 1,380

Court-Martial Charge Preferred (Initiated) 910 Nonjudicial Punishment (Article 15, UCMJ) 283 Administrative Discharge 85 Other Adverse Administrative Action 102

Evidence Only Supported Action on a Non-sexual Assault Offense 384 Court-Martial Charge Preferred (Initiated) 41 Nonjudicial Punishment (Article 15, UCMJ) 235 Administrative Discharge 23 Other Adverse Administrative Action 85

Unfounded by Command/Legal Review 55 Commander Action Precluded 600

Victim Died 0 Victim Declined to Participate in the Military Justice Action 244 Insufficient Evidence to Prosecute 345 Statute of Limitations Expired 11

Military Subject Dispositions

Reported in FY14 Subject Disposition Category

What percentage of Service member subjects who received disciplinary action for sexual assault had court-

martial charges preferred against them in FY 2014? 66%

In FY 2007, only 30% of subjects receiving disciplinary action had court-martial charges preferred against them.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

19

Exhibit 9: Dispositions of Subjects Under DoD Legal Authority, FY 2014

In addition, commanders declined to take action against 55 military subjects because, after a review of the facts of the case with a military attorney, they determined the allegations against those subjects were false or baseless (unfounded; Exhibit 9, Point V and Table 3). Since FY 2009, the percentage of Service member subjects for whom command action was precluded or declined has decreased. Exhibit 10 illustrates that DoD authorities were able to hold a larger percentage of Service member subjects appropriately accountable in FY 2014 than in FY 2009. For 1,764 military subjects, commanders had sufficient evidence and the legal authority to support some form of disciplinary action for a sexual assault offense or other misconduct (Exhibit 9, Point Q and Table 3). When a subject receives more than one

Evidence Supported Commander Action: 1764 Subjects (73%)

Court-Martial Charge Preferred (Initiated) 910 Subjects

Nonjudicial Punishments 283 Subjects Administrative Discharges 85 Subjects

Other Adverse Administrative Actions 102 Subjects

Sexual Assault Charge Substantiated 1380 Subjects

Other Misconduct Charges Substantiated 384 Subjects

Victim Died Before Completion of Justice Action 0 Subjects

Command Action Precluded 600 Subjects (25%)

Statute of Limitations Expired 11 Subjects

Victim Declined to Participate in Justice Action 244 Subjects

Insufficient Evidence of Any Offense to Prosecute 345 Subjects

Allegation Unfounded by Command/Legal Review 55 Subjects (2%)

Q U

V

R

Court-Martial Charge Preferred (Initiated) 41 Subjects

Nonjudicial Punishments 235 Subjects Administrative Discharges 23 Subjects

Other Adverse Administrative Actions 85 Subjects

S

T

Yes

Sexual Assault Investigation Subjects That Can Be Considered for Possible Action by DoD Commanders: 2419 Subjects

Was There Sufficient Evidence

to Substantiate Misconduct

(e.g. Take Disciplinary Action)?

P

No

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

20

disposition, only the most serious disciplinary action is reported (in descending order: preferral of court-martial charges, nonjudicial punishment, administrative discharge, and other adverse administrative action).

The following represents the command actions taken for the 1,380 subjects for whom it was determined a sexual assault offense warranted discipline: 66 percent (910 subjects) had courts-martial charges preferred (initiated) against them, 21 percent (283 subjects) were entered into proceedings for nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 of the UCMJ, and 14 percent (187 subjects) received a discharge or another adverse administrative action (Exhibit 9, Point R and Table 3).

Exhibit 10: Percentage of Military Subjects with Misconduct Substantiated, Command Action Precluded, and Command Action Declined, FY 2009 – FY 2014

For 384 subjects, evidence supported command action for other misconduct discovered during the sexual assault investigation (such as making a false official statement, adultery, underage drinking, or other crimes under the UCMJ), but not a sexual assault charge (Exhibit 9, Point S and Table 3). Of these 384 military subjects for whom probable cause existed only for a non-sexual assault offense: 11 percent (41 subjects) had court-martial charges preferred against them, 61 percent (235 subjects) were entered into proceedings for nonjudicial punishment, and 28 percent (108 subjects) received some form of adverse administrative action or discharge (Exhibit 9, Point T and Table 3).

57% 60% 65% 66%

73% 73%

30% 35% 32% 30%

24% 25%

14%

5% 3% 5% 3% 2% 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

FY09 N=1971

FY10 N=1925

FY11 N=1518

FY12 N=1714

FY13 N=2149

FY14 N=2419

Pe rc

en ta

ge o

f M ilit

ar y S

ub jec

ts C

on sid

er ed

fo

r P os

sib le

Ac tio

n

Fiscal Year

Subjects with Misconduct Substantiated (Command Action for sexual assault and all other offenses for which there was evidence)

Subjects With Command Action Precluded (e.g., evidence problems)

Subjects With Command Action Declined (e.g., unfounded by command/legal review of evidence)

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

21

Military Justice The following information describes what happens once a military subject’s commander finds that there is sufficient evidence to take disciplinary action. Exhibit 11 shows that, from FY 2007 to FY 2014, commanders’ preferral of court-martial charges against military subjects for sexual assault offenses increased from 30 percent of subjects in FY 2007 to 66 percent of subjects in FY 2014. During the same period, nonjudicial punishment, other adverse administrative actions, and administrative discharges decreased substantially.

Exhibit 11: Breakdown of Disciplinary Actions Taken Against Subjects for Sexual Assault Offenses, FY 2007 – FY 2014

Courts-Martial for a Sexual Assault Offense As noted previously, of the 1,380 military subjects against whom disciplinary action was initiated for a sexual assault offense, 910 had court-martial charges preferred against them (Exhibit 9, Point R and Table 3). Exhibit 12 illustrates what happened to these subjects after their commanders preferred court- martial charges. The dispositions and the sentences imposed by courts-martial are for those subjects with at least one sexual

Notes: 1. Percentages are of subjects found to warrant disciplinary action for a sexual assault offense only.

Other misconduct (false official statement, adultery, etc.) is not shown. 2. Percentages listed for some years exceed 100% due to rounding of percentages to the nearest

whole point.

What percentage of Service member subjects charged and tried for sexual assault offenses were convicted in

FY 2014, and what kind of punishment did they receive? 72% of Service members tried for a sexual assault

offense were convicted of at least one charge at trial. Most subjects received four kinds of punishment:

Confinement, a Fine or Forfeiture of Pay, Reduction in Rank, and a Punitive Discharge or Dismissal.

30%

38% 42%

52%

62% 68% 71% 66%

34%

30%

36%

25% 24% 18% 18% 21%

36% 32%

23% 23%

14% 15% 12% 14%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

FY07 N=600

FY08 N=832

FY09 N=983

FY10 N=1025

FY11 N=791

FY12 N=880

FY13 N=1187

FY14 N=1380

Pe rc

en ta

ge o

f M ilit

ar y S

ub jec

ts R

ec eiv

in g

Ac tio

n on

a Se

xu al

As sa

ul t C

ha rg

e

Fiscal Year

Courts-martial charge preferred (Initiated)

Nonjudicial punishments (Article 15 UCMJ)

Administrative actions and discharges

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

22

assault charge adjudicated in FY 2014. Of the 910 subjects who had court-martial charges preferred against them for at least one sexual assault charge in FY 2014, 735 subjects’ court-martial outcomes were completed by the end of the FY:

• Court-martial charges against 149 subjects were dismissed. However, commanders used evidence gathered during the sexual assault investigations to take nonjudicial punishment against 41 of the 149 subjects (nonjudicial punishment was initiated but dismissed for six of these subjects, leaving 35 subjects with a nonjudicial punishment imposed). The punishment may have been for any kind of misconduct for which there was evidence. The 35 subjects who received nonjudicial punishment were adjudged five categories of punishment: reductions in rank, fines or forfeitures of pay, restriction, extra duty, and reprimand.

• Ninety subjects were granted a resignation or discharge instead of court-martial. • Of the 496 subjects whose cases proceeded to trial: 359 subjects (72 percent)

were convicted on any charge at court-martial. Most convicted Service members received at least four kinds of punishment: confinement, reduction in rank, fines or forfeitures, and a discharge (enlisted) or dismissal (officers) from service.

• Initial data indicate that sex offender registration was required for at least 175 military members convicted for a qualifying offense at court-martial.

• One hundred and thirty-seven subjects (28 percent) were acquitted of all charges.

Resignations and discharges in lieu of court-martial are granted by the Department in certain circumstances and may only occur after court-martial charges have been preferred against the accused. For such an action to occur, the accused must initiate the process. Resignation or discharge in lieu of court-martial requests include a statement of understanding of the offense(s) charged and the consequences of administrative separation, an acknowledgement that any separation could possibly have a negative characterization, and an acknowledgement that the accused is guilty of an offense for which a punitive discharge is authorized or a summary of the evidence supporting the guilt of the accused. These statements are not admissible in court- martial should the request ultimately be disapproved. Discharges of enlisted personnel in lieu of court-martial are usually approved at the Special Court-Martial Convening Authority level. Resignations of officers in lieu of court-martial are approved by the Secretary of the Military Department. In FY 2014, 75 of 85 enlisted members who received a discharge in lieu of court-marital were separated Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC), the lowest characterization of discharge possible administratively (information was not available for the other ten subjects). The UOTHC discharge characterization is recorded on the Service member’s DD Form 214, Record of Military Service, and significantly limits separation and post-service benefits from the Department and DVA. Military Service policies, codified in the FY 2013 NDAA, direct that those Service members who are convicted of a sexual assault, but who do not receive a punitive discharge at court- martial, should be processed for administrative discharge. This year, the Service documented that 47 convicted subjects that did not receive a punitive discharge or dismissal will be processed for administrative separation from military service.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

23

Exhibit 12: Dispositions of Subjects Against Whom Sexual Assault Court-Martial Charges were Preferred, FY 2014

Notes: 1. Percentages listed for some categories do not sum to 100% due to rounding of percentages to

the nearest whole point. 2. The Military Services reported that 910 subjects of sexual assault investigations had court-martial

charges preferred against them for a sexual assault offense. 3. Of the 910 subjects who had court-martial charges preferred against them, 175 subjects were

still pending court action at the end of FY 2014. 4. Of the 735 subjects whose courts-martial were completed and reported in FY 2014, 496 subjects

proceeded to trial, 90 subjects were granted a discharge or resignation in lieu of court-martial, and 149 subjects had court-martial charges dismissed.

Convicted of Any Charge at Trial 359 Subjects (72%)

Discharge or Resignation

Granted In Lieu of Courts-Martial 90 Subjects (12%)

Court Charges Dismissed

149 Subjects (20%)

Courts-Martial: Sexual Assault Charges

Preferred 910 Subjects

Case Disposition Completed in FY

2014 735 Subjects

Nonjudicial Punishment

Administered Based On Evidence

Discovered During Sexual

Assault Investigation 35 Subjects

Punitive Discharge/Dismissal

57% of Subjects*

Reductions in Rank 81% of Subjects

Fines/Forfeitures 61% of Subjects

Restriction 12% of Subjects

Confinement 71% of Subjects

Hard Labor 7% of Subjects

Correctional Custody

0% of Subjects

Reductions in Rank 74% of Subjects

Fines/Forfeitures 69% of Subjects

Hard Labor 0% of Subjects

Restriction 43% of Subjects

Case Disposition Not Completed in

FY 2014 175 Subjects

(To be reported in future)

Case Disposition Data Not Available 0 Subjects

Discharge Subsequent to

Nonjudicial Punishment Reported for

23% of Subjects

4 Officer Resignations 1 Cadet Disenrollment

85 Enlisted Discharges: ▪75 Subjects – Under Other than Honorable Conditions ▪10 Subjects – No Info Available

*Note: The NDAA for FY 2013 now requires convicted subjects that were not adjudged a punitive discharge or dismissal to be processed for separation. Service reports indicate that 47 convicted subjects were processed for administrative discharge subsequent to court-martial conviction in FY 2014.

Sex Offender Registration 175 subjects

convicted of a qualifying sex offense were

required to register as sex offender.

Nonjudicial Punishment Initiated, but Dismissed Based On Evidence

Discovered During Sexual

Assault Investigation

6 Subjects

Extra Duty 40% of Subjects

Reprimand 31% of Subjects

Extra Duty 0% of Subjects

Acquitted of All Charges

137 Subjects (28%)

Proceeded to Trial (At least one sexual

assault offense charged)

496 Subjects (67%)

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

24

Nonjudicial Punishment Nonjudicial punishment is administered in accordance with Article 15 of the UCMJ and empowers commanding officers to impose penalties on Service members when there is sufficient evidence of a minor offense under the UCMJ. Nonjudicial punishment allows commanders to address some types of sexual assault and other misconduct by Service members that may not warrant prosecution in a military or civilian court. With nonjudicial punishment a commander can take a variety of corrective actions, including demotions, fines/forfeitures, and restrictions on liberty. Nonjudicial punishment may support a rationale for discharging military subjects with a less than an honorable discharge. The Service member may demand trial by court-martial instead of accepting nonjudicial punishment by the commander.

Of the 1,380 military subjects who received disciplinary action on a sexual assault offense, 283 received nonjudicial punishment (Exhibit 9, Point R and Table 3). Exhibit 13 displays the outcomes of nonjudicial punishment actions taken against subjects on a sexual assault charge in FY 2014. Of the 258 subjects whose

nonjudicial punishments were completed in FY 2014, 90 percent of subjects were found guilty by the commander and received punishment. Nearly all of the administered nonjudicial punishments were for a contact (non-penetrating) sex offense. Most subjects who received nonjudicial punishment received at least three kinds of punishment: reduction in rank, a fine or forfeiture of pay, and extra duty. Available Military Service data indicated that for 59 subjects (25 percent of those administered nonjudicial punishment) the nonjudicial punishment served as grounds for a subsequent administrative discharge. Characterizations of these discharges were as follows:

Honorable Discharge 7 Subjects General Discharge 24 Subjects Under Other Than Honorable 20 Subjects Uncharacterized 8 Subjects Total 59 Subjects

Exhibit 12 notes, continued: 5. In cases in which a discharge or resignation in lieu of court-martial is requested and approved,

the characterization of the discharge is UOTHC, unless a higher characterization is justified (see also the discussion of administrative discharge characterizations in the “Administrative Discharges and Adverse Administrative Actions” section of the report). Of the 149 subjects with dismissed charges, commanders imposed nonjudicial punishment on 35 subjects. Most of these 35 subjects received two kinds of punishment: a reduction in rank and a fine or forfeiture of pay.

6. Of the 496 subjects whose cases proceeded to trial, 359 (72%) were convicted of at least one charge. Conviction by courts-martial may result in a combination of punishments. Consequently, convicted Service members could be adjudged one or more of the punishments listed. However, in most cases, they received at least four kinds of punishment: confinement, a reduction in rank, a fine or forfeiture of pay, and a punitive discharge (bad conduct discharge, dishonorable discharge, or dismissal (officers). The NDAA for FY 2013 now requires mandatory administrative separation processing for all Service members convicted of a sexual assault offense.

Do military commanders use nonjudicial punishment as their primary means of discipline for sexual assault crimes?

No Only 21% of subjects who received

disciplinary action for a sexual assault crime received nonjudicial punishment in FY 2014.

Most subjects (66%) had court-martial charges preferred against them.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

25

Administrative Discharges and Adverse Administrative Actions A legal review of evidence sometimes indicates that the court-martial process or nonjudicial punishments are not appropriate means to address allegations of misconduct against the accused. However, military commanders have other means at their disposal to hold offenders appropriately accountable. Administrative discharges may be used to address an individual’s misconduct, lack of discipline, or poor suitability for continued service. There are three characterizations of administrative discharges: Honorable, General, and Under Other Than Honorable (UOTHC). General and UOTHC discharges may limit those discharged from receiving full entitlements and benefits from both the DoD and DVA. Commanders processed 85 subjects in sexual assault investigations for administrative discharge in FY 2014 (Exhibit 9, Point R and Table 3). Twelve members have faced an administrative discharge board and are pending

Exhibit 13: Dispositions of Subjects Receiving Nonjudicial Punishment, FY 2014

Notes: 1. The Military Services reported that 283 subjects of sexual assault investigations disposed in FY

2014 were considered for nonjudicial punishment. 2. Of the 283 subjects considered for nonjudicial punishment, 25 subjects were still pending action at

the end of FY 2014. 3. Of the 258 subjects whose nonjudicial punishments were completed in FY 2014, 232 subjects

(90%) were found guilty by the commander and issued punishment. The remaining 26 subjects (10%) were found not guilty.

4. Nonjudicial punishment may result in a combination of penalties. Consequently, Service members found guilty can be administered one or more kinds of punishments. However, for most of the cases, convicted Service members received at least three kinds of punishment: a reduction in rank, fines/forfeitures, and extra duty.

5. For 59 subjects (25% of those punished), the nonjudicial punishment contributed to the rationale supporting an administrative discharge.

Correctional Custody 0% of Subjects

Reductions in Rank 59% of Subjects

Fines/Forfeitures 70% of Subjects

Restriction 44% of Subjects

Hard Labor 0% of Subjects

Reprimand 26% of Subjects

Nonjudicial Punishment: Sexual Assault Charge

Initiated in FY 2014 283 Subjects

Nonjudicial Punishment Administered

232 Subjects (90%)

Nonjudicial Punishment Dismissed

26 Subjects (10%)

Discharge Subsequent to

Nonjudicial Punishment Reported for

25% of Subjects Action

Completed 258 Subjects

Action Pending

25 Subjects

Extra Duty 50% of Subjects

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

26

characterizations or were retained. Characterizations of the completed discharges were as follows:

Honorable Discharge 3 Subjects General Discharge 22 Subjects Under Other Than Honorable 39 Subjects Uncharacterized 9 Subjects Total 73 Subjects

In FY 2014, commanders took adverse administrative actions against 102 subjects investigated for a sexual assault offense (Exhibit 9, Point R and Table 3). Adverse administrative actions are typically used when available evidence does not support more serious disciplinary action. Adverse administrative actions can have a serious impact on one’s military career, have no equivalent form of punishment in the civilian sector, and may consist of Letters of Reprimand, Letters of Admonishment, and Letters of Counseling. These actions may also include but are not limited to denial of re- enlistment, the cancellation of a promotion, and the cancellation of new or special duty orders. Cadets and midshipmen are subject to an administrative disciplinary system at Military Service Academies. These systems address misconduct that can ultimately be grounds for disenrollment from the Academy and, when appropriate, a requirement to reimburse the government for the cost of education. Probable Cause Only for a Non-Sexual Assault Offense The sexual assault investigations conducted by MCIOs sometimes do not find sufficient evidence to support disciplinary action against the subject on a sexual assault charge, but may uncover other forms of chargeable misconduct. When this occurs, the Department seeks to hold those Service members who have committed other misconduct appropriately accountable based on the available evidence. In FY 2014, commanders took action against 384 subjects who were originally investigated for sexual assault allegations, but for whom evidence only supported action on non-sexual assault misconduct, such as making a false official statement, adultery, assault, or other crimes (Exhibit 9; Exhibit 14, Point S; and Table 3).

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

27

Exhibit 14: Dispositions of Subjects for Whom There was Only Probable Cause for

Non-Sexual Assault Offenses, FY 2014 Notes: 1. The Military Services reported that investigations of 384 subjects only disclosed evidence of

misconduct not considered to be a sexual assault offense under the UCMJ. 2. Of the 384 subjects, 41 subjects had court-martial charges preferred against them, 235 subjects

were entered into nonjudicial punishment proceedings, 23 subjects received a discharge or separation, and 85 subjects received adverse administrative action.

3. Of the 27 subjects whose cases proceeded to courts-martial, 23 subjects were convicted of the charges against them. Most convicted Service members were adjudged a reduction in rank and a fine or forfeiture of pay.

4. Of the 235 subjects considered for nonjudicial punishment, 217 were ultimately found guilty. Most subjects received two kinds of punishment: a reduction in rank and fines/forfeitures.

5. Some categories do not sum to 100% due to rounding to the nearest whole percentage.

Extra Duty 0% of Subjects

Proceeded to Trial 27 Subjects (66%)

No Information Available/ Court-Martial Not

Completed 6 Subjects (15%)

Court Charges Dismissed 6 Subjects (15%)

Court-Martial Charge Preferred

41 Subjects

Nonjudicial Punishment

Initiated: 235 Subjects Punishment

Administered in FY 2014:

217 Subjects

Confinement 43% of Subjects

Reductions in Rank 70% of Subjects

Fines/Forfeitures 57% of Subjects

Discharge/Dismissal 30% of Subjects

Restriction 22% of Subjects

Hard Labor 4% of Subjects

Discharges and other

Separations 23 Subjects

Adverse Administrative

Actions 85 Subjects

Correctional Custody 0% of Subjects

Reductions in Rank 69% of Subjects

Fines/Forfeitures 68% of Subjects

Restriction 47% of Subjects

Hard Labor 0% of Subjects

Probable Cause Only for Non-Sexual Assault Offense

384 Subjects

Convicted of Charges

23 Subjects

Acquitted of Charges 4 Subjects

Discharge Subsequent to

Nonjudicial Punishment Reported for

18% of Subjects

Reprimand 34% of Subjects

Extra Duty 48% of Subjects

Discharge or Resignation Granted In Lieu

of Courts-Martial 2 Subjects (5%)

S

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

28

Subjects Outside DoD Legal Authority As previously discussed, each year the Department does not have jurisdiction over several hundred subjects in its sexual assault investigations. When the subject of an investigation is a U.S. civilian, a foreign national, or an unidentified subject, they fall outside the Department’s legal authority to take any action. Civilian authorities in the United States and the governments of our host nations have primary responsibility for prosecuting U.S. civilians and foreign nationals, respectively, who are accused of perpetrating sexual assault against Service members. In a small percentage of cases each year, a state or host nation will assert its legal authority over a Service member to address alleged misconduct. This typically occurs when a Service member is accused of sexually assaulting a civilian or foreign national at a location where the civilian or foreign authorities possess jurisdiction.

Exhibit 15: Subjects Investigated for Sexual Assault by the Department Who Were Outside Its Legal Authority, FY 2009 – FY 2014

Notes: 1. In FY 2009, 462 (18%) of the 2,584 subjects in completed dispositions were outside DoD legal

authority or were Service member subjects prosecuted by a civilian or foreign authority. 2. In FY 2010, 335 (13%) of the 2,604 subjects in completed dispositions were outside DoD legal

authority or were Service member subjects prosecuted by a civilian or foreign authority. 3. In FY 2011, 486 (21%) of the 2,353 subjects in completed dispositions were outside DoD legal

authority or were Service member subjects prosecuted by a civilian or foreign authority. 4. In FY 2012, 584 (22%) of the 2,661 subjects in completed dispositions were outside DoD legal

authority or were Service member subjects prosecuted by a civilian or foreign authority. 5. In FY 2013, 648 (20%) of the 3,234 subjects in completed dispositions were outside DoD legal

authority or were Service member subjects prosecuted by a civilian or foreign authority. 6. In FY 2014, 550 (16%) of the 3,520 subjects in completed dispositions were outside DoD legal

authority or were Service member subjects prosecuted by a civilian or foreign authority.

7% 6%

10% 9% 9%

8%

7%

3%

5%

7%

4%

2% 4% 3%

5% 5%

6% 5%

<1% <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% 0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

FY09 N=2584

FY10 N=2604

FY11 N=2353

FY12 N=2661

FY13 N=3234

FY14 N=3520

Pe rc

en ta

ge o

f A ll R

ep or

te d

Su bj

ec t

Di sp

os iti

on s

Fiscal Year

Unknown Subject

Civilian/Foreign Authority Prosecuting Service Member

Subject is Civilian or Foreign National

Subject Died or Deserted

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

29

While Service members are always under the legal authority of the Department, a civilian or foreign authority may choose to exercise its authority over a Service member anytime he or she is suspected of committing an offense within its jurisdiction. Sometimes civilian and foreign authorities agree to let the Department prosecute the Service member. However, such decisions are made on a case-by-case and jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis. A host nation’s ability to prosecute a Service member is subject to the SOFA between the United States and the foreign government. SOFAs vary from country to country. From FY 2009 to FY 2014, the percentage of subjects investigated by the Department for sexual assault found to be outside the Department’s legal authority or under the authority of another jurisdiction varied between 13 percent and 22 percent, as depicted in Exhibit 15. Unfounded Allegations of Sexual Assault The goals of a criminal investigation are to determine who has been victimized, what offenses have been committed, and who may be held appropriately accountable. When the allegations in an Unrestricted Report are investigated, one possible outcome is that the evidence discovered by the investigation demonstrates that the accused person did not commit the offense. Another possible outcome is that evidence shows that a crime did not occur. When either of these situations occurs, the allegations are determined to be unfounded, meaning false or baseless (Exhibit 8, Point K, and Exhibit 9, Point V).

Exhibit 16: Subjects with Unfounded Allegations in Completed DoD Investigations of Sexual Assault, FY 2009 – FY 2014

Notes: 1. In FY 2009, 331 (13%) of the 2,584 subjects in reported dispositions had unfounded allegations. 2. In FY 2010, 371 (14%) of the 2,604 subjects in reported dispositions had unfounded allegations. 3. In FY 2011, 396 (17%) of the 2,353 subjects in reported dispositions had unfounded allegations. 4. In FY 2012, 444 (17%) of the 2,661 subjects in reported dispositions had unfounded allegations. 5. In FY 2013, 495 (15%) of the 3,234 subjects in reported dispositions had unfounded allegations. 6. In FY 2014, 606 (17%) of the 3,520 subjects in reported dispositions had unfounded allegations. 7. Numbers in chart do not sum to total due to rounding.

13% 14%

17% 17% 15% 17%

6%

13% 15%

14% 14% 16%

7%

1% 2% 3% 2% 2%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

FY09 N=2584

FY10 N=2604

FY11 N=2353

FY12 N=2661

FY13 N=3234

FY14 N=3520

Pe rc

en ta

ge o

f A ll R

ep or

te d

Su bj

ec t

Di sp

os iti

on s

Fiscal Year

Total Unfounded Cases

Unfounded by Legal Review after Criminal Investigation

Unfounded by Command/ Legal Review

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

30

Allegations may be unfounded either by the legal review at the end of a criminal investigation or by the disposition authority and legal officers when determining whether disciplinary action is warranted. Exhibit 16 shows that although there has been some variation in who has determined whether allegations were unfounded, the overall percentage of subjects with unfounded allegations has remained about the same since FY 2009.

Provisional Demographics of Victims and Subjects in Completed Investigations The following initial demographic information was gathered from the 3,818 investigations of sexual assault initiated and completed in FY 2014. These investigations involved 4,189 victims and 4,353 subjects. Victims Table 4 illustrates that the vast majority of victims in investigations tend to be female, under the age of 25, and of junior enlisted grades.

Table 4: Demographics of Victims in Completed Investigations

Victim Gender Count Share Male 718 17% Female 3,121 75% Victim Grade or Status Count Share Data Not Available 350 8% E1-E4 2,611 62% Total 4,189 100% E5-E9 467 11%

WO1-WO5 2 <1% Victim Age Count Share O1-O3 121 3%

0-15 15 <1% O4-O10 23 1% 16-19 783 19% Cadet/Midshipman/Prep 27 1% 20-24 1,715 41% US Civilian 542 13% 25-34 705 17% Foreign National/Foreign Military 20 <1% 35-49 170 4% Data Not Available 376 9% 50 and older 17 <1% Total 4,189 100% Data Not Available 784 19% Total 4,189 100%

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

31

Subjects Table 5 shows that the vast majority of subjects of investigations tend to be male, under the age of 35, and of junior enlisted grades, respectively.

Table 5: Demographics of Subjects in Completed Investigations

FY 2014 REPORTS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT IN COMBAT AREAS OF INTEREST Arduous conditions in combat areas of interest (CAI) make sexual assault response and data collection very difficult. However, SARCs, SAPR VAs, and other SAPR personnel are in place in all of these areas. SAPR personnel are diligent in getting requested services and treatment to victims. The data reported below are included in the total number of Unrestricted and Restricted Reports described in previous sections.

Exhibit 17: Total Reports of Sexual Assault in CAIs: Unrestricted Reports and Restricted Reports, FY 2008 – FY 2014

Subject Gender Count Share Male 3,563 82% Female 175 4% Subject Grade or Status Count Share Unknown or Data Not Available 615 14% E1-E4 1,847 42% Total 4,353 100% E5-E9 1,200 28%

WO1-WO5 29 1% Subject Age Count Share O1-O3 147 3%

16-19 314 7% O4-O10 72 2% 20-24 1,412 32% Cadet/Midshipman/Prep 6 <1% 25-34 1,228 28% US Civilian 150 3% 35-49 542 12% Foreign National/Foreign Military 44 1% 50 and older 48 1% Unknown or Data Not Available 858 20% Unknown or Data Not Available 809 19% Total 4,353 100% Total 4,353 100%

260

314 281 289

262

322

149 223

259 251 253 235 268

104

37 55 30 36 27 54 45

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Nu m

be r o

f R ep

or ts

Fiscal Year

Total Reports to DoD in CAI

Unrestricted Reports

Reports Remaining Restricted

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

32

In FY 2014, there were 149 reports of sexual assault in CAIs. This number reflects a 54 percent decrease in overall reporting in CAIs from FY 2013. This is mostly likely a reflection of the decreased number of Service members deployed to these countries in FY 2014. Exhibit 17 illustrates the history of Unrestricted and Restricted Reporting in CAIs since FY 2008. As stated earlier, starting in FY 2014, DSAID accounts for each individual report of sexual assault, such that each report corresponds to one victim. In Exhibit 17, the number of Unrestricted Reports, for all fiscal years, corresponds to the number of victims. Exhibit 18 compares the number of Unrestricted Reports using the case-driven accounting method and the victim-driven accounting method.

Exhibit 18: Reports of Sexual Assault in CAIs: Comparison of Victim-Driven and Case-Driven Accounting of Unrestricted Reports, FY 2007 – FY 2014

Sexual Assaults Perpetrated by Foreign Nationals against Service Members The Military Services reported that 44 foreign national subjects, in investigations completed in FY 2014, were suspected to have committed sexual assaults against Service members.

Demographics of Unrestricted Reports in CAIs Demographic information about the Unrestricted Reports made in CAIs was drawn from the investigations closed during FY 2014. These 72 investigations involved 76 victims and 89 subjects. Victims The demographics of victims in CAIs who made Unrestricted Reports mirror the demographics of victims in all Unrestricted Reports made to the Department, in that they are mostly female Service members (78 percent), of a junior enlisted grade (86 percent). However, victims in CAIs who made Unrestricted Reports tended to be slightly older (87 percent were under the age of 35) than victims making Unrestricted Reports in general.

223 259 251 253

235 268

104 153

204 224 238 225 212

247

21 37 55

30 36 27 54 45

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Nu m

be r o

f R ep

or ts

Fiscal Year

Unrestricted Reports (Victim-Driven Accounting)

Unrestricted Reports (Case- Driven Accounting)

Reports Remaining Restricted

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

33

Subjects The demographics of subjects in Unrestricted Reports made in CAIs are similar to the demographics of subjects in all Unrestricted Reports made to the Department, in that they are mostly male Service members (70 percent), under the age of 35 (51 percent), and in an enlisted grade (47 percent).

Demographics of Restricted Reports in CAIs The 45 victims who made Restricted Reports of sexual assault in CAIs mirror the demographics of victims in all Restricted Reports made to the Department, in that they were mostly female Service members (84 percent). However, victims making Restricted Reports in CAIs tended to be a little older (71 percent were under the age of 35) and of higher rank (44 percent were E1 to E4; 42 percent were E5 to E9) than victims making Restricted Reports in general.

FY 2014 RESTRICTED REPORTS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT Because Restricted Reports are confidential, covered communications as defined in Department policy, SAPR personnel only collect limited data about the victim and the allegation being made. As with Unrestricted Reports, Restricted Reports can be made for incidents that occurred in prior reporting periods and incidents that occurred prior to military service. In FY 2014, there were 1,824 initial Restricted Reports of sexual assault. Of the 1,824 reports, 342 (19 percent) converted to Unrestricted Reports. At the close of FY 2014, 1,482 reports remained Restricted.6 This year, 388 Service Members made a Restricted Report for an incident that occurred prior to entering military service, representing approximately six percent of the 5,983 reports of sexual assault. Of these 388 Service members:

• 244 members indicated that the incident occurred prior to age 18, • 121 members indicated that the incident occurred after age 18, and • 23 members declined to specify one of the two categories listed above.

Over time, the percentage of victims who convert their Restricted Reports to Unrestricted Reports has remained relatively stable at about 15 percent. In FY 2014, the conversion rate increased to 18.8 percent. Exhibit 19 shows the Restricted Reports and conversion rates for the past eight FYs.

6 The 342 Restricted reports that converted to Unrestricted Reports are included in the total 4,501 Unrestricted Reports cited earlier.

How many Restricted Reports convert to Unrestricted Reports each year?

On average, about 15% of victims convert their Restricted Reports to

Unrestricted Reports. However, in FY 2014 about 19% of victims converted from a Restricted to an Unrestricted Report.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

34

Exhibit 19: Total Number of Reports that Were Initially Made as Restricted, the Remaining Number of Restricted Reports, and the Number of Reports that Converted, FY 2007 – FY 2014

Demographics of Restricted Reports of Sexual Assault Table 6 shows that victims who made a Restricted Report were primarily female, under the age of 25, and of a junior enlisted grade.

Table 6: Demographics of Victims in Restricted Reports

Victim Gender Count Share Male 249 17% Female 1,227 83% Victim Grade or Status Count Share Data Not Available 6 <1% E1-E4 1,067 72% Total 1,482 100% E5-E9 265 18%

WO1-WO5 1 <1% Victim Age Count Share O1-O3 79 5%

0-15 194 13% O4-O10 12 1% 16-19 337 23% Cadet/Midshipman/Prep 19 1% 20-24 584 39% Non-Service Member 32 2% 25-34 256 17% Data Not Available 7 <1% 35-49 55 4% Total 1,482 100% 50 and older 1 <1% Data Not Available 55 4% Total 1,482 100%

Note: The percentages in parentheses are the percentage of cases that converted during that time period from a Restricted Report to an Unrestricted Report.

705 753 837 882 877

981

1501

1824

603 643 714 748 753

816

1293 1482

102 (14.5%)

110 (14.6%)

123 (14.7%)

134 (15.2%)

124 (14.1%)

165 (16.8%)

208 (13.9%)

342 (18.8%)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Nu m

be r o

f R ep

or ts

Fiscal Year

Initial Restricted Reports

Reports Remaining Restricted

Reports Converted (% Converted)

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

35

FY 2014 SERVICE REFERRAL INFORMATION SARCs and SAPR VAs are responsible for ensuring victims have access to medical treatment, counseling, legal advice, and other support services. Referrals for these services are made to both military and civilian resources. A referral for service can happen at any time while the victim is receiving assistance from a SARC or SAPR VA and may happen several times throughout the military justice process. This year, SARCs and SAPR VAs made an average of 1.9 service referrals per Service member victim making an Unrestricted Report. For Service member victims making Restricted Reports, SARCs and SAPR VAs made an average of two service referrals per Service member victim. Exhibit 20 shows the average number of referrals per Service member victim in sexual assault reports from FY 2007 to FY 2014. The Military Services varied in the average number of referrals per victim:

• The Army provided an average of 1.2 referrals per Service member victim making an Unrestricted Report and 1.7 referrals per Service member victim making a Restricted Report.

• The Navy provided an average of 2.9 referrals per Service member victim making an Unrestricted Report and 2.8 referrals per Service member victim making a Restricted Report.

• The Marine Corps provided an average of 3.4 referrals per Service member victim making an Unrestricted Report and 2.3 referrals per Service member victim making a Restricted Report.

• The Air Force provided an average of 1.4 referrals per Service member victim making an Unrestricted Report and 1.5 referrals per victim making a Restricted Report.

Exhibit 20: Average Number of Service Referrals per Service Member Victim of Sexual Assault, FY 2007 – FY 2014

Note: Referrals in Unrestricted Reports are not listed for FY 2007 because the Military Services were not directed to collect these data until FY 2008.

0.7

1.8 1.4

1.6 2.1

3.4

1.9

0.5

1.0 1.4 1.0

1.5

2.7 3.0

2.0

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

FY07 FY08 FY09 F10 F11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Re fe

rra ls

Pe r S

er vic

e M em

be r

Vi ct

im

Fiscal Year

Unrestricted

Restricted

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

36

The Military Services reported that there were a total of 562 Sexual Assault Forensic Examinations (SAFEs) conducted for Service member victims during FY 2014. Exhibit 21 depicts the reported number of SAFEs conducted for military victims of sexual assault from FY 2007 to FY 2014. The decision to undergo a SAFE always belongs to the victim.

Exhibit 21: SAFEs Reported by the Military Services involving Service Member Victims, FY 2007 – FY 2014

FY 2014 EXPEDITED TRANSFERS Since FY 2012, the Department has allowed victims of sexual assault to request an expedited transfer from their assigned units (Table 7). This may take the form of a move to another duty location on the same installation, or it may involve moving to a new installation entirely. Requests for transfers are made to the unit commander, who has 72 hours to act on the request. Should the request be declined, the victim may appeal the decision to the first GO/FO in his/her commander’s chain of command. The GO/FO then has 72 hours to review the request and provide a response back to the victim. The following table shows the number of expedited transfers and denials since FY 2012.

Table 7: Expedited Transfers and Denials, FY 2012 – FY 2014 Transfer Type FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014

Number of victims requesting a change in Unit/Duty Assignment (Cross-Installation Transfers) 57 99 39

Number Denied 2 3 0 Number of victims requesting a change in Installation (Permanent Change of Station) 161 480 529

Number Denied 0 11 19 Total Approved 216 565 549

377

557

378

689

459 533

562

272

399

267

480

339 380

436

113 105 158

111

209 120 153 126

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

N um

be r o

f E xa

m s

Total SAFEs Conducted for Service Member Victims

SAFEs for Service Member Victims in Unrestricted Reports

SAFEs for Service Member Victims in Restricted ReportsFiscal Year

Provisional Metrics on Sexual Assault

Fiscal Year 2014

Report to the President of the United States on Sexual Assault Prevention and Response

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS METRICS ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1 Metric 1: Past-Year Prevalence of Unwanted Sexual Contact ………………………………. 1 Metric 2: Prevalence versus Reporting ……………………………………………………………… 4 Metric 3: Bystander Intervention Experience in the Past-Year ………………………………. 7 Metric 4: Command Climate Index – Addressing Continuum of Harm ………………….. 10 Metric 5: Investigation Length ………………………………………………………………………… 12 Metric 6: All Fulltime Certified SARC and VA personnel Currently Able to Provide Victim Support …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 13 Metric 7: Victim Experience – Satisfaction with Services Provided by SARCs, VAs/UVAs, and SVCs/VLCs ………………………………………………………………………….. 14 Metric 8: Percentage of Subjects with Victims Declining to Participate in the Military Justice Process …………………………………………………………………………………………… 15 Metric 9: Perceptions of Retaliation ………………………………………………………………… 15

A. Command Climate Perspective …………………………………………………………… 16 B. The RAND Military Workplace Study – WGRA Responses …………………….. 18 C. Victim Perspective: Survivor Experience Survey (SES) ………………………….. 18

Metric 10: Victim Experience – Victim Kept Regularly Informed of the Military Justice Process ………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 20 Metric 11: Perceptions of Leadership Support for SAPR ……………………………………. 21 Metric 12: Reports of Sexual Assault over Time ……………………………………………….. 23 NON-METRICS ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 24 Non-Metric 1: Command Action – Case Dispositions ………………………………………… 24 Non-Metric 2: Court-Martial Outcomes ……………………………………………………………. 27 Non-Metric 3: Time Interval from Report of Sexual Assault to Court Outcome ………. 28 Non-Metric 4: Time Interval from Report of Sexual Assault to Nonjudicial Punishment Outcome …………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 29 Non-Metric 5: Time Interval from Report of Investigation to Judge Advocate Recommendation ………………………………………………………………………………………… 30 Non-Metric 6: DoD Action in Sexual Assault Cases Declined or Not Fully Addressed by Civilian or Foreign Justice Systems ……………………………………………………………. 30

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

ii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure A- Metric 1a: Past-Year Prevalence of Unwanted Sexual Contact, CY 2006 and FY 2010 – FY 2014 …………………………………………………………………………………….. 2

Figure B- Metric 1b: FY 2014 Estimated Rates of Past-Year Sexual Assault, as Indicated by the RAND Military Workplace Study (RMWS) “Sexual Assault” Measure and the Workplace Gender Relations Survey (WGRA) “Unwanted Sexual Contact” Measure ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 3

Figure C- Metric 1c: FY 2014 Estimated Number of Service Members Experiencing Sexual Assault in the Past-Year, as Indicated by the RAND Military Workplace Study (RMWS) “Sexual Assault” Measure and the Workplace Gender Relations Survey (WGRA) “Unwanted Sexual Contact” Measure …………………………………….. 4

Figure D- Metric 2: Sexual Assault Reports versus Prevalence ……………………………….. 6 Figure E- Metric 3a and 3b: Bystander Intervention in the Past 12 Months, 2014 ……….. 7 Figure F- Metric 3a: Bystander Intervention- Observed a High Risk Situation by Gender

and Rank …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 8 Figure G- Metric 3b: Bystander Intervention- Action Taken Among Respondents Who

Observed a High Risk Situation by Gender and Rank ……………………………………… 9 Figure H- Metric 4: Command Climate Index- Addressing Continuum of Harm by

Gender and Rank ……………………………………………………………………………………… 11 Figure I- Metric 5: Investigation Length ………………………………………………………………. 12 Figure J- Metric 6: All Fulltime Certified SARC and VA Personnel Currently Able to

Provide Victim Support ………………………………………………………………………………. 13 Figure K- Metric 7: Victim Experience- Satisfaction with Services Provided by

SVCs/VLCs, SARCs, and VAs/UVAs …………………………………………………………… 14 Figure L- Metric 8: Subjects with Victims Declining to Participate in the Military Justice

Process …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 15 Figure M- Metric 9a: Service Members Perceptions of Victim Retaliation – Command

Climate Perspective ………………………………………………………………………………….. 17 Figure N- Metric 9b: Perceived Retaliation – Victim Perspective ……………………………. 18 Figure O- Metric 9c: Perceived Retaliation – Victim Perspective ……………………………. 19 Figure P- Metric 10: Victim Experience – Victim Kept Regularly Informed of the Military

Justice Process ………………………………………………………………………………………… 21 Figure Q- Metric 11: Service Members’ Perceptions of Leadership Support for SAPR . 22 Figure R- Metric 12: Reports of Sexual Assault Over Time ……………………………………. 23 Figure S- Non-Metric 1a: Command Action for Alleged Military Offenders under DoD

Legal Authority …………………………………………………………………………………………. 25 Figure T- Non-Metric 1b: Command Action for Alleged Military Offenders under DoD

Legal Authority by Penetrating and Sexual Contact Crimes …………………………….. 26 Figure U- Non-Metric 2: Sexual Assault Court-Martial Outcomes by Penetrating and

Sexual Contact Crimes ……………………………………………………………………………… 27

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

iii

Figure V- Non-Metric 3: Time Interval from Report to Court Outcome …………………….. 28 Figure W- Non-Metric 4: Time Interval from Report to Nonjudicial Punishment Outcome29 Figure X- Non-Metric 5: Time Interval from Report of Investigation to Judge Advocate

Recommendation ……………………………………………………………………………………… 30

Report to the President of the United States on Sexual Assault Prevention and Response

1

PROVISIONAL METRICS ON SEXUAL ASSAULT At the request of the White House, the Department of Defense developed the following metrics and “non-metrics” to help evaluate DoD progress in sexual assault prevention and response. As part of the development process, the Department canvassed sexual assault programs throughout the nation to identify potential points of analysis. Unfortunately, DoD could find no widely accepted, population-based metrics to serve as a reference. Consequently, the Department developed the following twelve metrics and six “non-metrics” in a collaborative process involving DoD SAPR program experts and researchers. The term “metric” is used to describe some quantifiable part of a system’s function. Inherent in performance metrics is the concept that there may be a positive or negative valence associated with such measurements. In addition, adjustments in inputs to a process may also allow an entity to influence a metric in a desired direction. For example, it is the stated intent of the Department to encourage greater reporting of sexual assault. Consequently, increases in the number of sexual assault reports may be an indicator that such a policy may be having the desired effect. The Department chose to coin the term “non-metric” to describe aspects or outputs of the military justice system that should not be “influenced,” or be considered as having a positive or negative valence in that doing so may be considered inappropriate or unlawful under military law. Metric and non-metric points of analysis are illustrated and explained in Figure A through Figure X.

METRICS Metric 1: Past-Year Prevalence of Unwanted Sexual Contact The Department uses the Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of Active Duty Members (WGRA) to estimate the prevalence, or occurrence, of sexual assault in the active duty over a year’s time. This survey process is normally conducted by the Defense Manpower Data Center and required as part of the quadrennial cycle of human relations surveys outlined in Title 10 U.S. Code Section 481. In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012, Congress directed the Department to survey the active duty every two years, which allows the Department to more frequently estimate the prevalence of sexual assault. Thus, past-year prevalence estimates are available for Calendar Year (CY) 2006, FY 2010, FY 2012, and FY 2014. Since 2002, the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) has conducted the Workplace and Gender Relations Surveys. However, in 2013, the leadership of the Senate Armed Services Committee requested that the Department arrange for an independent survey to estimate sexual assault prevalence. In accordance with this request, the RAND Corporation (RAND) was contracted to administer the Military Workplace Study (RMWS) which will serve as the 2014 WGRA. RAND created and simultaneously administered two versions of the survey:

1) One version employed DMDC’s prior form questions about sexual assault (unwanted sexual contact) and sexual harassment, drawn from the FY 2012

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

2

Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of Active Duty Members, allowing for some level of comparison with previous years’ survey data (WGRA form administered by RAND). Past-year prevalence estimates in this report are primarily drawn from this WGRA measure as part of the FY 2014 RAND Military Workplace Study.

2) RAND also developed and administered a new measure to estimate past-year prevalence of sexual assault and sexual harassment (RMWS form) that found statistically similar prevalence rates as the WGRA form. The newer items on the RMWS form were designed to closely track with the legal language describing the crimes that constitute sexual assault in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and the legal definition of sexual harassment in federal law. The differences between the WGRA and the RMWS forms are explained in greater detail in RAND’s initial findings, attached to this report (Annex 1). RAND will be conducting additional analysis this winter and will provide greater detail about the similarities and differences of these two measures with DoD’s Annual Report to Congress, to be released in April 2015.

Figure A- Metric 1a: Past-Year Prevalence of Unwanted Sexual Contact, CY 2006 and FY 2010 – FY 2014

Metric 1a (Figure A) illustrates the past-year rates of unwanted sexual contact among active duty women and men for CY 2006, FY 2010, FY 2012, and FY 2014 using similar survey questions across time. Unwanted sexual contact (USC) is the DMDC survey term for the range of contact sexual crimes between adults, prohibited by military law, ranging from rape to abusive sexual contact (Figure A). USC involves intentional sexual

Description: Past-year prevalence of unwanted sexual contact as measured by the WGRA form. Frequency: Reported to the SAPR Joint Executive Council (JCS Tank) on a biannual basis. Source: Gender Relations Survey of Active Duty Members (2006); Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of Active Duty Members (WGRA, 2010/2012); WGRA form, RAND Military Workplace Study (RMWS, 2014). Implication: Estimates the occurrence of unwanted sexual contact of active duty members in a one-year period.

6.8% 4.4%

6.1% 4.3% 1.8% 0.9% 1.2% 0.9%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

CY06 FY10 FY12 FY14

Un wa

nt ed

S ex

ua l C

on ta

ct

Pr ev

ale nc

e R at

e

Calendar and Fiscal Year

Metric 1a: Past-Year Prevalence of Unwanted Sexual Contact

Women

Men

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

3

contact that occurred against a person’s will or that occurred when a person did not or could not consent. In FY 2014, RAND’s Military Workplace Study, using the WGRA methodology, revealed that 4.3 percent of active duty women and 0.9 percent of active duty men experienced an incident of USC in the past 12 months prior to survey completion. For active duty women, the FY 2014 USC rate is statistically lower than the USC rate found in FY 2012 (4.3 percent versus 6.1 percent, respectively). For active duty men, the FY 2014 USC rate is statistically the same as the USC rate found in FY 2012 (0.9 percent versus 1.2 percent, respectively). The decreased prevalence of USC for women suggests that, overall, active duty personnel experienced less crime in FY 2014 than they did in FY 2012. Nonetheless, sexual assault remains a persistent problem that requires continued DoD attention.

Figure B- Metric 1b: FY 2014 Estimated Rates of Past-Year Sexual Assault, as Indicated by the RAND Military Workplace Study (RMWS) “Sexual Assault” Measure and the Workplace Gender

Relations Survey (WGRA) “Unwanted Sexual Contact” Measure

Metric 1b (Figure B) displays the 2014 rates of unwanted sexual contact as determined by the WGRA measure, designed by DMDC, and the new measure of sexual assault developed by RAND (RMWS). For active duty men and women, the rates of sexual assault as estimated by the two methods are about the same. However, the methodological differences employed by the RMWS appear to provide a “crime rate” that more closely aligns with legal terminology in the UCMJ. Nonetheless, these results

Description: Past-year prevalence of sexual assault as measured by the WGRA and RMWS forms. Frequency: Reported to the SAPR Joint Executive Council (JCS Tank) on a biannual basis. Source: RAND Military Workplace Study (RMWS; 2014). Implication: Estimates the occurrence of sexual assault of active duty members in a one-year period. Note: The 95% confidence interval for each estimate is indicated in parentheses.

0.9% (0.7%-1.2%)

1.0% (0.8%-1.2%)

4.3% (3.9%-4.8%)

4.9% (4.6%-5.1%)

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

WGRA “Unwanted Sexual Contact” (FY14)

RMWS “Sexual Assault” (FY14)

Se xu

al As

sa ul

t P re

va len

ce R

at e

Survey Mode

Metric 1b: Estimated Rates of Past-Year Sexual Assault, as Indicated by RMWS “Sexual Assault” Measure and WGRA

“Unwanted Sexual Contact” Measure, FY 2014

Women

Men

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

4

are provisional and subject to additional analysis that will be made available with the FY 2014 Annual Report to Congress, due in April 2015.

Figure C- Metric 1c: FY 2014 Estimated Number of Service Members Experiencing Sexual Assault in the Past-Year, as Indicated by the RAND Military Workplace Study (RMWS) “Sexual Assault”

Measure and the Workplace Gender Relations Survey (WGRA) “Unwanted Sexual Contact” Measure

Metric 1c (Figure C) displays the 2014 estimated number of Service members experiencing unwanted sexual contact as determined by the WGRA measure designed by DMDC and the RMWS measure of sexual assault developed by RAND. As with Metric 1b, the number of active duty men and women who have experienced sexual assault in the past-year as estimated by the two methods is about the same.

Metric 2: Prevalence versus Reporting Underreporting occurs when crime reports to law enforcement fall far below scientific estimates of how often a crime may actually occur. Nationally, sexual assault is one of the most underreported crimes, with estimates indicating that between 65 and 84

Description: Estimated number of Service members experiencing sexual assault, as measured by the WGRA and RMWS forms. Frequency: Reported to the SAPR Joint Executive Council (JCS Tank) on a biannual basis. Source: RAND Military Workplace Study (RMWS; 2014). Implication: Estimates the occurrence of sexual assault of active duty members in a one-year period. Note: Error bars represent the 95% confidence interval for each estimate.

~19,000 ~20,000

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

WGRA (FY14) RMWS (FY14)

Nu m

be r o

f S er

vic e M

em be

rs

Survey Mode

Metric 1c: Estimated Number of Service Members Experiencing Sexual Assault, as Indicated by RMWS and

WGRA Measures

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

5

percent of rapes and sexual assaults go unreported to police.7 Underreporting also occurs within the Department of Defense. Underreporting of sexual assault interferes with the Department’s ability to provide victims with needed care and prevents the Department from holding offenders appropriately accountable. Much remains to be done to improve reporting as DoD estimates indicate that most military victims who experience USC do not make a sexual assault report. In order to better understand the extent to which sexual assault goes unreported, Metric 2 compares the estimated number of Service members who may have experienced USC, as calculated with data from the WGRA form (administered by RAND), with the number of Service member victims in sexual assault reports for incidents occurring during military Service. Each year, the Department receives reports of sexual assault from both military and civilian victims. The Department responds to all reports of sexual assault; however, a focus on Service member victim reports of sexual assault for an incident during military Service allows for direct comparison with WGRA prevalence estimates. The difference between reports and the estimated number of military victims is illustrated in Figure D. Although reports to DoD authorities are unlikely to capture all USC estimated to occur in a given year, it is the Department’s goal to increase Service member victim confidence in reporting sexual assault. The increase in reporting, combined with efforts to reduce the overall occurrence of the crime through prevention efforts, is expected to narrow the “gap” between prevalence and reporting. As Figure D shows, 4,608 Service member victims in Unrestricted and Restricted Reports of sexual assault made to DoD authorities in FY 2014 accounted for approximately 24 percent of the estimated number of Service members who may have experienced unwanted sexual contact that year (19,000 ± 3,000). This represents a decrease in underreporting (e.g., the gap between reports received and the survey- estimated number of victims) since 2012, when 2,828 Service member victims in reports to DoD authorities accounted for about 11 percent of the 2012 USC prevalence estimate (~26,000).

7 National Research Council. (2014). Estimating the Incidence of Rape and Sexual Assault. Panel on Measuring Rape and Sexual Assault in Bureau of Justice Statistics Household Surveys, C. Kruttschnitt, W.D. Kalsbeek, and C.C. House, Editors. Committee on National Statistics, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

6

Figure D- Metric 2: Sexual Assault Reports versus Prevalence

The Department expects that the “gap” between the survey-estimated number of Service members experiencing USC and the number of Service members accounted for sexual assault reports to DoD authorities can be reduced in two ways:

• Over time, initiatives to build victims’ confidence in the system are expected to increase the number of Service members who choose to make an Unrestricted or Restricted Report.

• Over time, the effects of the many prevention initiatives implemented across the Department are expected to reduce past-year prevalence rates of USC, as measured by the WGRA.

Description: Estimates the percentage of Service member incidents captured in reports of sexual assault (Restricted and Unrestricted Reports). Frequency: Reported to the SAPR Joint Executive Council (JCS Tank) on a biannual basis. Sources: Service reports of sexual assault (FY04 – FY13) and Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database (DSAID, FY14); Gender Relations Survey of Active Duty Members (2006); Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of Active Duty Members (WGRA, 2010/2012); WGRA form, RAND Military Workplace Study (RMWS, 2014). Implication: Capturing a greater proportion of sexual assault incidents in reports to DoD improves visibility over the extent of the problem. It is the Department’s goal to decrease the prevalence of sexual assault through prevention, while encouraging a greater number of victims to make a Restricted or Unrestricted Report. Increased reporting allows a greater number of victims to obtain needed assistance, and gives the Department an opportunity to hold offenders appropriately accountable. Note: Error bars represent the 95% confidence interval for each estimate.

Women: 6.8% Men: 1.8%

~34,200

Women: 4.4% Men: 0.9%

~19,300

Women: 6.1% Men: 1.2%

~26,000

Women: 4.3% Men: 0.9%

~19,000

1275 1774

(~7%)

2289 2223 2340 2454

(~13%)

2532 2639

(~11%)

2828 4113

(~24%)

4608

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

CY04 CY05 CY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Nu m

be r o

f S er

vic e M

em be

rs

Calendar and Fiscal Year

Metric 2: Sexual Assault Reports versus Prevalence Estimated Number of Service Members Experiencing Unwanted Sexual Contact Using WGRA Methodology

Service Member Victims in Reports of Sexual Assault to DoD Authorities For Incidents that Occurred in Military Service (Unrestricted and Restricted)

(%)= Percentage of estimated Service members accounted for in Unrestricted and Restricted Reports

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

7

Metric 3: Bystander Intervention Experience in the Past-Year The DEOCS Command Climate Survey8 included two items to assess respondents’ bystander intervention experiences in the past 12 months. The first item asked whether participants observed a situation they believed could have led to a sexual assault within the past 12 months.

Figure E- Metric 3a and 3b: Bystander Intervention in the Past 12 Months, 2014

If respondents answered “yes” to this question, they were prompted to answer a second question to identify the response that most closely resembled their actions. The two items are listed below: In the past 12 months, I observed a situation that I believe was, or could have led to, a sexual assault:

• Yes • No

8 Additional information about the DEOCS Command Climate Survey can be found above in the “How It Is Gathered” section of this report (p. 5).

No 96% No action

13%

Intervened 87%

Yes 4%

Observed a high risk situation? If yes, what action was taken?

Metric 3a and 3b: Bystander Intervention February-September 2014

% Observed High Risk Situation If Observed, % Intervened DoD February-September 2014 4% 87%

Description: Service member responses to: “In the past 12 months, I observed a situation that I believed was, or could have led to, a sexual assault” and, if they observed a high risk situation, what action they took. Source: DEOMI Organizational Climate Survey (DEOCS). Implication: Indicator of frequency of observed high-risk situations and Service member actions to prevent sexual assault. However, DEOCS results draw from a convenience sample and may not be representative of the entire force. Summary Points: Overall, 4% of Service member respondents indicated they witnessed a high risk situation. However, of those who observed a high risk situation, the vast majority took some action to intervene. Notes: The DEOCS is a voluntary survey administered to a unit annually or within 120 days of change in unit command.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

8

In response to this situation (Select the one response that most closely resembles your actions):

• I stepped in and separated the people involved in the situation. • I asked the person who appeared to be at risk if they needed help. • I confronted the person who appeared to be causing the situation. • I created a distraction to cause one or more of the people to disengage

from the situation. • I asked others to step in as a group and diffuse the situation. • I told someone in a position of authority about the situation. • I considered intervening in the situation, but I could not safely take any

action. • I decided to not take action.

Figure F- Metric 3a: Bystander Intervention- Observed a High Risk Situation by Gender and Rank Of the respondents who completed the DEOCS in FY 2014, about 4 percent indicated they observed a situation they believed was, or could have led to, a sexual assault (i.e., a high risk situation). However, of those who observed a high risk situation, the vast majority took some action to intervene (Figure E). In order to better understand

3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 4% 3% 3%

7% 7% 6% 7% 7% 8% 7% 6%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. P er

ce nt

ag e W

ho O

bs er

ve d a

Hi

gh R

isk S

itu at

io n

2014

Metric 3a: Bystander Intervention- Observed a High Risk Situation by Gender

Men

Women

4% 4% 4% 4% 5% 5% 5% 4% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.P er

ce nt

ag e W

ho O

bs er

ve d a

Hi

gh R

isk S

itu at

io n

2014

Metric 3a: Bystander Intervention- Observed a High Risk Situation by Rank

Jr. Enlisted/NCO All Remaining Ranks

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

9

differences in responding by certain demographic groups, the Department conducted subsequent comparisons as follows:

• Male compared to female respondents • Junior enlisted (E1 to E3)/non-commissioned officer (E4 to E6) respondents

compared to senior enlisted member (E7 to E9)/warrant officer (W1 to W5)/officer (O1 and above) respondents.

Figure G- Metric 3b: Bystander Intervention- Action Taken Among Respondents Who Observed a High Risk Situation by Gender and Rank

Compared to men, women were more likely to observe a high risk situation and more likely to intervene (Figure F and Figure G). Officers and senior enlisted Service members were less likely to observe a high risk situation, but more likely to intervene

85% 87% 86% 86% 85% 88% 86% 86% 91% 92% 90% 89% 93% 90% 89% 92%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.

Pe rc

en ta

ge W

ho T

oo k A

ct io

n

2014

Metric 3b: Bystander Intervention – Action Taken Among Respondents Who Observed a High Risk Situation by Gender

Men

Women

86% 88% 86% 85% 86% 88% 86% 86% 92% 93% 91% 93% 92% 94% 94%

94%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.

Pe rc

en ta

ge W

ho T

oo k A

ct io

n

2014

Metric 3b: Bystander Intervention – Action Taken Among Respondents Who Observed a High Risk Situation by Rank

Jr. Enlisted/NCO

All Remaining Ranks

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

10

(Figure F and Figure G) when compared to junior enlisted members and non- commissioned officers.

Metric 4: Command Climate Index – Addressing Continuum of Harm Respondents who completed the DEOCS Command Climate Survey answered three questions about their perceptions of the extent to which their leadership promotes a climate based on mutual respect and trust. These items, listed below, use a four-point scale, ranging from, “Not at All” to “Great Extent”, and are coded such that a high score indicates a more favorable climate. To what extend does your chain of command:

1. Promote a unit climate based on “respect and trust.” 2. Refrain from sexist comments and behaviors. 3. Actively discourage sexist comments and behaviors.

The responses to these three items were then combined into an index, still using a 4 point scale. The data displayed represent the average monthly responses from the demographic groups. Overall, DEOCS respondents indicated a very favorable command climate. Perceptions of command climate are less favorable among junior enlisted members and non-commissioned officers (3.3 out of 4.0; E1-E3 and E4-E6, respectively), compared to senior enlisted Service members and officers (3.6 out of 4.0; E7-E9, W1-W5, and O1 and above, respectively). Moreover, perceptions of command climate are slightly less favorable among women than among men (Figure H). While between 100,000 and 200,000 personnel take the DEOCS each month, the respondents may not be completely representative of the force as a whole. The consistency indicated in monthly results is notable, given that each month represents a different group of respondents. It is important to note that this is the first year that the DEOCS results have been used in this way, and the data have not been fully analyzed to determine scientific reliability and validity, representativeness, and sensitivity to changes in the military population. The DEOCS remains a valuable tool to assess climate on the unit level. However, the inferences that can be made in combining the data of many units for a DoD-wide or Service-wide picture of climate are subject to limitations. The Department will be reviewing its metric methodology in the forthcoming year to identify strengths and areas for improvement.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

11

Figure H- Metric 4: Command Climate Index- Addressing Continuum of Harm by Gender and Rank

3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3

1

2

3

4

Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.

Me an

C om

m an

d Cl

im at

e I nd

ex

2014

Metric 4: Command Climate Index – Addressing Continuum of Harm by Gender

Men

Women

Le ss

fa vo

ra bl

e

M

or e

fa vo

ra bl

e

3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6

1

2

3

4

Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.

Me an

C om

m an

d Cl

im at

e I nd

ex

2014

Metric 4: Command Climate Index – Addressing Continuum of Harm by Rank

Jr. Enlisted/NCO

All Remaining Ranks

Le ss

fa vo

ra bl

e

M

or e

fa vo

ra bl

e

Men Women Jr. Enlisted/NCO All Remaining Ranks DoD February-September 2014 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.6 Description: Mean Service member perceptions of the extent to which their command: (1) Promotes a climate based on “mutual respect and trust”, (2) Refrains from sexist comments and behaviors, and (3) Actively discourages sexist comments and behaviors. Higher scores indicate more favorable perceptions. Source: DEOMI Organizational Climate Survey (DEOCS). Implication: Service member rating of command climate in this area that addresses the continuum of harm. However, DEOCS results draw from a convenience sample and may not be representative of the entire force. Summary Points: Overall, Service members perceived a favorable command climate. Men perceived a slightly more favorable climate compared to women. Junior enlisted Service members and NCOs reported a less positive command climate compared to all other ranks. Notes: The DEOCS is a voluntary survey administered to military units annually or within 120 days of change in unit command. Rankings are categorized as follows: Junior enlisted includes E1-E3, NCO includes E4-E6, and all remaining ranks includes E7-E9, W1-W-5, and O1 and above.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

12

Metric 5: Investigation Length As illustrated in Figure I, it took an average of 142 days, or 4.7 months, to complete a sexual assault investigation in FY 2014, up slightly from the 121 day average investigation length in FY 2013. The Department began tracking investigation length in FY 2013; therefore, data from previous fiscal years are not available. It is important to note that the length of an investigation does not necessarily reflect an investigation’s quality. The time it takes to conduct an investigation depends on a variety of factors, including the complexity of the allegation, the number and location of potential witnesses involved, and the laboratory analysis required for the evidence. Thus, the factors that impact investigation length vary on a case by case basis. Knowledge of the average length of a sexual assault investigation will help inform victims about the investigative process and allow the Department to assess its resources and investigative capabilities moving forward.

Figure I- Metric 5: Investigation Length

Average: 121 Average: 142

Median: 110 Median: 118

0

50

100

150

200

FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17

Metric 5: Investigation Length

Average Investigation Length (Days) Median* Investigation Length (Days)

Investigations Information DoD FY13 DoD FY14 Completed Investigations 2013 4641

Average Investigation Length (Days) 121 142

Median* Investigation Length (Days) 110 118 Description: Baseline average and median investigation lengths of sexual assault investigations for each Military Criminal Investigative Organization (MCIO). Length measured from date of victim report to date that all investigative activity is completed. Source: MCIOs (CID, NCIS, and AFOSI). Implication: Provides a means to address expectations about investigation length. Investigation length is not a measure of a thorough and professional investigation and may vary greatly depending on the complexity of the allegation and evidence. Shorter investigations are not necessarily better investigations. Summary Points: On average, a criminal investigation in the DoD takes 4.7 months *Note: The median is a “midpoint” for a set of numbers; it is the value for which half are above and half are below. Unlike an average, the median is less influenced by outliers in a set of numbers.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

13

Metric 6: All Fulltime Certified SARC and VA personnel Currently Able to Provide Victim Support As illustrated in Figure J, there are 1,039 fulltime civilian and Service member SARCs and VAs working to provide victim support. In addition to fulltime SARCs and VAs, the Services also employ collateral duty Service member SARCs and VAs to provide support to victims on a part-time basis.

Figure J- Metric 6: All Fulltime Certified SARC and VA Personnel Currently Able to Provide Victim Support

317 251

348

123

0

100

200

300

400

500

FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17

# o f F

ul lti

m e S

AR Cs

an d

VA s

Fiscal Year

Metric 6: All Fulltime Certified SARC and VA Personnel Currently Able to Provide Victim Support

Civilian SARCs Uniformed SARCs Civilian VAs Uniformed VAs

Total: 1,039

SARCs VAs SARCs VAs DoD FY14 317 348 251 123

Civilian Fulltime Uniformed Personnel Fulltime

Description: Number of fulltime civilian SARCs and VAs, number of fulltime uniformed personnel SARCs and VAs. Source: Service Manning Data. Implication: Indicator of fulltime professional capability both in garrison and deployed. Summary Point: There are 1,039 fulltime SARCs and VAs. In addition, the Services have many collateral duty and volunteer SARCs and VAs available to assist victims. In total, 33,919 individuals are D-SAACP certified.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

14

Metric 7: Victim Experience – Satisfaction with Services Provided by SARCs, VAs/UVAs, and SVCs/VLCs Survivors who completed the Survivor Experience Survey (SES) reported the extent to which they were satisfied with the services provided by their SARC, VA, UVA and Special Victim’s Counsel/Victim’s Legal Counsel (SVC/VLC). As illustrated in Figure K, the vast majority of survivors expressed satisfaction with the services provided by their SARCs, VAs/UVAs, and SVCs/VLCs. The SES is the first Department-wide effort to assess victims’ experiences with the DoD response system. The Department will continue to administer the Survivor Experience Survey on an ongoing basis to assess survivors’ needs and experiences in an effort to improve victim services. See Annex 2 for additional information about the SES.

Figure K- Metric 7: Victim Experience- Satisfaction with Services Provided by SVCs/VLCs, SARCs, and VAs/UVAs

Description: Victim opinion of the quality/value of support provided by the SVC/VLC, SARC, and VA/UVA, if assigned. Source: Survivor Experience Survey (SES), Phase 1. Implication: Indicates the degree to which SARCs, VAs/UVAs, and SVCs are valued by victims. Summary Points: The vast majority of victims were satisfied with their SVCs/VLCs, SARCs, VAs/UVAs. Note: Because of the small number of respondents contributing toward many of these estimates, we caution against comparing across groups.

84%

88%

89%

90%

6%

5%

6%

7%

10%

8%

5%

3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Overall satisfaction with UVA N=83

Overall satisfaction with VA N=40

Overall satisfaction with SARC N=136

Overall satisfaction with SVC/VLC N=98

Metric 7: Victim Experience- Satisfaction with Services Provided by SVCs/VLCs, SARCs, and VAs/UVAs

Satisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Dissatisfied

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

15

Metric 8: Percentage of Subjects with Victims Declining to Participate in the Military Justice Process The Services reported that DoD commanders, in conjunction with their legal advisors, reviewed and made case disposition decisions for 2,419 subjects in FY 2014. However, the evidence did not support taking disciplinary action against everyone accused of a sexual assault crime. For example, disciplinary action is precluded (not possible) when victims decline to participate in the military justice process. In FY 2014, 10 percent of accused subjects whose cases were presented to command for consideration of action did not receive disciplinary action because their victims declined to participate in the justice process. As illustrated in Figure L, the percentage of subjects with victims declining to participate remained steady from FY 2009 to FY 2014, with the exception of a small increase in FY 2010. Although the majority of victims participate in the justice process, the Department continues to seek avenues for greater and sustained victim involvement in the justice system. Recent initiatives, such as the Special Victims’ Counsel/Advocacy Program, are expected to encourage greater victim participation and engagement with the military justice process.

Figure L- Metric 8: Subjects with Victims Declining to Participate in the Military Justice Process

Metric 9: Perceptions of Retaliation It is the goal of the Department to have climate of confidence where victims feel free to report sexual assault, without any concern of retaliation or negative repercussions for doing so. It should be noted that for the following data, the Department did not conduct any follow-up or verification of the perceptions reported. As a result, someone who indicates that they perceived retaliation may not actually know why people are behaving

Description: The percentage of subjects that cannot be held appropriately accountable because the victim declined to participate in the military justice process. Frequency: Reported to the SAPR Joint Executive Council (JCS Tank) on an annual basis. Source: Past source = Service reporting, Current source = Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database (DSAID). Implication: Provides indication if the Department’s changes in the military justice process are having an impact on victim involvement.

10% 17%

12% 11% 9% 10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

FY09 N=1971

FY10 N=1925

FY11 N=1518

FY12 N=1714

FY13 N=2149

FY14 N=2419

Pe rc

en ta

ge o

f S ub

jec ts

w ith

V ict

im s

De cli

ni ng

to P

ar tic

ip at

e i n

th e M

ilit ar

y Ju

st ice

S ys

te m

Fiscal Year

Metric 8: Percentage of Subjects with Victims Declining to Participate in the Military Justice Process

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

16

in a particular way towards him or her. It could be because the victim made a report of sexual assault or because of some other reason unknown to the victim. Given the challenges associated with interpreting this data, the Department sought to sample a number of domains to get as full a picture of this phenomenon as possible:

A. Command Climate Perspective B. The RAND Military Workplace Study C. The Survivor Experience Survey

A. Command Climate Perspective The DEOCS survey included six items to assess command climate indicators that victims may be retaliated against for reporting. The items used a four-point scale ranging from “Not at all likely to “Very likely.” The responses to the items listed below were reverse coded such that a high score indicates a more favorable climate and combined into a four-point index:

If someone were to report a sexual assault to your current chain of command, how likely is it that:

1. Unit members would label the person making the report a troublemaker. 2. Unit members would support the person making the report. 3. The alleged offender(s) or their associates would retaliate against the person

making the report. 4. The chain of command would take steps to protect the safety of the person

making the report. 5. The chain of command would support the person making the report. 6. The chain of command would take corrective action to address factors that may

have led to the sexual assault.

Overall, Service members who completed the DEOCS perceived that the potential for retaliation from their command and unit members to be unlikely (i.e. they perceived a favorable climate). However, men (3.5 out of 4.0) perceived a slightly more favorable climate with a lower likelihood of retaliation compared to women (3.4 out of 4.0; Figure M). Moreover, senior enlisted Service members and officers (E7-E9, W1-W5, and O1 and above, respectively; 3.7 out of 4.0) perceived a more favorable climate and that retaliation was less likely to occur compared to junior enlisted Service members and non-commissioned officers (E1-E3 and E4-E6, respectively; 3.4 out of 4.0). While between 100,000 and 200,000 personnel take the DEOCS each month, the respondents may not be completely representative of the force as a whole. The consistency indicated in monthly results is notable, given that each month represents a different group of respondents.9 9 As stated earlier, this is the first year that the DEOCS results have been used in this way, and the data have not been fully analyzed to determine scientific reliability and validity, representativeness, and sensitivity to changes in the military population. The DEOCS remains a valuable tool to assess climate on the unit level. However, the inferences that can be made in combining the data of many units for a DoD-wide or Service-wide picture of climate are subject to limitations. The Department will be reviewing its metric methodology in the forthcoming year to identify strengths and areas for improvement.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

17

Figure M- Metric 9a: Service Members Perceptions of Victim Retaliation – Command Climate Perspective

3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4

1

2

3

4

Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.

Me an

C lim

at e I

nd ica

to rs

o f R

et ali

at io

n

2014

Metric 9a: Perceptions of Victim Retaliation- Command Climate Perspective by Gender

Men

Women

Le ss

fa vo

ra bl

e

M

or e

fa vo

ra bl

e

3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7

1

2

3

4

Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.

Me an

C lim

at e I

nd ica

to rs

o f R

et ali

at io

n

2014

Metric 9a: Perceptions of Victim Retaliation- Command Climate Perspective by Rank

Jr. Enlisted/NCO

All Remaining Ranks

Le ss

fa vo

ra bl

e

M

or e

fa vo

ra bl

e

Men Women Jr. Enlisted/NCO All Remaining Ranks DoD February-September 2014 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.7 Description: Mean command climate indicators that victims may be retaliated against for reporting. Higher scores indicate a more favorable command climate. Source: DEOMI Organizational Climate Survey (DEOCS). Implication: Provides an indication of Service member perceptions of whether individuals who report a sexual assault would experience some kind of retaliation for doing so. However, DEOCS results draw from a convenience sample and may not be representative of the entire force. Summary Points: Command climate indicators suggested that, overall, surveyed Service members did not believe that retaliation was likely to occur. Compared to men, women reported that retaliation was slightly more likely to occur. Compared to all other ranks, Junior enlisted Service members and NCOs reported that retaliation was more likely to occur. Notes: The DEOCS is a voluntary survey administered to military units annually or within 120 days of change in unit command. Rankings are categorized as follows: Junior enlisted includes E1-E3, NCO includes E4-E6, and all remaining ranks includes E7-E9, W1-W5, and O1 and above.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

18

B. The RAND Military Workplace Study – WGRA Responses Of the 4.3 percent of women who indicated experiencing Unwanted Sexual Contact in the year preceding the survey, and who reported the matter to a military authority or organization, 62 percent perceived some form of retaliation, administrative action, and/or punishment. Specifically, the types of retaliation experienced are shown below in Figure N:

Figure N- Metric 9b: Perceived Retaliation – Victim Perspective

C. Victim Perspective: Survivor Experience Survey (SES) In the SES, a similar pattern was observed, with 59 percent of respondents perceiving social retaliation and 40 percent perceiving professional retaliation (Figure O). The SES involves a convenience sample of victims who responded to a SARC’s invitation to take the survey. Nonetheless, the results on this item were within the margins of error associated with the similar item from the WGRA form, administered by RAND (Figure N), giving a good indication that the respondents to the SES had similar experiences as those respondents in the more representative RMWS.

Description: Victims indicating that they perceived personal, professional, and/or social retaliation after reporting a sexual assault. Source: Past source = Workplace Gender Relations Survey of Active Duty Members (WGRA), Current source = RAND Military Workplace Study (RMWS). Implication: Indicates the perceptions of those respondents who indicated experiencing unwanted sexual contact and reported the incident to a DoD authority. Most respondents (53%) indicated experiencing social retaliation. Summary Points: In FY 2014, 62% of women who experienced unwanted sexual contact and reported it, also perceived some form of personal, professional or social retaliation. Due to small sample size, the percentage for men was not reportable. Notes: Types of perceived retaliation do not sum to 62%, because respondents could select more than one type of retaliation. These estimates were created using the WGRA form survey, WGRA-type weights, with item missing among item eligible respondents coded as “no.”

11%

35%

53%

32%

62%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Punishment for infraction

Adverse administrative action

Social retaliation

Professional retaliation

Any type or retaliation

Percentage of women who reported a sexual assault and perceived retaliation

Metric 9b: Perceptions of Professional and Social Retaliation- Victim Perspective

Respondents could select

more than one type of

retaliation

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

19

Figure O- Metric 9c: Perceived Retaliation – Victim Perspective

That there is retaliation perceived of any kind is concerning, however additional information from the SES gives a greater understanding of the overall impact of those experiences on the individual. Respondents were asked to rate their level of agreement with a number of items that described their experience with their unit commander/director. Of the 64 percent of respondents who made an Unrestricted Report and spoke to their unit commander/director in response to the sexual assault, more than two-thirds agreed the unit commander/director supported them (82 percent), took steps to address their privacy and confidentiality (80 percent), treated them professionally (79 percent), listened to them without judgment (78 percent), and thoroughly answered their questions (70 percent). Across these items, less than one- fifth (between 14 and 18 percent) of respondents indicated they disagreed with those statements. Of the 64 percent of respondents who made an Unrestricted Report and spoke to their unit commander/director in response to the sexual assault, almost three- quarters (73 percent) indicated that overall they were satisfied with the unit commander/director’s response to the report of sexual assault, whereas 16 percent indicated they were dissatisfied.

Description: Victims indicating on the survey that they perceived social ostracization and/or professional retaliation as a result of reporting of sexual assault. Source: Survivor Experience Survey (SES), Phase I. Implication: Provides an indication of the experience of victims who report a sexual assault. Summary Points: Overall, a substantial proportion of victims perceived some kind of retaliation. However, a higher percentage of victims reported social ostracization than professional retaliation. Notes: Social retaliation includes being ignored by coworkers, blamed for the situation, made to feel responsible for changes in the unit. Professional retaliation includes loss of privileges, denied promotion/training, transferred to less favorable job, unwanted increased supervision. Percentages listed for professional retaliation do not add to100% due to rounding of percentages to the nearest whole point.

9%

20%

10%

12%

20%

27%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Professional retaliation N=108

Social retaliation N=111

Metric 9c: Perceptions of Professional and Social Retaliation- Victim Perspective

Small extent Moderate extent Large extent

6% Professional only 27% Social only 33% Both 34% Neither

59% retaliation to any extent

40% retaliation to any extent

Social

retaliation N=111

Professional retaliation

N=108

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

20

Respondents to the SES were less satisfied with other members of their chain of command. Of the 81 percent of respondents who made an Unrestricted Report and spoke to another member in their chain of command in response to the sexual assault, about two-thirds (61 percent) indicated that overall they were satisfied with the other member’s response to the report of sexual assault. More than one quarter (29 percent) indicated they were dissatisfied with the other member’s response to the sexual assault. Based on this, respondents to the SES appeared to have a better experience working with their commander than they did with others in their chain. This finding, while limited to the SES, may have broader applicability to DoD training initiatives, in that over the past two years DoD has worked to improve pre-command training for officers and senior enlisted members. This finding suggests that expanded leadership training on the SAPR program for other members of the chain of command may be warranted. Finally, one last finding from the SES provides additional insight. Given the potential impact of one survivor’s experience on the future decisions of others survivors to report, one of the ways the Department measures progress is whether respondents who report a sexual assault would recommend others report as well. In the 2014 SES, nearly three quarters of respondents (73 percent) indicated, based on their overall experience of reporting, that yes, they would recommend others report their sexual assault, whereas 14 percent of respondents indicated no and 13 percent were unsure if they would recommend others report their sexual assault. See Annex 2 for a full description of the methodology and results of the SES.

Metric 10: Victim Experience – Victim Kept Regularly Informed of the Military Justice Process As displayed in Figure P, 69 percent of victims who completed the SES reported that they were, to a large or moderate extent, kept informed of their case’s progress. DoD policy requires that victims be kept informed of the legal proceedings against the accused perpetrator of their sexual assault. Commanders hold primary responsibility for informing victims on a monthly basis about the progress on their cases.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

21

Figure P- Metric 10: Victim Experience – Victim Kept Regularly Informed of the Military Justice Process

Metric 11: Perceptions of Leadership Support for SAPR The DEOCS command climate survey included two questions on leadership support for sexual assault prevention and response. The items listed below used a four-point scale ranging from “Not at All” to “Great Extent.” The responses to the following items were coded such that a high score indicates higher perceived support: To what extent does your chain of command:

1. Encourage victims to report sexual assault. 2. Create an environment where victims feel comfortable reporting sexual assault.

The responses to these items were combined into an index and averaged across all military respondents to the DECOS each month. Overall, Service members who completed the DEOCS reported that their command supported sexual assault reporting by victims. While an overall encouraging trend was observed in DEOCS results, there is much work to be done to address observed differences in perceptions of command support for SAPR by gender and rank. Consistent with the pattern of results for previous DEOCS supported metrics, men (3.6 out of 4.0) perceived greater command support for victim reporting compared to women (3.4 out of 4.0; Figure Q). Additionally, senior enlisted Service members and officers (E7-E9, W1-W5, and O1 and above, respectively) perceived greater command support for SAPR (3.7 out of 4.0) compared to junior enlisted members and non-commissioned officers (E1-E3 and E4-E6, respectively; 3.5 out of 4.0).

Description: Survey respondents, who made an Unrestricted Report, indicated the extent to which they were regularly informed of updates as their case progressed through the response process. Source: Survivor Experience Survey (SES), Phase I. Implication: Indication of whether victims are kept regularly informed of their case’s progress, as required by DoD policy. Summary Points: Results suggest that the majority of victims were kept updated on their case.

48% 21% 18% 13%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Accurate up-to-date information on case status

N=109

Metric 10: Victim Experience- Victim Kept Regularly Informed of the Military Justice Process

Large extent Moderate extent Small extent Not at all

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

22

Figure Q- Metric 11: Service Members’ Perceptions of Leadership Support for SAPR

3.5 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4

1

2

3

4

Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.

Me an

P er

ce pt

io ns

o f

Le ad

er sh

ip S

up po

rt fo

r S AP

R

2014

Metric 11: Service Members’ Perceptions of Leadership Support for SAPR by Gender

Men Women

Le ss

s up

po rt

M

or e

su pp

or t

3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7

1

2

3

4

Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept.

Me an

P er

ce pt

io ns

o f L

ea de

rs hi

p Su

pp or

t f or

S AP

R

2014

Metric 11: Service Members’ Perceptions of Leadership Support for SAPR by Rank

Jr. Enlisted/NCO

All Remaining Ranks

Le ss

s up

po rt

M or

e su

pp or

t

Men Women Jr. Enlisted/NCO All Remaining Ranks DoD February-September 2014 3.6 3.4 3.5 3.7

Description: Mean Service member perceptions of command and leadership support for SAPR program, victim reporting, and victim support. Higher scores indicate more favorable perceptions. Source: DEOMI Organizational Climate Survey (DEOCS). Implication: Service member rating of command climate in this area. However, DEOCS results draw from a convenience sample and may not be representative of the entire force. Summary Points: Overall, Service members perceived their command and leadership to be supportive of SAPR. Women perceived lower levels of leadership support for SAPR compared to men. Junior enlisted Service members and NCOs perceived lower levels of leadership support for SAPR compared to all other ranks. Notes: The DEOCS is a voluntary survey administered to military units annually or within 120 days of change in unit command. Rankings are categorized as follows: Junior enlisted includes E1-E3, NCO includes E4-E6, and all remaining ranks includes E7-E9, W1-W5, and O1 and above.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

23

Metric 12: Reports of Sexual Assault over Time Reports of sexual assault are imperative for the Department to track for several reasons. The number of sexual assault reports received each year indicates:

• The number of victims who were sufficiently confident in the response system to make a report,

• The number of victims who gained access to DoD support and services, and • The number of victims who may be willing to participate in the military justice

system to hold offenders appropriately accountable.

Figure R- Metric 12: Reports of Sexual Assault Over Time

In FY 2014, the Military Services received a total of 5,983 reports of sexual assault involving Service members as either victims or subjects, which represents an 8 percent increase from the 5,518 reports made in FY 2013 (Figure R). It should be noted that while these reports were received in FY 2014, some reported incidents may have occurred in prior years. Of the 5,983 reports, 513 (or approximately 9 percent) were

2846 3109 3472 3327 3393

3604

5518 5983

2243 2466 2758 2579 2640 2788

4225 4501

603 643 714 748 753 816 1293 1482

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

Nu m

be r o

f R ep

or ts

Fiscal Year

Metric 12: Reports of Sexual Assault Over Time

DoD Total Reports

DoD Unrestricted Reports

DoD Reports Remaining Restricted

Reports of Sexual Assault = + % of Reports Restricted

DoD FY14 5983 (+8% ) = 4501 (+7% ) + 1482 (+15% ) 25%

DoD FY13 5518 = 4225 + 1293 23%

Total (±) Unrestricted (±) Restricted (±)

Description: Year to year trend of restricted and unrestricted reports received by the Department. Both restricted and unrestricted reports represent one victim per report. Frequency: Reported to the SAPR Joint Executive Council (JCS Tank) on a quarterly basis. Source: FY07 to FY13 = Service Reporting, FY14 Source = Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database (DSAID). Implication: A change in reports of sexual assault may reflect a change in victim confidence in DoD response systems. The continuing growth of Restricted Reporting may be a sign that victims view this option as a valuable and trustworthy means to access support while maintaining confidentiality. Summary: Reports of sexual assault increased by 8% from FY13 to FY14.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

24

made by Service members for incidents that occurred prior to their entering military service. 10

• The Military Services received 4,501 Unrestricted Reports involving Service members as either victims or subjects, a seven percent increase over FY 2013.

• The Military Services initially received 1,824 Restricted Reports involving Service members as either victims or subjects. Of the 1,824 initial Restricted Reports, 342 (19 percent) reports later converted to Unrestricted Reports. These converted Restricted Reports are now counted with the Unrestricted Reports. There were 1,482 reports remaining restricted, a 15 percent increase over FY 2014.

The increase in reporting from FY 2013 to FY 2014 is more modest than the increase in reporting from FY 2012 to FY 2013. This is not surprising given that the increase in FY 2013 was an unprecedented 50 percent. In FY 2014, Service members sustained the high level of reporting seen in FY 2013.

NON-METRICS Non-Metric 1: Command Action – Case Dispositions The following information is for those subjects’ cases whose investigations were complete and case disposition results were reported in FY 2014. In FY 2014, 2,419 subjects investigated for sexual assault were Service members who were primarily under the legal authority of the Department. However, as with the civilian justice system, evidentiary issues may have prevented disciplinary action from being taken against some subjects. In addition, commanders declined to take action on some subjects after a legal review of the matter indicated that the allegations against the accused were unfounded, meaning they were determined to be false or baseless. Taken together, command action was not possible in 27 percent of the cases considered for action by military commanders (Figure S) in FY 2014. For the remaining 73 percent of cases considered for command action, commanders had sufficient evidence and legal authority to support some form of disciplinary action for a sexual assault offense or other misconduct. Figure S displays command action taken from FY 2009 to FY 2014 and Figure T displays command action in FY 2014 for penetrating versus sexual contact crimes. Since FY 2007, the percentage of subjects preferred for court-martial has steadily risen and the percentage of subjects for whom command action was not possible has steadily declined. During the same period, commanders’ use of nonjudicial punishment, other adverse administrative actions, and administrative discharges has decreased.

10 Prior to FY 2014, an Unrestricted Report of sexual assault may have included one or more victims and one or more subjects. The Department relied upon the Military Criminal Investigative Organizations to provide the number of unrestricted reports each year, and the subsequent number of victims and subjects associated with those reports. In FY 2014, the Department moved to the Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database (DSAID) as the primary source of reporting statistics.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

25

Figure S- Non-Metric 1a: Command Action for Alleged Military Offenders under DoD Legal Authority

43% 40%

35%

34% 27% 27% 21%

27% 32% 35%

39% 38%

18% 13%

12% 9% 10% 12%

11% 12% 8% 7% 6% 8% 7% 6%

13% 14% 18% 16%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

FY09 N=1971

FY10 N=1925

FY11 N=1518

FY12 N=1714

FY13 N=2149

FY14 N=2419

Pe rc

en t o

f S ub

jec ts

C on

sid er

ed b

y Mi

lit ar

y C om

m an

de rs

fo r A

ct io

n

Fiscal Year

Non-Metric 1a: Command Action for Alleged Military Offenders under DoD Legal Authority

Command action not possible Court-martial charge preferred (Initiated) Nonjudicial punishments (Article 15 UCMJ) Administrative discharges and actions Action for non-sexual assault offense

Disposition of Alleged Offenders DoD FY14 (% of N) C-M Charge Preferral for Sexual Assault Offense 910 38% NJP for Sexual Assault Offense 283 12% Admin D/C & Actions for Sexual Assault Offense 187 8% Action for Non-Sexual Assault Offense 384 16% Command Action Not Possible* 655 27% Description: Year to year trends summarizing the actions Commanders have taken against alleged military offenders under the jurisdiction of military law. Frequency: These data will be reported to the SAPR Joint Executive Council (JCS Tank) on an annual basis. Source: Past Source: Service Reports and Offices of the Judge Advocates General (OTJAGs); Current Source: DSAID and OTJAGs.

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

26

Figure T- Non-Metric 1b: Command Action for Alleged Military Offenders under DoD Legal Authority by Penetrating and Sexual Contact Crimes

38%

44%

1% 3%

13%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

FY14 N=1082

Non-Metric 1b: Command Actions for Penetrating Crimes

Action for non-sexual assault offense

Administrative discharges and actions (SA offense)

Nonjudicial punishments (Article 15 UCMJ) (SA offense)

Court-martial charge preferred (Initiated) (SA offense)

Command action not possible

21%

23%

22%

13%

20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

FY14 N=1112

Non-Metric 1b: Command Actions for Sexual Contact Crimes

Action for non-sexual assault offense

Administrative discharges and actions (SA offense)

Nonjudicial punishments (Article 15 UCMJ) (SA offense)

Court-martial charge preferred (Initiated) (SA offense)

Command action not possible

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

27

Non-Metric 2: Court-Martial Outcomes Figure U illustrates subject outcomes in the court-martial process, displayed by type of crime (penetrating versus sexual contact). Not all cases preferred to court-martial proceed to trial. In certain circumstances, the Department grants a resignation or discharge in lieu of court-martial (RILO/DILO). Furthermore, Article 32 (pre-trial) hearings can result in a recommendation for dismissal of charges. However, commanders can use evidence gathered during sexual assault investigations and evidence heard in an Article 32 hearing to impose a nonjudicial punishment against subjects for whom court-martial charges were dismissed or not recommended based on the evidence available. As seen in Figure U, the majority of cases preferred to court- martial, for both penetrating and sexual contact offenses, proceeded to trial. However, the percentage of penetrating crime cases dismissed was higher than the percentage of sexual contact crime cases dismissed.

Figure U- Non-Metric 2: Sexual Assault Court-Martial Outcomes by Penetrating and Sexual Contact Crimes

66% 71%

23% 16%

12% 13%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

FY14 Penetrating Crimes N=467

FY14 Sexual Contact Crimes N=268

Non-Metric 2: Sexual Assault Court-Martial Outcomes

Subjects preferred to Court- Martial, discharged or resigned in lieu of Court-Martial Subjects preferred to Court- Martial, charges were dismissed Subjects preferred to Court- Martial, proceeded to and completed trial

C-M Charge Preferrals C-M Actions Completed in FY14 467 268

Cases Dismissed 107 23% 42 16% RILO/DILO Cases 54 12% 36 13% Proceeded To Trial 306 66% 190 71%

Acquitted 108 35% 29 15% Convicted 198 65% 161 85%

Description: Year to year trend in outcomes (i.e., Proceeded to Trial; Discharge In Lieu of Court-Martial; Dismissed) of court- martial proceedings involving sexual assault charges. Source: Past Source = Service Reports and TJAGs, Current Source = DSAID and TJAGs. Implication: Pertains to holding alleged offenders appropriately accountable.

Sexual Assault Offenses DoD Penetrating FY14 DoD Sexual Contact FY14 910

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

28

Non-Metric 3: Time Interval from Report of Sexual Assault to Court Outcome As illustrated in Figure V, the mean and median length of time from the date a victim reported a sexual assault to the date that court-martial proceedings concluded, was 278 days (9.1 months) and 267 days (8.8 months), respectively. This is the first year that the Department has collected this data. There are a variety of factors, such as the complexity of the allegation, the need for laboratory analysis of the evidence, the quantity and type of legal proceedings, availability of counsel and judges, and other factors that likely impact the interval of time between a report of sexual assault and the conclusion of a court-martial. That notwithstanding, knowledge of the average amount of time between a report and the end of a court-martial is useful because it improves the transparency of the military justice process and will inform victims about what to expect.

Figure V- Non-Metric 3: Time Interval from Report to Court Outcome

Description: Length of time from the date a victim signs a DD 2910 to the date that a sentence is imposed or accused is acquitted. Source: Start = DSAID DD Form 2910 date, End = DSAID/OTJAG Report of Trial. Implication: Provides transparency into justice process and sets expectations on justice process length. Note: The median is a “midpoint” for a set of numbers; it is the value for which half are above and half are below. Unlike an average, the median is less influenced by outliers in a set of numbers.

Average: 278

Median: 267

0 50

100 150 200 250 300 350 400

FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17

Da ys

fr om

R ep

or t t

o Co

ur t O

ut co

m e

Fiscal Year

Non-Metric 3: Time Interval from Report to Court Outcome

Average Median

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

29

Non-Metric 4: Time Interval from Report of Sexual Assault to Nonjudicial Punishment Outcome The mean and median length of time from the date a victim reported a sexual assault to the date that nonjudicial punishment proceedings concluded was 123 days (4 months) and 108 days (3.5 months), respectively (Figure W). This is the first year that the Department collected this data. Similar to non-metric 3, there are a variety of factors that influence the interval of time between a report of sexual assault and the conclusion of a nonjudicial punishment. However, knowledge of the average amount of time between a report and the end of nonjudicial punishment proceedings improves the transparency of the nonjudicial punishment process and will help to set appropriate expectations.

Figure W- Non-Metric 4: Time Interval from Report to Nonjudicial Punishment Outcome

Description: Length of time from the date a victim signs a DD 2910 to the date that NJP process is concluded (e.g. punishment awarded or NJP not rendered). Source: Start = DSAID DD Form 2910 date, End = DSAID/OTJAG NJP Form or Command Action Form. Implication: Provides transparency into justice process and sets expectations on justice process length. Note: The median is a “midpoint” for a set of numbers; it is the value for which half are above and half are below. Unlike an average, the median is less influenced by outliers in a set of numbers.

Average: 123

Median: 108

0

50

100

150

200

FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17

Da ys

fr om

R ep

or t t

o NJ

P Ou

tc om

e

Fiscal Year

Non-Metric 4: Time Interval from Report to Nonjudicial Punishment Outcome

Average Median

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

30

Non-Metric 5: Time Interval from Report of Investigation to Judge Advocate Recommendation As illustrated in Figure X, the mean and median length of time from the date a report of investigation was provided to command, until the date a judge advocate made a disposition recommendation to the commander of the accused, was 12 days and 0 days, respectively. A zero value indicates that the legal recommendation was made before the closure of the investigation. As for non-metrics 3 and 4, there is no expected or set time for this to occur. For cases where the legal recommendation for prosecution or non-prosecution was made before the investigation was closed, this was most likely due to the substantive involvement of judge advocates in the investigative process, as intended in the Departments Special Victim Investigation and Prosecution capability.

Figure X- Non-Metric 5: Time Interval from Report of Investigation to Judge Advocate Recommendation

Non-Metric 6: DoD Action in Sexual Assault Cases Declined or Not Fully Addressed by Civilian or Foreign Justice Systems Each of the Services were directed by the Joint Chiefs to collect five to ten cases where the military justice system was better able to address the misconduct alleged than the involved civilian or foreign justice system. This is not to say that the military justice system is superior to other justice systems, but rather it has the flexibility and capability to address certain types of misconduct that other systems cannot. For full descriptions of these selected cases, please refer to the Army, Navy, and Air Force Reports (Enclosures 1-3).

Description: Length of time from the date an ROI is handed out to the date JAG provides a prosecution/non-prosecution recommendation. A zero value indicates that the legal recommendation was made before the closure of the investigation. Source: Service military justice data. Implication: Shows responsiveness of legal support to command and may be an indicator of legal officer resourcing. Note: The median is a “midpoint” for a set of numbers; it is the value for which half are above and half are below. Unlike an average, the median is less influenced by outliers in a set of numbers.

Average: 12

Median: 0 0

5

10

15

20

FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17

Da ys

fr om

R ep

or t t

o SJ

A Re

co m

m en

da tio

n

Fiscal Year

Non-Metric 5: Time Interval from Report of Investigation to Judge Advocate Recommendation

Average Median

Provisional Statistical Data on Sexual Assault

Appendix C: List of Acronyms

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

Appendix C: List of Acronyms AFOSI Air Force Office of Special Investigations

AMSAAT Advanced Military Sexual Assault Advocate Training

App Application

CASH/A Cadets Against Sexual Harassment and Assault

CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

CDP Center for Deployment Psychology

CEU Continuing Education Units

CI Cognitive Interviewing

CID U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command

CIGIE Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency

CMG Case Management Group

CODIS Combined DNA Index System

CoP Community of Practice

DD Department of Defense (Form)

DEOCS DEOMI Organizational Climate Survey

DEOMI Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute

DFSC Defense Forensic Science Center

DMDC Defense Manpower Data Center

DNA Deoxyribonucleic Acid

DoD Department of Defense

DoDD DoD Directive

DoDI DoD Instruction

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

DOJ Department of Justice

DOL Department of Labor

D-SAACP DoD Sexual Assault Advocate Certification Program

DSAID Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database

DTF-SAMS Defense Task Force on Sexual Assault in the Military Services

DTM Directive-Type Memorandum

DVA Department of Veterans Affairs

EEO Equal Employment Opportunity

EO Equal Opportunity

FAP Family Advocacy Program

FAQ Frequently Asked Question

FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation

FETI Forensic Experiential Trauma Interview

FGSAPR Focus Groups on Sexual Assault Prevention and Response

FLETC Federal Law Enforcement Training Center

FY Fiscal Year

GAO Government Accountability Office

GO/FO General Officer/Flag Officer

IACP International Association of Chiefs of Police

IG Inspector General

JA Judge Advocate

JAG Judge Advocate General

JCS Joint Chiefs of Staff

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

LEAD Leadership, Education, Accountability, and Discipline

LOE Line of Effort

MCIO Military Criminal Investigative Organization

MEO Military Equal Opportunity

MJES Military Justice Experience Survey

MOU Memoranda of Understanding

MSA Military Service Academy

MTF Military Treatment Facility

NACP National Advocate Credentialing Program

NCIS Naval Criminal Investigative Service

NCO Noncommissioned Officer

NDAA National Defense Authorization Act

NGB National Guard Bureau

NOVA National Organization for Victim Assistance

ODMEO Office of Diversity Management and Equal Opportunity

OE Organizational Effectiveness

OGC Office of General Counsel

OJP Office of Justice Programs

OVC Office for Victims of Crime

PCAR Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape

PII Personal Identifying Information

PM Program Manager

PME Professional Military Education

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

P.L. Public Law

Q Quarter

QSI Quality Standards for Investigations

RAINN Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network

RMWS RAND Military Workplace Study

ROTC Reserve Officer Training Corps

RSP Response Systems to Adult Sexual Assault Crimes Panel

SAAM Sexual Assault Awareness Month

SAAPM Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month

SAFE Sexual Assault Forensic Examination

SAGR Service Academy Gender Relations Survey

SAIRO Sexual Assault Incident Response Oversight

SAPR Sexual Assault Prevention and Response

SAPRO Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office

SARC Sexual Assault Response Coordinator

SEM Social Ecological Model

SES Survivor Experience Survey

SHARP Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention

SJA Staff Judge Advocate

SORNA Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act

SVC Special Victims’ Counsel

SVIP Special Victims Investigation and Prosecution

TSM Transitioning Service Member

Report to the President of the United States on SAPR

TTAC Training and Technical Assistance Center

UCMJ Uniform Code of Military Justice

USACIL U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory

USAFA U.S. Air Force Academy

USAMPS U.S. Army Military Police School

USC Unwanted Sexual Contact

USCG U.S. Coast Guard

USD(P&R) Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness

USMA U.S. Military Academy

USNA U.S. Naval Academy

UVA Uniform Victim Advocate

VA Victim Advocate

VLC Victims’ Legal Counsel

VWAP Victim Witness Assistance Program

WGRA Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of Active Duty Members

WGRR Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of Reserve Component Members

WGRS Workplace and Gender Relations Surveys

AARRMMYY

SSSeeexxxuuuaaalll AAAssssssaaauuulllttt PPPrrreeevvveeennntttiiiooonnn aaannnddd RRReeessspppooonnnssseee PPPrrrooogggrrreeessssss RRReeepppooorrrttt tttooo ttthhheee PPPrrreeesssiiidddeeennnttt ooofff ttthhheee UUUnnniiittteeeddd SSStttaaattteeesss

LLOOYYAALLTTYY DDUUTTYY RREESSPPEECCTT SSEELLFFLLEESSSS SSEERRVVIICCEE HHOONNOORR IINNTTEEGGRRIITTYY PPEERRSSOONNAALL CCOOUURRAAGGEE

wwwwww..pprreevveennttsseexxuuaallaassssaauulltt..aarrmmyy..mmiill DDooDD SSaaffee HHeellpplliinnee:: 11–887777–999955–55224477

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Part 1 – U.S. Army Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Progress Report to the President of the United States

Executive Summary …………………………………………………………………………………………. 1

1. Line of Effort (LOE) 1 – Prevention ……….……………………………………………………. 5

2. Line of Effort (LOE) 2 – Investigation ……………………………………………………….. 10

3. Line of Effort (LOE) 3 – Accountability ………….………………………….………………. 13

4. Line of Effort (LOE) 4 – Advocacy/Victim Assistance ………………….………………… 20

5. Line of Effort (LOE) 5 – Assessment……………………………………………………….. 28

Part 2 – U.S. Army Statistical Report Data Call: Reported Sexual Assaults for the Period October 1, 2013 through September 30, 2014

1. Analytic Discussion ………………………………………………………………………….. 38

2. Unrestricted Reporting ………………………………………………………………………. 40

3. Restricted Reporting …………………………………………………………………………. 45

4. Service Referrals for Victims of Sexual Assault …………………………………………… 46

5. Additional Items ………………………………………………………………………………… 47

Appendix A: Vignettes of Civilian Declination Cases …………………….……….………. 48

Appendix B: Glossary of Acronyms …………………………………………………………. 52

Part 1 – U.S. Army Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Progress Report to the President

Executive Summary In December 2013, President Obama directed the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to provide a comprehensive report that would detail the military’s progress in preventing and responding to incidents of sexual assault. In preparation for the omnibus report of the Department of Defense (DoD), Secretary Hagel and Chairman Dempsey tasked each Military Service to provide a report outlining all of the Service-level programs implemented since Fiscal Year 2012, a period in which all of the Services have taken aggressive steps in this area. In the Army, these many efforts have been part of an overarching program that combines initiatives related to the prevention of and response to sexual assault and sexual harassment. This program is called “Sexual Harassment and Assault Response and Prevention” (SHARP), and it is publicized throughout the Army as the “I. A.M. STRONG” campaign, which stands for Intervene, Act, and Motivate. This report details the initiatives, programs, and policies that constitute the Army’s SHARP program, while also demonstrating the significant progress the Army has made in preventing and responding to the crime of sexual assault. Since its inception in 2009, the Army’s SHARP program has focused its efforts on five specific priorities or Lines of Effort:

1. Prevention of sexual assault 2. Competent and sensitive investigations of sexual assault 3. Accountability for the perpetrators of sexual assault 4. Assistance to, and advocacy for, the victims of sexual assault 5. Effective assessment of SHARP programs

These five Lines of Effort mirror those found in the DoD Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Strategic Plan and are formally expressed in the Army’s 2014 SHARP Campaign Plan. The Secretary of the Army has signed nine directives to implement policies to address these Lines of Effort. The Secretary of the Army and the Chief of Staff have also hosted annual leader summits to communicate the Lines of Effort and to emphasize the importance of sexual assault prevention and response; all Commanding Generals and Command Sergeant Majors are required to attend these events. The Chief of Staff has repeatedly reminded Army leaders that “combating sexual harassment and sexual assault is our primary mission.” In addressing the first Line of Effort – prevention – the Army has, over the last three years, continually revised the policies, training, and engagement strategies that address sexual assault. SHARP training is now required for all Soldiers and has been fully integrated into Future Soldier Training for new recruits, Initial Entry Training for new Soldiers, and at each level of Professional Military Education for officers and non- commissioned officers. In 2014, the Army completed a multi-year process to revise all Professional Military Education courses to update and improve their corresponding SHARP training. In addition, since 2011, unit-level SHARP training is required annually

1

and, since 2014, is now complemented by a highly-regarded, interactive presentation designed to educate Soldiers about the importance of active bystander intervention. In 2013, the Secretary of the Army also mandated suitability checks for more than 20,000 drill sergeants, recruiters, victim advocates, sexual assault response coordinators, and other “positions of trust” to ensure that only the best-qualified and most suitable individuals serve in these important positions. Over the last three years, the Army has worked on the second Line of Effort – competent and sensitive investigations of sexual assault – by increasing the timeliness and thoroughness of sexual assault investigations. U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Division has joined with prosecutors, victim witness liaisons, victim advocates, and other sexual assault responders to form Special Victim Capability teams at more than seventy Army installations. These teams are trained in the unique aspects of investigating and prosecuting sexual assault cases, including the need to ensure that victims are referred to the appropriate agencies for comprehensive care. In further support of the Army’s emphasis on this priority, the U.S. Army Military Police School, which has been recognized by DoD as a “Best Practice” in sexual assault investigative training, has substantially revised its curriculum to emphasize the best practices in sexual assault investigations while greatly increasing the number of agents certified as satisfying Special Victim Capability requirements. Since 2011, the U.S. Army Military Police School has also developed a number of innovative investigative techniques, including the Forensic Experiential Trauma Interview, which was designed to increase victim cooperation with the accountability process and thereby enhance prosecutions. Finally, to expedite sexual assault cases, the Army has increased its number of DNA analysts by more than 400% since 2011. The cornerstone of the Army’s accountability effort, the third Line of Effort, is the Special Victim Prosecutor (SVP). The Special Victim Prosecutors are selected for their courtroom expertise and also for their sensitivity to the victims of sexual assault. Special Victim Prosecutors complete a specially-designed, intensive training course, and oversee or assist in the prosecution of every sexual assault case in the Army. Since 2009, the Army has seen an increase of more than 100% in the proportion of sexual assault cases that result in prosecutions and convictions. At the same time, the Army has also observed a substantial decrease – from 44% to 12% – in the portion of founded cases in which command action is not possible (for example, because the victim will not participate in the prosecution, there is insufficient admissible evidence to proceed, or the statute of limitations has expired). Equally notable for this Line of Effort, the Army began a program of providing victims with Special Victims’ Counsel -in 2013. The Special Victims’ Counsel represents the victim throughout the investigation and accountability process, with the primary duty to zealously represent the express interests of the victim, even if those interests do not align with those of the government. The Army has now trained nearly 200 Special Victims’ Counsel, who together have represented more than 1,200 victims. The Army remains dedicated to victim care and response, the fourth Line of Effort. In 2014, the Chief of Staff of the Army directed the development of a centralized SHARP Academy to expand the knowledge and skills of sexual assault response coordinators, victim advocates and program managers. To date, the SHARP Academy has hosted three courses, training more than 150 personnel on their responsibilities within the

2

program and validating a comprehensive curriculum that includes enhanced human relations, interpersonal communication and leadership training. The Army also ensures that victims of sexual assault receive quality medical care. Since 2012, the U.S. Army Medical Command has trained more than 100 Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examiners annually. Reconstituted and improved in 2014, a Sexual Assault Medical Management Office in every Military Treatment Facility optimizes coordination of sexual assault cases and consists of a medical director, a Sexual Assault Care Coordinator, a Sexual Assault Clinical Provider, the Sexual Assault Behavioral Health provider and all Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examiners. Since 2014, U.S. Army Medical Command also provides at least one Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner at every Military Treatment Facility with a 24/7 emergency room. The objective of the fifth and final Line of Effort is to measure, analyze, and assess the effectiveness of the Army’s SHARP programs. Over the last three years, the Army has actively collected multiple types of data, ranging from leader-led focus groups to Soldier surveys, about the efficacy of SHARP training. In 2013, the Army added research and analysis experts to the SHARP Program Office to assist in expanding and focusing SHARP assessments. In addition, the Army now provides data from the Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database on a monthly basis to commands and installations, enhancing Sexual Assault Response Coordinators’ ability to provide comprehensive victim case management, and helping commanders to more thoroughly assess the effectiveness of their response efforts. The Army firmly believes its sexual assault prevention and response programs demonstrate the progress rightfully demanded by the President. In fact, signs of real and lasting progress are emerging. One indicator of this is the dramatic increase in formal reports of sexual assault since the second half Fiscal Year 2013. At the time, the 3rd and 4th Quarters of FY13 were the two highest reporting quarters of sexual assault since the Army began tracking such data in 2004. FY14 has seen more officially reported cases than any previous year. The Army believes this increase in the number of reports of sexual assault reflects increased awareness and reporting, and, consistent with the findings of the RAND study, does not result from an increase in the number of sexual assault incidents. The unprecedented priority placed on sexual assault prevention and response by Army leaders since 2012 appears to have resulted in increasing victim confidence in the system. Data from the most recent Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute Organizational Climate Survey seem to support this belief, as 90% of the 367,000 Soldiers surveyed indicated they favorably view their units’ reporting climate and chain of command support for victims. Regardless, sexual assault remains an under-reported crime and the Army must continue to improve reporting climates. Although positive indicators are a credit to committed Army leadership and the sustained resourcing of prevention, training, and response efforts, the Army recognizes that there is more work to be done. The Army will continue to work to improve processes to prevent sexual assaults and, when a sexual assault does occur, take strong steps to address the crime and to be compassionate in caring for the victim. Recent high-profile cases demonstrate the Army’s commitment to strong and compassionate response to sexual assault. While these cases are very troubling, in each of them the Army investigated the alleged misconduct, provided support to victims

3

and took appropriate action to hold all individuals accountable. Guiding the Army’s efforts going forward is the comprehensive Army SHARP Program Campaign Plan, which provides structure and focus for the Army’s efforts to achieve cultural change and thereby reduce, with the goal to eliminate, sexual assault and sexual harassment. The following sections of this report provide a review, by Line of Effort, of the Army’s progress over the past three years.

4

Comprehensive Overview by LOE 1. Line of Effort (LOE) 1—Prevention

– Populations Affected: All – Training enhancements – Process/procedural upgrades and efficiencies – Best practices/innovations specific to your Service – Positive trends (qualitative & quantitative)

Prevention is a leadership mission, supported greatly by training and education. Leaders must establish a positive command climate that supports Soldier safety, emphasizes Army Values and encourages candor and trust throughout their organizations. Soldiers must be trained to recognize the signs of distress and misconduct and then trust in their leaders to take appropriate action when they bring concerns forward. Successful prevention of sexual harassment and sexual assault requires that all Soldiers and leaders understand expected standards of conduct; hold each other accountable for violations of those standards; and work together to build a unit climate of dignity, respect and sensitivity to others.

Training Enhancements The Army first introduced SAPR (now SHARP) training in 2006 by requiring annual unit training and subsequently embedding it in all levels of PME from IET to the Army War College. The Army continues to improve and refine its SHARP training, which now complies with the Core Competencies and Learning Objectives developed by the DoD Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office (SAPRO), in collaboration with the Services. Professional Military Education (PME) Revised SHARP training was implemented in early 2011 into the Basic Combat Training (BCT) portion of IET. Soldiers now receive a one-hour introductory course on SHARP policy and resources during their first two weeks of BCT and are introduced to the “Sex Rules” messaging targeted for new recruits (“Sex Rules – Follow Them”). This set of ten “Sex Rules” break down the elements of sexual harassment and sexual assault and define them in simple, relatable terms. By linking each rule to an Army Value, the scenario-based training helps establish the social behavior expected of all Soldiers. Later in BCT, two additional hours of SHARP training help Soldiers learn about their responsibilities to take action using several interactive vignettes during the very well- received production of “Sex Signals.” This 90-minute, live, two-person, audience interactive program contains skits dealing with topics ranging from dating and consent, to rape and other topics such as body language, alcohol use and intervention. Additionally, Drill Sergeants and Army Recruiters attend specialized SHARP training tailored for their unique roles dealing with new Soldiers and potential Soldiers. Drill Sergeants use a pocket guide titled “Sex Rules – Teach Them”, provided to them during training. The U.S. Army Cadet Command (USACC), in coordination with the Army SHARP Program Office, assessed and revised all Basic Officer Leader Course-Accessions

5

(BOLC-A) SHARP training for cadets in Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC). As of September 2012, BOLC-A training consists of leader-facilitated training supplemented by web-based training. The facilitated training focuses on the Army SHARP Program, survivor testimonials, prevention methods (bystander intervention, establishing personal boundaries, etc.) and victim support services. The web-based self-study training provides integrated and gender-separated training models designed in a peer-to-peer influence model. BOLC-A training also incorporates “Sex Rules” and “Sex Signals” and defines the Army’s sexual assault policy as it relates to the Army Values, Warrior Ethos and Soldier’s Creed. Using realistic situations, the training also focuses on reporting, prevention, victim’s rights and resources for survivors. Within the first week of arrival at the United States Military Academy (USMA), new cadets are taught the basic tenets of sexual harassment and sexual assault prevention. They are verbally quizzed by their chain of command and receive two additional one- hour sessions on SHARP during their six-week basic training, using the BOLC-A curriculum. In FY13, a comprehensive curriculum was introduced at USMA that infused lessons on sexual harassment and sexual assault topics into core academic coursework across the 47-month cadet experience. SHARP training for new Lieutenants is taught in BOLC-B and focuses on interpreting the Army’s SHARP Program prevention strategy and applying sexual harassment response techniques to prevent potential sexual assaults. SHARP training in BOLC-B incorporates “Sex Signals” and tailored “Sex Rules” training and includes a pocket guide with scenarios where the officer is able to apply leader decision-making in response to different sexual harassment and sexual assault situations. During FY12, the Army developed new training for senior leaders at the Battalion and Brigade Pre-Command Course (PCC), the Sergeants Major Academy and the Army War College. The Army also continued to refine SHARP training for each intermediate level of PME (Officer, Warrant Officer and NCO), to ensure Soldiers and leaders have the knowledge and skills necessary for their duties and responsibilities. The focus for the training is to enable leaders to identify prevention measures and create an organizational climate that prevents sexual harassment and sexual assault. SHARP training was implemented into the Warrior Leader Course for Junior NCOs, the Company Commander/First Sergeants Course and the Intermediate Level Education course for Majors. The Army also requires Brigade SARCs to conduct SHARP training for all Company Commanders and First Sergeants within 30 days of assuming their position. In 2013, the Army continued its work to place SHARP lessons in the remaining NCO PME curriculum: Advanced Leader Course for Staff Sergeants (E6), the Senior Leader Course for Sergeants First Class (E7), the Sergeants Major Academy and Drill Sergeant School. The Recruiter School and Advanced Individual Training Platoon Sergeant Courses also implemented new SHARP training in 2013. The focus for these two functional courses is to identify the roles and responsibilities of both groups, to be able to recognize behaviors associated with sexual harassment and sexual assault and to prevent these behaviors from taking place. The training is tailored for their unique roles working with potential new recruits and new Soldiers. Further development and revisions to the SHARP PME training continued in 2013

6

with Officer and Warrant Officer Courses. Training in the Captains Career Course focused on Company Commanders’ roles and responsibilities and their ability to foster a climate of prevention. The Officer Candidate School introduced training focusing on the new leader responsibilities that support the Army’s SHARP Program, including a description of the sexual harassment and sexual assault prevention strategy. The Warrant Officer Basic Course, Warrant Officer Staff Course, Warrant Officer Advanced Course and the Warrant Officer Senior Staff College also implemented revised SHARP training. While revisions and refinements will continue, the full integration of SHARP core competencies and learning objectives into all echelons of Army PME is complete. In addition, based on an assessment of Army Pre-Command and Senior Enlisted SHARP training, the Army expanded mandatory First Responder training from Brigade and Battalion level to the Company level. Unit Training A major overhaul of operational SHARP training began in 2011 with a revision to the annual Unit Refresher Training (URT) for Active Duty and Reserve Component Soldiers, Army Civilians and Contractors deploying in support of military operations. The URT consists of two parts, a facilitated training portion and an online self-study portion. Part one includes a Chief of Staff introductory video and two other videos that demonstrate behavior consistent with the Army’s SHARP Program. The training describes the impact of sexual harassment and sexual assault on the Army, examines strategies to prevent sexual harassment and sexual assault, identifies support resources and explains reporting options, procedures and the importance of reporting. Part two of the URT employs another video, “Team Bound”, to demonstrate strategies for intervention and allow users to practice making decisions and taking actions in a safe, virtual environment. The training defines sexual harassment and sexual assault and describes the consequences of incorrect decisions. “Team Bound” is an interactive, multiple scenario video in which Soldiers, in a self-study mode, become the lead character and must make choices in realistic situations dealing with sexual harassment and sexual assault. To improve prevention of sexual assault and harassment, the Army established a new training program to augment URT and focused on bystander intervention. Implemented in FY14, “Got Your Back” is a dynamic, 90-minute facilitated interactive lecture created by Catharsis Productions, the creator of “Sex Signals”. To date, the Army conducted more than 2,000 separate training events with very positive feedback. “Got Your Back” is conducted Army-wide for audiences of up to 350 personnel. One male and one female who are specially trained in the subjects of sexual harassment and sexual assault prevention and response conduct the training. Key training goals of “Got Your Back” include:

• Language Exercise – Make connections between objectifying language, violent crime and

bystander intervention. – Make connections between objectification, dehumanization and consent. – Understand the continuum of harm, making connections between sexual

7

harassment and sexist language demonstrating how those behaviors permit an inappropriate and unacceptable climate.

• Cycle of Non-Stranger Rape – Examine the perpetrator’s modus operandi. – Understand how to identify a potential perpetrator in order to set in motion

bystander intervention learning. – Explore the points in the cycle of non-stranger rape that a bystander can be

activated to intervene in a way that is safest for all parties. • Bystander Intervention Discussion and Activities

– Recognize personal and societal barriers to intervention and how to overcome them.

– Use scenarios to build participants skills in intervening. – Participants leave armed with resources, practical intervention tools and the

confidence to intervene in risky sexual situations.

Process/Procedural Upgrades Policy Updates. The Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA) SHARP Program Office is currently staffing a revision of Army Regulation (AR) 600-20, Army Command Policy, Chapter 7 (The SHARP Program). This represents the first major revision of SHARP policy since the Secretary combined SAPR and POSH in 2009. Publication is planned for 2015. The HQDA SHARP Program will also publish a stand- alone SHARP regulation and a Department of the Army Pamphlet (DA PAM) that establishes the parameters of how to run an organizational SHARP Program in the Army. Company Commander’s SHARP Guidebook. Published in September 2013, the target audience is Company Commanders in their role as front-line leaders. The guidebook is a leader’s tool that provides quick reference and is geared toward portability and ease of use. It consolidates current Army, DoD policy and directives as they pertain to company-level program compliance, training, victim care and response. It is an authoritative document that can be revised with greater flexibility than a published Army Regulation.

Best Practices/Innovations Future Soldier Training. The Army developed a SHARP distributed-learning program that the U.S. Army Recruiting Command (USAREC) implemented in 2013 for future Soldiers. This is a web-based training tool for potential and new recruits that is used in Recruiting Stations. Topics for the training include:

• The definition of sexual assault • The effects/risks of alcohol use • How to recognize sexual aggression • Escape tactics during physically threatening situations • The nature of consent and the differences between consensual sex and

8

rape/sexual assault • How to intervene in potentially dangerous situations • What to do if a sexual assault occurs • How Army Values relate to the issue of sexual assault and sexual harassment.

In addition, the Military Entrance Processing Centers and Reception Battalions provide SHARP Program information and awareness materials (touch cards, brochures, posters, etc.). Emergent Leader Immersive Training Environment (ELITE) Training. The Army recently worked with the University of Southern California (USC) Institute for Creative Technologies (ICT) in developing individual, interactive counseling tools to improve small unit leader counseling skills. Specific SHARP scenarios take junior leaders through counseling events, such how to handle a sexual harassment complaint or an allegation of sexual assault. Soldiers receive a grade as well as a comparison on how they rate against their peers. USMA incorporated ELITE into one of its leadership courses and the Warrior Leader Course, for junior NCOs, may soon add ELITE to its curriculum. This “gaming” approach is an innovative learning model that seems to appeal to the current demographic of junior leaders. The next iteration of ELITE will address training for company grade officers and NCOs. Risk Reduction. To assist leaders in building and maintaining resilience within our Soldiers, in 2013 the Army developed “Strong Choices,” a standardized four-hour substance abuse prevention training package. In addition, the Confidential Alcohol Treatment and Education Pilot Program (CATEP) is expanding Army-wide. CATEP allows Soldiers to confidentially refer themselves for treatment without command notification if they meet eligibility requirements. Finally, the Army is conducting a campaign to develop openness about behavioral health and remove barriers that might prevent Soldiers from seeking help.

Positive Trends As noted throughout this discussion of LOE 1 (Prevention), the Army implemented significant improvements to sexual assault prevention training and education.

Feedback across the Army is very complementary of interactive training that provides Soldier and leaders meaningful practical experience with respect to their roles and responsibilities to prevent sexual assault. In addition to instances of sexual assault, perceptions measured through command climate and other surveys are key components in evaluating progress in LOE 1 (Prevention). Results of the 2014 Military Workplace Study and the FY14 Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute Organizational Climate Survey indicate positive trends with a decrease in the prevalence of sexual assault

and improved chain of command support for victims. The Army’s ongoing data collection efforts regarding command climate and the prevalence of sexual assault is addressed in LOE 5 (Assessment).

I’ve done a lot of bystander training and conducted

psychotherapy for survivors and perpetrators. The presentation delivered

today was by far the best I’ve ever witnessed. – Comment from a

Psychologist for the Medical Evaluation Board about “Got

Your Back”

9

2. LOE 2—Investigation – Populations Affected: MCIOs, other first responders – Training enhancements – Process/procedural upgrades and efficiencies – Best practices/innovations specific to your Service – Positive trends (qualitative & quantitative)

The Army has approximately 700 criminal investigators (military and civilian) assigned to the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command (commonly known as CID) who investigate/supervise sexual assault and other criminal investigations. These criminal investigators (CID agents) receive extensive initial, refresher and specialty training developed by the U.S. Army Military Police School (USAMPS) at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. The Army has established a set of baseline standards that CID agents must meet before they can be selected for advanced training in sexual assault investigations. Upon completion of the advanced sexual assault training, the agents are certified as meeting the Special Victim Capability requirements and awarded an Additional Skill Identifier (ASI) to their Military Occupational Specialty (MOS). This ASI helps track the number of agents trained in this specialty and assists in the assignment process to ensure that at least one Special Victim Capability agent is at each CID office throughout the world, to include deployed environments. Currently, approximately half of the CID field agent force have received the advanced training in sexual assault investigations.

Training Enhancements USAMPS is credited by DoD with establishing the “gold standard” in sexual assault investigation training. The first training course was conducted in September 2009 and has been updated and improved every year since. The training is an intense two-week curriculum of common criteria and core competences in trauma, memory recall, alcohol facilitated sexual assault, same sex sexual assaults, marital sexual assaults, child and domestic violence, false report myths, false recantations and enhanced interview techniques. The USAMPS Special Victim Unit Investigative Course (SVUIC) teaches investigators from all three Services (Army, Navy and Air Force) and the Coast Guard, as well as prosecutors from those same departments and the National Guard. The common training for prosecutors and investigators helps the integration and common operating picture needed for successful Special Victim Capability teams. Outside experts (such as Dr. David Lisak and Dr. James Hopper, nationally renowned psychiatrists focused on sexual assaults; Dr. Barbara Craig, a nationally renowned child abuse expert; and Dr. Kim Lonsway, a renowned victim advocate expert from Ending Violence Against Women International) provide instruction at the SVUIC. In December 2013, the entire SVUIC curriculum was reviewed and modified by a committee of CID, Navy Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS), DoD SAPRO, Coast Guard Investigative Service and Air Force Judge Advocate General (JAG) representatives. The committee updated various aspects of the training to emphasize the latest best practices in sexual assault investigations, and expanded several blocks of existing training to provide more information and expertise in child abuse and

10

domestic violence. At this time, all the measures indicate that the SVUIC has been effective in improving the Army’s investigative response to sexual assault allegations. The effectiveness of this training is evident in the low number of sexual assault investigations found to be deficient during DoD Inspector General (DoDIG) inspections and the reduced number of complaints being received from victims about investigator misconduct or shortcomings.

Process/procedural upgrades and efficiencies From 2011 to August 2014, CID issued six changes to investigative policy to increase the thoroughness and timeliness of sexual assault investigations. In that same time frame, CID issued 11 operational memorandums to field units highlighting investigative issues that field agents needed to pay more attention to in order ensure a thorough investigation. CID issued the Sexual Assault Investigation Handbook in April 2013. This resource provided investigators with a pamphlet that highlights and reminds agents of important issues regarding sexual assault investigations such as crime scene processing, interviews and alcohol facilitated incidents. Updated in March 2014, the Sexual Assault Investigative Handbook (CID Pamphlet 195-12) reflects the most current best practices employed in investigations. Timely and thorough investigation of sexual assaults is a matter of special interest during CID Inspector General (IG) inspections and case reviews at field units. Supervisors at all levels from battalion to command headquarters review all sexual assault investigations to ensure they are accurate and thorough. Furthermore, the DoDIG conducts periodic reviews of sexual assault investigations to ensure they are completed to standard. All deficiencies, shortcomings or better business practices identified by any of the inspections are incorporated into the annual refresher training of investigators to improve the conduct of investigations. The SVUIC training (with investigators and prosecutors attending) emphasizes the need for early and frequent coordination between investigators and prosecutors to ensure all evidence is collected or considered to meet the elements of proof for a crime. At some installations, SVP are co-located with investigators which results in enhanced coordination of efforts. At other Army installations, newly established SHARP-RCs combine victim advocacy, SVC, SVP, SAI and medical assistance at one location. This co-location eases the burden on victims to find the right help and ensures all members of the Army sexual assault response network are within close proximity to provide timely and integrated support to victims.

Best Practices CID agents at all field locations have joined with Special Victim Prosecutors (SVP), Victim-Witness Liaison (VWL) officers, victim advocates and other sexual assault responders to form a Special Victim Capability team at more than 70 Army installations worldwide. As noted, some installations began establishing SHARP-RCs in FY13 to facilitate team integration and make it easier for victims to report and obtain support at these “one-stop” sites. A detailed discussion of the SHARP-RC initiative is included in the LOE 4 (Advocacy) section of this report.

11

One of the most innovative aspects of the Army’s sexual assault investigation training is the Forensic Experiential Trauma Interview (FETI) technique, developed at USAMPS. This technique allows investigators to obtain information about the assault, and the offender, while minimizing the traumatic effects on the victim. Investigators are also instructed on the dangers of re-victimization and how to avoid this problem. Also, if a victim recants an allegation, agents are trained to cautiously and compassionately investigate the recantation to ensure the victim has not recanted merely to opt out of an investigation. The FETI technique has shown to drastically reduce victim recantations, increase victim cooperation and participation, enhance rapport with the victim and support prosecution efforts. Since 2013, CID has used a forensic tool (Cellbrite) that allows agents at all locations to analyze and download emails, texts and phone numbers from suspects’ and victims’ cell phones, providing valuable evidence in sexual assault investigations. By training agents to be Digital Forensic Examiners, CID is reducing the time it takes for forensic examinations of electronic media (computers, cell phones, etc.), thus shortening the investigation time of sexual assault allegations. Instead of sending digital media to the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory (USACIL) for examination, the media is now handled at the local level, allowing for quicker analysis. USACIL itself is at the forefront of sexual assault evidence analysis. Since 2010, USACIL increased its DNA analyst staff from nine to 41 personnel, specifically to support sexual assault casework. USACIL’s aggressive laboratory modernization program significantly enhances the ability to test smaller samples and reduce processing times. USACIL also helped design the current DoD Sexual Assault Evidence Collection Kit (SAECK), which enables long term storage at room temperature, facilitates consistent collections and reduces the requirement for gender specific kits. In FY14, USACIL introduced a “Back in 30” campaign with a goal to achieve an average case turn-around time of 30 days or less. Business process changes already resulted in a 55% reduction in backlog and cut the quarterly median turn-around time from 65 days (in FY13) to 51 days as of the end of the 3rd Quarter, FY14.

Positive Trends USAMPS continues to refine the SVUIC training, incorporating new methods and proven practices to ensure the course remains on the cutting edge of technological advances and evolving investigative practices. CID continues to send its agents to the SVUIC with a goal to have all agents trained. Additionally, the Army is developing further advanced training in crime scene processing, child abuse and domestic violence that agents can attend to improve their skills. Those going to these advanced courses receive another ASI that highlights their expertise in all areas within the Special Victim Capability system. The continued enhanced training and emphasis on timely and thorough investigations resulted in the overall improvement of sexual assault investigations. The number of IG complaints regarding investigations remained about the same from 2011 through 2013 (five, six and five, respectively, which is approximately 0.25% of all investigations). As of this report, there have been no IG complaints in 2014.

12

The number of significant investigative deficiencies found in CID sexual assault investigations in the last DoDIG inspection, begun in 2012 and completed in July 2013, was 6.6%, the lowest of any of the Services. DoDIG also found that 93% of CID’s investigations had no deficiencies. Although the DoDIG’s current inspection of investigations is still on-going, initial feedback indicates that CID’s significant deficiency rate will be even lower this year. Additionally, the number of judicial and non-judicial actions taken against offenders has significantly increased since 2011 (see LOE 3 – Accountability). The Army attributes this improvement, in part, to training and coordination of investigators and prosecutors through the Army’s Special Victim Capability. 3. LOE 3—Accountability

– Populations Affected: OTJAGs, Special Victims Prosecutors, Special Victims Counsel, Commanders, other first responders

– Training enhancements – Process/procedural upgrades and efficiencies – Best practices/innovations specific to your Service – Positive trends (qualitative & quantitative)

Over the past three fiscal years, the Army achieved substantial, meaningful progress in the prosecution and defense of sexual assault allegations. The Army established SVP, SAI and SVC programs; transformed critical elements of the disposition and adjudication processes; and implemented the new military criminal sexual assault statute. Together, these initiatives helped create the most victim-friendly, progressive military justice system, grounded in due process. Accountability is a key element of the Army’s efforts to transform its culture. To that end, the Army provides a cadre of professionals trained in the unique aspects of sexual assault crimes. This capability, embedded at every level of command, provide Special Victim personnel who play an integral role in educating the commanders they advise, the victims and first responders they interact with and the Soldiers they train.

Positive Trends Increasing Prosecution Rates Since the inception of its unique SVP program in 2009, the Army has increased its proficiency in trying special victims courts-martial (Figure 1- 1), while maintaining conviction rates between 60 and 70%. During the same period, the number of criminal convictions and punitive discharges for all sexual assault and serious family violence offenses has more than doubled.

Figure 1-1: Army Special Victims Courts-Martial

0 50

100 150 200 250 300 350

FY 04

FY 05

FY 06

FY 07

FY 08

FY 09

FY 10

FY 11

FY 12

FY 13

FY 14

SVP PROGRAM 2009

Source: Clerk of Court, Army Court of Criminal Appeals

Army Special Victims Courts-Martial Tried to Completion (Before/After SVP Program)

13

Prosecution rates in the Army reflect an active judicial system, in which the commander’s commitment to good order and discipline means that they pursue cases that serve the interests of victims and of our communities. Comparative Prosecution Rates based on Annual Report Data Beginning in FY12, the Army began calculating comparative prosecution rates based on data from the Annual Report to Congress on Sexual Assault in the Army. The data, when properly broken down by offense, demonstrates that prosecution rates for the

Army remained consistently higher than civilian jurisdictions, as illustrated in Figure 1-2. An examination of the FY13 data supports this conclusion and clarifies the calculations. Penetrative offenses in which the Army had jurisdiction over the offender, and a final disposition was made, in FY13 show commanders prosecuted rape at a rate of 64% and sexual assault (sleeping or incapacitated victim) at a rate of 53%. These figures are much higher than the prosecution

rates of civilian authorities that exercised jurisdiction over Soldiers. For the offense of rape, of the 50 cases in which civilian authorities charged a Soldier offender, the civilian authorities had a 14% prosecution rate, compared to the Army’s 64%. Civilian authorities dismissed the charges in 28 cases, prosecuted lesser non-sexual assault charges in three cases, prosecuted the sexual assault charges in only five cases and had 14 cases still pending review. For the offense of sexual assault (sleeping or intoxicated victim), of the 25 cases in which civilian authorities charged a Soldier offender, the civilian authorities dismissed the charges in ten cases, prosecuted lesser non-sexual assault charges in eight cases, prosecuted the sexual assault charges in three cases and had four cases still pending. This resulted in a 14% prosecution rate by civilian authorities compared to the Army’s 59% prosecution rate. An initial analysis of FY14 data indicates that the trends remain unchanged. On the other end of the spectrum of sexual assault offenses (unwanted but non- penetrative touches or contact), Figure 1-3 indicates that in 90% of the founded allegations of wrongful sexual contact (370/411) in FY13, Army commanders took disciplinary action against the offender (an initial analysis of FY14 data indicates that the trends remain unchanged). The FY13 actions ranged from:

• Courts-martial, 29% (120/411) • Administrative separation, 9% (38/411) • Non-judicial punishment, 32% (131/411)

Figure 1-2: Army Sexual Assault Prosecution Rates

14

• Other adverse administrative action, 13% (55/411) • Punishment for a non-

sexual assault offense, 7% (26/411) in cases with evidentiary issues

• No action taken, 10% (41/411), either because there was insufficient admissible evidence to take action or the victim declined to cooperate with the investigation.

While civilian jurisdictions rarely criminalize, investigate or prosecute these offenses, the disciplinary tools available in the military justice system allow commanders to address the entire spectrum of crime. The data also indicate that Army commanders are effectively addressing the less serious behaviors that could be precursors to more serious offenses. The message to Soldiers from their commanders is that the Army does not tolerate this type of conduct. Civilian Declination Cases Anecdotal data collected by the Army corroborates the assessment of cases in which civilian authorities declined to either investigate or prosecute an allegation of sexual assault that Army commanders subsequently prosecuted. The Army noted more than 50 instances of civilian declination in the past fiscal year alone. In 2013, the Army provided summaries of 79 civilian declination cases from 2012-13 to Congress. Each of these compelling individual stories of justice, including ten vignettes in Appendix A, represent victims given their day in court by Army commanders.

Best Practices Special Victim Prosecutors (SVP) and Sexual Assault Investigators (SAI) The cornerstone of the Army’s accountability efforts is the SVP and SAI Program. In 2009, recognizing the need for improved training and resources for the prosecution of sexual assault and family violence crimes, the Army initiated the SVP in the Judge Advocate General’s Corps (JAGC) and the SAI within CID. The SVPs are hand- selected by senior leaders at the HQDA level for their expertise in the courtroom and their ability to work with victims. Prior to assuming their duties, SVPs complete a specially-designed, intensive training program that includes the career prosecutor course offered by the National Association of District Attorneys and an on-the-job training opportunity with a Special Victim Unit in a prosecutor’s office in a major metropolitan civilian community. SAIs, civilians with significant prior experience in investigating these crimes, are similarly selected and trained. These independent

Figure 1-3: Disposition of Unwanted Touching Sexual Assault Offenses

15

professionals investigate all allegations of sexual assault. Commanders must forward all allegations of sexual assault to trained criminal investigators and do not have authority to conduct investigations or make any preliminary inquiries into the circumstances of the crime. Together, these investigators and prosecutors work only

special victim cases, developing an expertise that is unprecedented. SVPs consult and advise on the disposition and prosecution of every sexual assault allegation in the Army, with their role dependent upon the complexity of the case and the experience of the assigned prosecutors. The SVP program proved so effective and popular that the Army now has 23 regionally-placed SVPs working hand- in-hand with 25 SAIs. Over the past two fiscal years, the teams now include full-time dedicated support from specially selected and trained NCO paralegals and civilian victim witness liaisons. These teams enable Army SVPs to

conduct offender-focused prosecutions with an emphasis on caring for the victim throughout the process. This effort not only produces great outcomes in the courtroom, but, more importantly, it also garners the gratitude of victims and their families. Civilian Experts In 2009, the Army was the first Service to integrate civilian highly qualified experts into the prosecution, defense and training of judge advocates. The Army hired seven civilian attorneys with extensive experience in the prosecution, defense and adjudication of sexual assault and family violence crimes:

• Three civilian experts assist the Trial Counsel Assistance Program (prosecutors) • Two assist the Defense Counsel Assistance Program • One develops curriculum and teaches at The Judge Advocate General’s Legal

Center and School (TJAGLCS) • One expert oversees advocacy training and assessment efforts Army-wide

These experts provide training and direct assistance to prosecutors and defense counsel on pending cases. Originally intended as single term employees, the Army recognized the on-going value of expertise developed outside our judicial system and has recently converted these positions to renewable four-year term government employees. Special Victims Counsel The Army implemented the SVC program in FY14. This program is unique to the military justice system and is unequalled in the civilian community. At no cost to the victim, the Army provides a specially trained attorney to every Soldier or dependent family member victim of sexual assault. The SVC represents the victim throughout the investigation and accountability process, with the primary duty to zealously represent the express interests of the victim, even if those interests do not align with the government’s interests. Each SVC attends a one-week training course prior to certification. The SVC Program Manager developed follow-on training for experienced SVC personnel and a course focused on representing child victims. The Army SVC

“I can never tell you what this prosecutor has done for my daughter…we consider him a part of our family. He has given my daughter so much but most of all he showed her that the Army does the right thing”. – Mother of sexual assault victim

16

Program Manager holds monthly training through Defense Connect Online (DCO). The Judge Advocate General published policy governing the program and the Program Manager published an SVC Handbook, with the second edition scheduled for release in November 2014. The Army’s SVC program is a complete success for victims and Commanders. Since implemented in the Fall of 2013, the Army SVC Program trained 70-75 Active Army judge advocates, 70 Army Reserve judge advocates and 47 National Guard judge advocates. The SVC Program has taken on 1,296 client victims, conducted 7,224 consultations, attended 1,627interviews or pre-trial meetings with clients, appeared in courts-martial and conducted 278 post trial counseling sessions. Results from the Survivor

Experience Survey (SES) indicated 89% of participating Army victims reported satisfaction with the services of their SVC. Training Enhancements Commanders receive extensive training on their legal responsibilities throughout their career, beginning with Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) training in ROTC and USMA prior to commissioning. Once commissioned, officers assume duties with increasing levels of responsibility and authority with respect to administering the UCMJ. Judge advocates play a critical role in the legal training for commanders, including responsibilities for sexual assault offenses. At the local level, judge advocates instruct at Pre-Command and Company Commander/First Sergeant Courses. Officers entrusted with the disposition of sexual assaults (Colonels with Special Court Martial Convening Authority), are required to attend Senior Officer Legal Orientation (SOLO) courses taught at TJAGLCS. General Officers (GO), who serve as convening authorities, receive one-on-one instruction at TJAGLCS, again with a focus on sexual assault. Beginning in 2013, TJAGLCS offered a new course for Nominative Command Sergeants Major. In addition to these specialized legal courses, JAG officers teach a block of instruction during the Pre- Command Course at Fort Leavenworth for officers selected for Battalion and Brigade Commands and their senior enlisted advisors. Recognizing the need for a more integrated and synchronized training program, the JAGC completed a substantial overhaul of available courses. The primary training components of the JAGC are the Trial Counsel Assistance Program (TCAP) and the Defense Counsel Assistance Program (DCAP) and TJAGLCS. These activities coordinate quarterly to synchronize and prioritize training needs covered by a budget of more than $3 million. Judge advocates attend required training at the TJAGLCS throughout their career and can attend more than 21 elective courses with a sexual assault focus. In addition, JAG officers attend courses offered by civilian organizations, including the National District Attorney’s Association and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. TCAP and DCAP also conduct regional outreach training courses at installations, tailored to the needs of each jurisdiction. These programs allow

“It is a program that has made a huge difference to me. I felt incredibly supported……. The best description that can be made is that a court martial is like a chess game. The defense and the prosecution are the people making the moves and the victims are just chess pieces that don’t know the overall plan. The SVC was able to support me while the prosecution and defense were moving their chess pieces”. -Army Sexual Assault Victim

17

time for direct case assistance and evaluation. As TCAP and DCAP identify emerging issues across the Army, the civilian experts and senior litigators from TCAP and DCAP develop new short courses to offer counsel Army-wide. In FY13, the Army Trial Judiciary added a four-day sexual assault training course to the professional education requirements for sitting trial judges. For the past four fiscal years, all incoming Staff Judge Advocates (senior legal advisors to commanders) attend annual training with sexual assault components and a best practices course for military justice. Attendance at courses is managed both at the local level by supervising Staff Judge Advocates (SJA) and at the HQDA level to ensure that necessary skills sets and experience levels are developed across the installations. The Military Justice ASI centrally tracks advocacy training and experience for Army JAGs. The ASI program establishes four levels of recognized military justice proficiency, from Basic to Master, based on requirements of completed training and experience in terms of total cases or time in a military justice assignment. ASI levels support JAG assignments and consistent levels of proficiency across installations.

Process and Procedural Upgrades The Army transformed critical elements of the military justice system during the past three fiscal years through improved policy and practices. Changes implemented by the Army include:

• Continued evolution of Article 120 into one of most progressive, expansive and offender-focused sexual assault statutes in the country

• Elevation of initial disposition authority for sexual assault offenses; elevated review of decisions not to refer allegations to court-martial

• Revision of the scope and procedural rules for Article 32 preliminary hearings • Enhanced protections for victims during preliminary hearings, including application

of “rape shield” evidentiary rules and the victim advocate privilege • Revision of the Rules for Court-Martial governing disposition of offenses • Revision of procedures to allow victims and their counsel to be heard throughout

the pre and post-trial process • Addition of mandatory minimum sentences for sexual assault • Procedures for identifying and separating Soldiers convicted of sexual offenses • Codifying the criminal nature of retaliatory acts taken against Soldiers who report a

sexual assault or intervene to stop one • Adopting a policy to publish all courts-martial results in a public forum to provide

maximum transparency to our community Additionally, the Army worked steadily to improve digital tools for practitioners and policy makers. The centerpiece of the Army’s efforts to improve and standardize the adjudication process across the spectrum of possible dispositions is Military Justice Online (MJO). MJO provides users at the installation level the ability to generate charging documents and other military justice actions based on prototypes drafted by

18

subject matter experts. MJO also serves as a case management tool, providing users with the ability to track case timelines, and as a reporting source to identify trends. For policymakers, the Army developed databases for the trial judiciary and for the SVPs that allow analysis of trends in charging, processing times, findings, sentencing, and post-trial procedures. These databases, along with information from the Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database (DSAID), provide critical information to inform the Army’s efforts for the future.

Leader Accountability In addition to holding offenders accountable, the Army initiated several measures to enhance leader and chain of command accountability with respect to sexual assault and

sexual harassment prevention and response. The Chief of Staff set the tone for leader accountability when, in June 2013, he issued five imperatives and told senior Army leaders that, “combating sexual harassment and sexual assault is our primary mission.” These imperatives require leaders to establish positive command climates where incidents of sexual assault are rare, but when they do occur, victims are treated with dignity and respect while offenders are held appropriately

accountable. Specific measures implemented to reinforce leader accountability include: • Army Directive 2013-20, Assessing Officers and Noncommissioned Officers on

Fostering Climates of Dignity and Respect and on Adhering to the Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention Program (http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/ad2013_20.pdf). This directive, signed by the Secretary on September 27, 2013, enhances the Evaluation Reporting System to assess how officers and NCOs meet their commitments to eliminate sexual harassment and assault and to foster climates of dignity and respect in their units. The Directive also requires raters to document any substantiated finding that the officer or NCO committed an act of sexual harassment or sexual assault, failed to report an incident of sexual harassment or assault, failed to respond to a reported incident or retaliated against a person for reporting an incident.

• Army Directive 2013-29, Army Command Climate Assessments. (http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/ad2013_29.pdf). This directive, signed December 23, 2013, requires all Active Army company commanders to conduct a Command Climate Assessment within 30 days of assuming command. All Active Army commanders above the company level must conduct an assessment within 120

In alignment with the Department of Defense Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Strategy, the following five imperatives will drive Army actions:

Prevent offenders from committing crimes, provide compassionate care for victims, and protect the rights and privacy of survivors.

Report every allegation and ensure it is thoroughly and professionally investigated; take appropriate action based on the investigation.

Create a positive climate and an environment of trust and respect in which every person can thrive and achieve their full potential.

Hold every individual, every unit and organization, and every Commande appropriately accountable for their behavior, actions and inactions.

The chain of command must remain fully engaged—they are centrally responsible and accountable for solving the problems of sexual assault and harassment within our ranks and for restoring the trust of our Soldiers, Civilians, and Families.

19

days of assuming command. Commanders must then complete surveys after six, 12, and 24 months for company level, and 12 and 24 months for echelons above company. Commanders brief the results and analysis of their command climate surveys to the next higher commander and complete an action plan for addressing concerns.

• An Army Pilot Program for using a 360-degree assessment for brigade and battalion-level commanders. Based on positive feedback, the Army approved including the use of a leader-directed 360-degree assessment as an additional tool for raters to assess their rated officers. This assessment occurs at the six and 18 month points in the rated officer’s command. Results are used to create and monitor the officers Individual Leader Development Plan.

• A “Risk Reduction Dashboard”, provided to all commanders and their raters. This dashboard provides a statistical analysis of unit data across a wide-spectrum of issues: suicide, assault, domestic violence, drug use, etc. The Army is currently updating to provide commanders with sexual assault and harassment data.

The Army continues to take positive action toward the identification, accountability and management of sex offenders. These actions include:

• Revising AR 420-1 (Army Facilities Management) in August 2012, providing Garrison Commanders the authority to revoke authorization to reside in housing for sex offender misconduct or when the best interests of the Army for reasons relating to health, safety, morale, or welfare on the installation are concerned.

• Issuing Army Directive 2013-06, Providing Specified Law Enforcement Information to Commanders of Newly Assigned Soldiers (http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/ad2013_06.pdf). Signed by the Secretary on February 14, 2013, this directive provides brigade level commanders with criminal history reports on newly assigned Soldiers, improving the ability to identify convicted sex offenders.

• Issuing Army Directive 2013-21, Initiating Separation Proceedings and Prohibiting Overseas Assignment for Soldiers Convicted of Sex Offenses (http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/ad2013_21.pdf). Although the Army previously required any Soldier convicted of a qualifying sex offense be processed for separation, the Secretary enhanced that requirement on November 7, 2013 by requiring for any Soldier who is retained as a part of the administrative separation process, Commanders must initiate Secretarial plenary separation authority. While the Army has had sex offender assignment restrictions since 2005, this directive further prohibits assignment or deployment outside the United States (or its territories) any Soldier convicted of a sex offense.

4. LOE 4—Advocacy/Victim Assistance – Populations Affected: Survivors/victims, SARCs, VAs, UVAs, medical

personnel, other responders – Training enhancements – Process/procedural upgrades and efficiencies – Improvements to victim/survivor services and resources available – Indicators of victim satisfaction and confidence in the system

20

– Best practices/innovations specific to your Service – Positive trends (qualitative & quantitative)

It is the Army’s goal to eliminate sexual assault; but when incidents do occur, the Army treats victims with dignity, respect and professionalism. As noted in the discussions of LOE 2 (Investigation) and LOE 3 (Accountability), the Army’s cadre of SAI, SVP and SVC help ensure that sexual assault victims receive the highest quality of professional and compassionate services during the military justice process. Likewise, other responders such as SARCs, VAs and healthcare personnel play essential roles in the care and advocacy that victims of sexual assault deserve. The Army made a determined effort during the past few years to ensure those entrusted to provide advocacy and healthcare to sexual assault victims are the best qualified and the best trained. These efforts include increased and improved training as well as more intense scrutiny and screening of personnel to fill these sensitive and trusted roles.

Training Enhancements SARCs and VAs In August 2010, the Army conducted the first 80-Hour SHARP Certification Course at Fort Hood, Texas using a contracted Mobile Training Team (MTT). This course teaches SARCs and VAs how to perform their duties with respect to sexual harassment and sexual assault prevention and response. During FY11, FY12 and FY13, SHARP MTTs trained more than 15,000 SHARP personnel at locations Army-wide. In April 2012, the National Organization of Victim Assistance (NOVA) credentialed the two-week SHARP Certification Course, allowing the Army to meet the FY12 NDAA requirement that SARCs and VAs be credentialed prior to assisting sexual assault victims. The Army updated this course in 2013, adding more practical exercises. This improvement gave students realistic scenarios to simulate interacting with sexual assault victims. Additionally, SAIs and SVPs began participating in the SHARP Certification Courses at the larger Army installations. This helped demonstrate to SARCs and VAs the value of teamwork and collaboration with these critical response groups. On July 31, 2013, the Chief of Staff held the first in a series of meetings with groups of SARCs and sexual assault victims to discuss improvements to the SHARP Program. One clear theme was that SARCs and VAs needed more training. On August 2, 2013, the Army G-1 directed the SHARP Program Office to develop a more professional training program for SARCs and VAs. He suggested SHARP look at training conducted by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI), the Army Management Staff College (AMSC) and the Inspector General School. The results of this effort led to the development of an eight-week SHARP Trainer Pilot Course, attended by newly hired DA Civilian SHARP Trainers and interim Military SHARP Trainers. After the completion of the course, these trainers returned to their units to teach the SHARP 80-hour Certification Course to collateral duty SARCs and VAs. The SHARP Trainer Pilot Course, conducted January 27 – March 21, 2014, was based on the existing 80-hour Course and extended by six weeks to provide additional instruction from adjunct professors and subject matter experts (SME) from around the Army. The adjunct professors and SMEs represented several Army organizations,

21

including: TJAGLCS, Legislative Liaison, OPMG/CID, Office of the Chief of Chaplains (OCCH), AMSC, Army Training Support Center, USAMPS and the U.S. Army Medical Command (MEDCOM). The topics of instruction include:

• Intra-Personal Series – facilitated by the Army Management Staff College, this training uses Myers-Briggs Type Indicators to look at Self-Awareness, Group Development, Socialization, Conflict Management, Motivation Theory and Individual Diversity.

• Describe the Dynamics of “Victimology” – facilitated by Mr. Russell Strand from USAMPS. This training addresses difficulties associated with identifying potential sex offenders.

• Describe the Foundation for a Culture of Prevention – facilitated by the Army Management Staff School. The block of instruction looks at ways to change the culture to prevent sexual harassment and sexual assault.

• Describe the Investigative and Legal Process – facilitated byTJAGLCS. This block of instruction addresses what a victim/survivor will experience when they make their way through the legal process when pursuing legal charges against and alleged offender.

• Foundation Instructor Facilitator Course (FIFC) and the Small Group Instructor Course – facilitated by the Army Training Support Center. This training certifies individuals as instructors so they can teach Army subjects.

During the execution of the SHARP Trainer Pilot Course, work began on developing a course for the full-time Brigade Level SARC/VA Course. It was determined this would be a seven-week course. In conjunction with the development of the SARC/VA course, work went into expanding the SHARP Trainer Course to twelve weeks. On June 2 and June 6, 2014 the Army rolled out the pilot for a seven-week Brigade SARC/VA Baseline Certification Course and the expanded pilot for a twelve-week SHARP Trainer Course. The curriculum for both courses was based off the eight-week SHARP Trainer Pilot Course. The one-week instructor portion that was in the original eight-week pilot course was removed from the SARC/VA course. The Baseline Certification Course better prepares students to assist victims of both sexual harassment and sexual assault. The curriculum incorporates more practical exercises and facilitated instruction to help the students be become better advocates to victims and advisors to their commanders. The twelve-week SHARP Trainer Course consists of the seven-week Brigade SARC/VA Baseline Certification Course, the two-week FIFC course and the three-week SHARP Trainer Certification. The course is designed to better prepare the SHARP Trainer to conduct the 80-Hour SHARP Certification training for battalion (and below) collateral duty SARCs/VAs. By the end of FY14 the newly designed courses graduated five classes for a total of 148 students: 54 SHARP Trainers, 62 VAs and 32 SARCs. On October 1, 2014, the Army gave TRADOC responsibility for the newly established SHARP Academy which will conduct the SARC/VA Baseline Certification and SHARP Trainer Courses. The Secretary’s decision to permanently locate the SHARP Academy at Fort Leavenworth reinforces the principle that leader involvement at the commander level is the best driver of culture change. At Fort Leavenworth, the

22

SHARP Academy is co-located among leaders attending the Command and General Staff College, the Battalion and Brigade Commander and Command Sergeant Major Pre-Command Courses. The Center for Army Leadership and the Mission Command Center of Excellence, both located at Fort Leavenworth, will serve as outstanding resources for the SHARP Academy.

SARC/VA Recertification Training In July 2014, the Army implemented a 24-Hour SARC/VA Recertification Course (online) for those individuals who need continuing education credits to meet the two year recertification requirements as outlined by the DoD Sexual Assault Advocate Certification Program (D-SAACP).

Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examiners (SAMFE) MEDCOM trains more than 100 Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examiners (SAMFE) annually (FY12: 188; FY13: 129; FY14: 141) to support deployment missions and the congressionally mandated Military Treatment Facility (MTF) emergency room (ER) requirements. MEDCOM SAMFE training meets and exceeds the Department of Justice (DoJ) National Training Standards. During FY14 SAMFE training was revised. The new program has three phases instead of two. This change was made based on the SAMFE Leading Standard guidelines. Phase one and two consist of 80 hours of classroom training (40 hours of didactic and 40 hours of skills practicum to include live models). Phase three consists of supervised sexual assault patient examinations, observation of legal proceedings, testifying experience and sexual assault review board observation. A mentor guides each students’ performance during phase three of the SAMFE training. The MEDCOM SHARP Program Office currently coordinates and manages the SAMFE training. A review and analysis initiated during FY13, realigned and integrated SAMFE training into the Army Training Requirements and Resources System (ATRRS). Institutionalizing SAMFE into ATRRS standardizes the training under the AMEDD Center and School and provides critical support for training requirements, resource data, training management and program evaluation.

Process/Procedural Upgrades and Efficiencies Professionalizing SHARP Personnel The FY12 NDAA mandated a full-time SARC and a full-time VA at every brigade or equivalent sized unit. To initially meet this requirement, the Army used existing military manpower to fill these full-time SARC and VA positions. In order to institutionalize these efforts, the Army held a series of General Officer Steering Committee (GOSC) meetings from December 2011 to February 2012. As a result of decisions made by the GOSC, the Army authorized and resourced more than 800 military and civilian full-time SARC and VA positions and thousands of collateral positions at battalions and below. The Army primarily utilizes military personnel to fill SARC positions, and civilian personnel to fill VA positions. The Army allocated SHARP Program funding for FY14-18 and the Vice Chief of Staff directed hiring to begin in FY13 using unencumbered bill-payer positions. Some Army

23

commands hired personnel in FY13, but the impacts of sequestration affected other commands’ ability to hire, despite the Army fully funding civilian pay for FY13. As of this report, the Army has hired 307 of the 442 authorized full-time civilian SARCs and VAs. The Army uses both full-time and collateral duty military personnel to cover the civilian vacancies. In June 2014, the Army expanded its personnel structure for the SHARP Program to include Program Managers at Army installations and echelons above brigade level. Additionally, all battalion-level units have one collateral duty military SARC and one collateral duty military VA. All company-level organizations also have one collateral SHARP Advisor to support the commander with program compliance and training. The Army recognizes that selecting and retaining suitable personnel in sensitive positions is critical to achieving SHARP goals. Based on an FY13 internal assessment of our screening process, the Army established broader and more stringent criteria and background checks for personnel serving as SARCs, VAs, Recruiters, Drill Sergeants and Advanced Individual Training (AIT) Platoon Sergeants. The revised processes and procedures ensure commanders actively select personnel who are best suited for their roles and responsibilities.

Indicators of Victim Satisfaction and Confidence There is a lack of definitive information regarding the level of victim satisfaction with SHARP services following a sexual assault. This is primarily due to the fact that, until recently, service providers were discouraged from seeking out victims and soliciting feedback. Beginning in FY13, the Chief of Staff initiated a SHARP Advisory Panel which included sexual assault victims. Victim feedback during these sessions highlighted areas needing improvement in the SHARP Program, including more training for SARCs and VAs. DoD also conducted a Survivor Experience Survey (SES), which provides some useful feedback from victims (who reported a sexual assault after October 1, 2013) regarding advocacy/assistance, the military health system, the military justice process and other areas of support. Although there were a low number of respondents to the SES, preliminary results from Army victims suggest satisfaction with the services they receive. In fact, 98% of the participating Army victims were “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with the services provided by the SARCs and they were “likely” or “very likely” to “recommend SARCs to other survivors.”

Improvements to Victim/Survivor Services and Resources Available Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examiner (SAMFE) The FY14 NDAA requires that every MTF with 24/7 emergency room (ER) capability shall have at least one Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) on staff. MEDCOM has 20 MTFs with a 24/7 ER capability, each of which meet the requirement of the NDAA. MEDCOM began implementing this SANE requirement in March, 2014, which resulted in an increase in MEDCOM’s MTF on-staff capability from 13 trained SANEs (65%) in FY12 and FY13 to 20 SANEs (100%) in FY14. MEDCOM’s goal is to be a nationally recognized leader in providing patient-centered

24

responses to victims of sexual violence. Accordingly, MEDCOM led a national conversation on a SAMFE Leading Standard with the Department of Justice (DoJ), International Association of Forensic Nurses, USACIL and DoD. Once finalized, the SAMFE Leading Standard’s guidelines will be incorporated into MEDCOM Regulation 40-36 (Medical Facility Management of Sexual Assault). MEDCOM policy requires a Sexual Assault Medical Management Office (SAMMO) in every MTF to ensure a consistent patient centered experience for victims of sexual violence. The goal of this realignment is meant to instill confidence in the program and preserve the restricted reporting option for all eligible victims. The SAMMO optimizes communication and coordination of cases and consists of a medical director, the Sexual Assault Care Coordinator (SACC), the Sexual Assault Clinical Provider (SACP), the Sexual Assault Behavioral Health (SABH) provider and all SAMFEs. Standardizing SAMFE services across the Army optimizes access, quality of care and patient safety, and supports combat casualty care and readiness of a deployable medical force. Moreover, standardizing the program and introducing enhancements at policy-level, classroom, and MTF-level reduces clinical variance, thereby encouraging trust and confidence in the medical response for patients of sexual assault.

Expedited Transfers for Victims of Sexual Assault On October 3, 2011, the Secretary signed Army Directive 2011-19, Expedited Transfer or Reassignment of Victims of Sexual Assault (http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/ad2011_19.pdf). This directive specifically states that commanders may conduct an expedited transfer of the alleged offender if they deem such action is in the best interest of the victim. Since its implementation in 2011, more than 600 Soldier victims requested and received expedited transfers.

Standardized ‘Hotline’ Service The Army prominently displays DoD Safe Helpline information (phone, on-line text or on-line chat and text) on Army SHARP Program training and marketing materials, the Army SHARP Program website and installation websites. The DoD Safe Helpline provides brochures, banners and information cards for dissemination throughout the Army. The Army also publicizes DoD Safe Helpline information in various media materials to include Army magazines and newsletters. During FY13, the Army Audit Agency (AAA) conducted a comprehensive review of the Army’s procedures for supporting the synchronization of the Safe Helpline with installation SHARP hotlines. As a result of the AAA review, and the efforts of Army Command SHARP Program Managers, the Army reconciled all installation SHARP hotlines with the DoD Safe Helpline. On December 20, 2013, the Army standardized requirements for Army-wide compliance with the DoD Safe Helpline requirements and established monthly reports for the Chief of Staff and the Secretary. The Army SHARP Program Office, the Army Operations Center, AAA and DoD SAPRO conduct monthly compliance checks at various frequencies.

25

Best Practices/Innovations SHARP Resource Center A SHARP Resource Center (SHARP-RC) is a “one-stop shop” designed to coordinate and support all SHARP Program services on an Army installation, with a focus on maximum co-location of advocacy, investigative and legal personnel. The SHARP-RC also serves as the installation resource center coordinating prevention, outreach and training activities. Leadership and personnel at Joint Base Lewis- McChord (JBLM) established the initial SHARP-RC in 2013. On March 21, 2014, the Chief of Staff directed a feasibility assessment for implementing resource centers at all Army installations, using the facility at JBLM as the model. A SHARP-RC Working Group conducted a comprehensive review of the JBLM model, to include an on-site visit, to identify core functions and resources required. Using the Sexual Assault Response Team (SART) approach to case management, the SHARP-RC balances the interests of the military justice system by holding offenders accountable while also taking care of victims. The SART approach is a multi- disciplinary collaboration for intervention and response, uniformly considered a “best practice” among civilian communities. Designated SART members integrate information across multiple staff elements, assess installation-based coordination processes and analyze emerging trends and concerns. There are four primary disciplines represented in the SART:

• VAs from the installation SHARP Program. • Healthcare providers from the installation MTF. • SAIs from the supporting CID office. • SVPs from the supporting SJA office.

Together, these representatives utilize the SHARP-RC to structure their customer service functions. The installation-based SART meets regularly to support the monthly Sexual Assault Review Board (SARB) to collect and analyze data related to sexual assault to better inform command decision-making at all levels. The SHARP-RC has multiple functions that provide comprehensive service to the military community, including coordination with local victim advocacy agencies, legal, social and medical services. The designated SHARP-RC SARC, ideally filled by the Senior Commander’s SHARP Program Manager, supervises day-to-day operations. Based on each installation’s specific resources and requirements, the following elements of the SHARP-RC may be full-time or part-time:

• Full-time VAs provide customer service and advocacy in support of victims, providers, responders and leaders. VAs operate the victim care and treatment area (with segregated Restricted Reporting and Unrestricted Reporting areas), perform ‘triage’ to identify needed resources, make referrals and direct non- SHARP issues to the appropriate program staff.

• A SACC/Nurse Case Manger (NCM) provides victim care management. While medical treatment is not conducted at the center, the SACC/NCM interviews victims and coordinates immediate and ongoing medical and behavioral health

26

referrals. • The SVC provides the victim with an attorney to help them navigate the legal

process. • CID provides agent support and interview space in the SHARP-RC for immediate

interaction with victims choosing the Unrestricted Reporting option. • The SJA dedicates a prosecutor to the SHARP-RC and uses the space as a

neutral environment for interacting with victims during the investigation and trial phase of the case. SJA and CID personnel are co-located in the SHARP-RC away from the Customer Service Area in order to protect confidentiality and preserve a victim’s Restricted Reporting option. In addition, VWLs and Special Victim Paralegals may support SHARP-RC operations.

• The SHARP-RC provides training and analysis resources to the installation including:

– Professional development programs for SHARP personnel and first responders.

– Installation-wide training requirements to educate leaders on their SHARP Program responsibilities.

– Training, advice and resources for VAs embarking on their first case. – Analysis on installation specific data and trends to give commanders more

insight into their environment. The HQDA SHARP-RC Working Group assessed establishing SHARP-RCs at 43 Army locations based on Army Command input and:

• Population size. • Historical sexual assault caseload. • Availability of physical resources such as building and office space. • Availability of advocacy. • Investigative, legal and medical resources. • Geographic dispersion.

On June 2, 2014, the Chief of Staff approved a pilot program for the SHARP-RC concept at 12 locations across the Army. The initial operating capability is scheduled for January 2015, however, seven installations already established their SHARP-RC.

Positive Trends The Army continues to hire personnel to fill authorized DA Civilian SARC and VA positions. The percentage of civilian personnel hired is now 69%. The overall number of credentialed SARCs and VAs is 15,795 (1,442 SARCs: 1,221 military and 221 civilian. 14,353 VAs: 13,777 military and 576 civilian). The actions cited in LOEs 1-4 demonstrate the Army’s commitment to provide the best possible services to victims of sexual assault. From investigators and prosecutors, to healthcare providers and SARCs/VAs, the Army continues to improve and professionalize all aspects of the SHARP Program.

27

5. LOE—Assessment – Populations Affected: All – Process/procedural upgrades and efficiencies (other than DSAID) – Best practices/innovations specific to your Service – Positive trends (qualitative & quantitative) – Highlights over last 3 years from DEOCS, WGRA/R surveys, Survivor

Experience Survey, Focus Groups (recent and past efforts), etc. During the first several years of the Army SHARP (SAPR) Program, its assessment consisted primarily of feedback from surveys which included questions about command climate, Soldier safety, sexual harassment and sexual assault. Two of these survey instruments were operated and analyzed by the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI); the Sample Survey of Military Personnel (SSMP) and the Human Relations Operational Troops Survey (HR OTS):

• The SSMP is an attitude and opinion survey that focuses on personnel topics and issues of interest to the Army. The survey is administered to a representative, random sample of Soldiers (E2-E4), NCOs (E5-E9), Officers/Warrant Officers (O1- O6/WO1-CW4). Analysis weights the data by rank to reflect the Army’s population. In the Spring of 2013, 7,016 Soldiers completed surveys, 6,913 responded to the Fall 2012 SSMP and 8,263 responded to the Spring 2012 SSMP.

• The HR OTS is a triennial survey that focuses on perceptions and experiences from a sample of Active Component (AC) operational Soldiers. The survey focuses on Soldiers’ experiences with sexual harassment and sexual assault, reporting behaviors, leadership and climate, SHARP training and policies and bystander intervention attitudes and expectations. The Army administers the survey to Soldiers (E3-E4), NCOs (E5-E6) and Officers (O1-O4). In 2012, 11,083 Soldiers responded to the survey compared to 11,718 in 2009.

Process/procedural upgrades and efficiencies The Army also performed program assessment using other internal sources, including DA Inspector General (DAIG) and Command IG inspections, as well as external sources such as DoDIG, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the Defense Task Force on Sexual Assault in the Military Service (DTF-SAMS). In FY12 and FY13, the Army began expanding its sources for internal assessments of the SHARP Program:

• Red Team Focus Groups. Directed by the Chief of Staff to assess the effectiveness of the Army SHARP Program, a Red Team conducted focus groups from April through November 2012. These teams consisted of a broad spectrum of subject matter experts, to include representatives from the Army SHARP Program, Office of the Provost Marshal General (OPMG), Office of the Surgeon General (OTSG), DAIG, OTJAG and OCCH. This team assessed the effectiveness, coordination, training and synergy, including investigation and prosecution, of those responsible for preventing, reporting and responding to sexual assault at all levels of the command.

• Sensing Sessions. The Vice Chief of Staff personally conducted a series of sensing sessions at dozens of installations across the Army, meeting with a wide

28

variety of leaders, Soldiers and Family members in order to assess the climate in the field regarding SHARP.

• Initial Military Training (IMT) Review. TRADOC, and all commands that support the IMT mission, (e.g., USAREC, USACC and USMA), conducted a comprehensive review of all policy, procedures and regulations. Army commands evaluated the Lackland Air Force Base investigation report and lessons learned. These assessments identified areas for clarification and improvement in Army policy, procedures, training and oversight.

• SHARP Advisory Panel. In June 2013, the Chief of Staff initiated the SHARP Advisory Panel to advise Army senior leadership on the improvement of policies, programs and services that impact victims of sexual assault. The Panel, a forum hosted by the Chief of Staff, provides feedback on SHARP campaign efforts to: improve overall victim care; increase trust in the chain of command; increase reporting; reduce the possibility of ostracizing victims. In addition, the Panel provides recommendations for improving victim treatment by their peers, co- workers and chains of command.

The Army continued to increase its internal assessments of the SHARP Program during FY14:

• ARI conducted more than 170 focus groups and individual interviews at 12 Army locations on attitudes and experiences with sexual harassment/assault and SHARP. Visits took place during November and December 2013. Topics discussed included: reporting (e.g., barriers to reporting, reasons to report/not report, retaliation, confidentiality, SARC/VA), command climate (e.g., trust in leadership, unit climate regarding sexual harassment/assault), SHARP training, “sexting” and social media.

• The DAIG conducted a Special Interest Item Inspection from November 2013 through February 2014. More than 1,700 Soldier surveys; 128 leader surveys (battalion/company command teams), and 100 SARC/VA suitability files were reviewed for compliance and completeness.

Analysis of these independent assessments resulted in some common findings: Finding 1: Confidentiality – Assessments cited concern that a lack of confidentiality discourages reporting. The findings highlighted the challenges in respecting the victim’s right to confidentiality while ensuring that only those with need to know about the incident are informed. Commanders must balance the conflicting needs for Soldiers to understand the chain of command’s response to sexual harassment/ assault incidents while maintaining victim confidentiality. Commanders are doing all they can to provide SHARP personnel with working areas where a victim could feel comfortable seeking help. However, some SHARP offices are located inside facilities where the victim has to approach a counter, usually surrounded by people, and ask to talk to the SARC or VA. To address these concerns, the Chief of Staff approved the SHARP-RC Program discussed in LOE 4 (Advocacy). Finding 2: Training – Assessments found that the emphasis on SHARP training resulted in both training fatigue and hypersensitivity across the force. Some Soldiers were somewhat overwhelmed with the large amount of SHARP training

29

including PowerPoint presentations, online module and videos. Soldiers felt that the online training was just something they did to “check the box” and that they clicked through it. Satisfaction with SHARP training appeared to be related to the training modality. Participants in each survey/rank group expressed dissatisfaction with PowerPoint training and satisfaction with interactive training such as skits and role-play. There was also agreement that SHARP training should incorporate situations in which the genders and ranks of the victim and offender are other than what might be expected. Other concerns were that mandatory annual SHARP training was not effectively targeting the right audience, including commanders and leaders. The Army incorporated these recommendations into SHARP annual training guidance which stated that training should be conducted in groups of less than 25, be small unit leader-led and scenario-based. To address these and other issues, the Army updated its annual URT for FY15 by reducing reliance on briefing slides and introducing vignette- and scenario-driven training to support small group discussion. Many of the scenarios were based on real-life circumstances. The Army also implemented the ELITE training for developing individual, interactive counseling tools to improve small unit leader counseling skills. These scenarios are now in the Army Warrior Leader Course. The next iteration will look at company grade officers and NCOs. Finding 3: SARC/VA Training – One assessment questioned the adequacy of SARC and VA training and suggested inclusion of additional topics and a lengthened course of instruction to better prepare SARCs/VAs to perform their duties. A majority of SARCs and VAs in one command voiced concerns about the quality, content and length of the training they received. Another assessment found that the Army needs to ensure consistent execution of a program of instruction and enhance training to improve response capabilities of VAs. To address these findings, the Army improved its training program for full time SARCs and VAs and established for the new SHARP Academy. This training program provides an expanded curriculum focused on professional services in direct support of sexual assault victims. Finding 4: SHARP Personnel Screening Process – One assessment found that the screening packet configuration varied significantly from location to location because of local interpretations of the employment requirements. In some cases, this lack of understanding resulted in incomplete screening packets. Also, the screening packets varied from installation to installation, containing different information, incomplete information/documents and different formats. No installation inspected identified a centralized office to gather, provide quality control and maintain/store the screening packets. Another assessment recommended the Army publish guidance that includes an estimate for annual screening/re-screening requirements for SHARP personnel. In response to these concerns, the Army published EXORD 193-14 (July 25, 2014) directing an enduring process for screening sensitive positions, including SARCs and VAs. Finding 5: Senior Leader Training – One assessment found that Army leaders need to establish and consistently model a climate of “zero retaliation”. Another assessment recommended that the Army expand and emphasize a tiered approach to training and include leader professional development in PME. To

30

address these recommendations, the Army completed full integration of SHARP core competencies and learning objectives into all echelons of Army PME. Based on an assessment of Army PCC and Senior Enlisted SHARP training, the Army expanded mandatory first responder training from Brigade and Battalion level to the Company level. Army policy now requires Brigade SARCs to conduct this training for all Company Commanders and First Sergeants within 30 days of assuming their position. In addition, to improve prevention of sexual assault and harassment, the Army established a new training program for implementation in focused on bystander intervention, entitled ‘Got Your Back’. The Army also updated SHARP URT for FY15 by reducing reliance on briefing slides and introducing extensive scenario-driven, leader-led, small group discussion. Finding 6: Social Media – One assessment found that SHARP training should include scenarios discussing the use of text messages and social media to sexually harass others. Another assessment found that some Soldiers reported that they were harassed via social media. Additionally, 90% of sexual assault and sexual harassment cases were found to include the use of digital/social media. To address these findings, ARI is initiating research in 2015 on aspects of social media and cyber personas that may inform programs and policy on sexual harassment and sexual assault.

Best practices/innovations Several SHARP Program assessment innovations implemented by the Army have proved very valuable:

• In FY13, the Army established a data and assessments team to provide a programmatic overview of data requirements and oversight responsibilities. Specifically, the Army added research and analysis experts to the SHARP Program Office to assist in expanding and focusing SHARP assessments. This team includes an Operations Research Analyst, a Process Improvement Specialist and a Research Psychologist. This team actively collaborated with the Army staff and command, DoD SAPRO and sister Service SAPR Programs to create a meaningful measurement and evaluation system aligned along the DoD LOEs. The data and assessments team reviews research studies, data sources and current policy and procedures for potential improvements to the SHARP Program.

• The Army fully transitioned to DSAID in October 2013. To improve and maintain data quality, the HQDA SHARP Program Office created monthly quality control and command reports for all ACOM, ASCC, DRU and installations. These reports allow commands and installations to analyze their DSAID data, correct errors and inform their leaders of areas of potential issues and achievements. Through this continual report and quality control process monitoring, the Army increased visibility and disposition tracking for more than 1,400 sexual assault cases. The Army continues to work with DoD SAPRO and all subordinate units to improve sexual assault data integrity and fidelity.

• The Army incorporated SHARP equities into its Ready and Resilient Campaign. This effort integrates behavioral issues and indicators to allow a holistic assessment of the health of the force. The goal of the campaign is to inculcate a

31

cultural change in the Army by directly linking personal resilience to readiness and emphasizing the responsibility of personnel at all levels to build and maintain resilience. Through centralized data collection and display, commanders can see how their sexual assault statistics fit in with other resiliency indicators using a web- based dashboard. This common operating picture establishes a baseline for Army tracking of resiliency metrics at various levels of command.

Additional Army SHARP Program assessment activities planned for FY15 include: • Campaign Plan Assessment. In the 4th Quarter FY14, the Army SHARP

Program Office instituted a Campaign Plan assessment to synchronize program lines of effort. This assessment tracks progress through the Strategic Management System (SMS), thereby giving a distributed common operating picture for commanders at all levels. Improvement of the assessment will continue throughout FY15. This assessment will aggregate several disparate data sources including manning and training data, climate assessments and incident reports and dispositions. Products from the assessment will allow commanders to verify compliance, examine trends and maintain situational awareness of the SHARP climate in their units.

• RAND Studies. HQDA SHARP Program Office commissioned two RAND studies in 2014 to review specific areas of leadership and Army Values. The first study is reviewing response system nodes from the company-level across the installation and is establishing a network map of that process. This will allow the SHARP Program to better understand who are the key players in this process and focus resources and training accordingly. The second study is reviewing how the Army defines its core values and how we teach them to our Soldiers. The studies are scheduled for completion in 2nd Quarter FY15.

• SHARP Organizational Inspection Program (OIP). The Army SHARP Program Office reviewed and certified the existing FORSCOM SHARP OIP as the Army- wide standard. The HQDA SHARP Program Office distributed this OIP to all command SHARP Program Managers, with guidance to inspect brigade and battalion programs on an annual basis.

• Sexual Harassment Reporting. The Army continues to improve sexual harassment data collection and reporting through upgrades to the Integrated Case Reporting System (ICRS). In conjunction with this effort, the Army SHARP Program Office began developing a standard form for sexual harassment reporting. This form provides inputs for improved ICRS data fidelity and quality. In conjunction with these efforts, the Army will significantly improve sexual harassment reporting.

Positive trends As cited in the following paragraphs which detail results from various assessment tools, there are some very positive signs. During examinations of command climate as part of assessments conducted in the past two years, the Army found that unit leaders have ‘zero-tolerance’ of sexual harassment and sexual assault; Soldiers generally trust that their commanders (at all levels) will take action upon receipt of an allegation of sexual assault or sexual harassment; leaders at battalion and above exhibit buy-in and

32

take ownership when it comes to SHARP concepts. Soldiers participating in focus groups stated the Army is getting its message out about sexual assault prevention and response and nearly all battalion level commands and above take appropriate actions. However, there is still room for improvement in chain of command support. In 2014, ARI conducted Human Relations Focus Groups that included sexual assault and sexual harassment topics. Some Soldiers who participated in these focus groups indicated leaders do not always model appropriate behaviors or make necessary corrections. This observation demonstrates that the Army’s vigilance in training and positive leadership must continue.

Survey/Focus Group Highlights The Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI) Organizational Climate Survey (DEOCS) is mandatory for every command in the Army. Required periodic administration of the survey at the company and battalion level can help detect problems. The climate survey underwent major revisions in 2013. These revisions significantly improved organizational assessment for sexual assault intervention, climate and chain of command support perceptions. Since the new survey was fielded in January 2014, data prior to 2014 is not comparable to the new data. The most recent DEOCS data available for this report was 3rd Quarter FY14. DEOMI provided the Army with a report analyzing survey data for 3,730 Army organizations, with 220,408 respondents, from April 1 – June 30, 2014. Therefore, the bulk of the DEOCS data presented here is taken directly from DEOMI reports for 3rd Quarter FY14. The Army was not able to perform direct trend analysis on DEOCS command climate data due to the survey improvements. However, some trends were apparent based on data from other previous sources, such as the SSMP and HR OTS. The DEOCS received more than 367,000 surveys from January to June 2014. The results were generally very positive. Approximately 90% of Army participants responded positively to the survey questions addressing intervention, perception of safe environment, reporting climate and chain of command support. One area of improvement for the Army concerns Soldiers’ perception about retaliation against victims. Approximately 25% of all DEOCS respondents said it was “moderately likely” or “very likely” that some form of retaliation, including peer retaliation, would occur subsequent to a report of sexual assault. Results of the 3rd Quarter FY14 DEOCS are presented below.

Intervention Soldiers surveyed indicated they would most likely intervene when presented with a hypothetical sexual assault scenario. In fact, 92% of DEOCS respondents reported that they would take an intervening action if they witnessed a situation that might lead to sexual assault. Of the 4% of individuals who said they had observed a high risk situation, 87% indicated that they took some action. This data is consistent with the 2012 HR OTS. However, across almost all rank groups and genders, except male and female officers, significant gaps existed between respondents’ expectations of themselves and expectations of their peers. Larger percentages of 2012 HR OTS respondents said they

33

would intervene compared to their belief that their peers would do the same. Junior enlisted male and female respondents (E3 and E4) had the lowest expectations that their peers would intervene in the sexual harassment scenario.

Safe Environment 97% of DEOCS respondents indicated that they felt “safe” or “very safe” where they live and 98% of respondents indicated that they felt “safe” or “very safe” at work.

Reporting Climate In general, Soldiers are very confident in their unit level sexual assault reporting climate. The mean response (DEOCS Q3, FY14) for Unit Reporting Climate fell within the range of moderately to very likely for the extent to which respondents perceived that the chain of command would take appropriate actions to address a report of sexual assault. Specific results for the Q3 FY14 DEOCS reporting climate questions were as follows:

• 93% responded it was very or moderately likely that the chain of command would take the sexual assault report seriously.

• 89% felt it was very or moderately likely that unit members would support the person making the report.

• 92% felt it was very or moderately likely that the chain of command would take corrective action to address factors that may have led to the sexual assault.

• 92% responded it was very or moderately likely that the chain of command would support the person making the report.

• 92% felt it was very or moderately likely that the chain of command would take steps to protect the safety of the person making the report.

• 86% answered it was very or moderately likely that the chain of command would forward the report outside the unit to criminal investigators.

• 90% answered it was very or moderately likely that the chain of command would keep knowledge of the report limited to those with a need to know.

• 77% believed it was slightly or not at all likely that unit members would label the person making the report a troublemaker.

Figure 1-4: Reporting Climate (DEOCS)

70%

78%

20%

15%

7%

5%

3%

1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

The chain of command would keep knowledge of the report limited to

those with a need to know

The chain of command would take the report seriously

Not at all Likely Slightly Likely Moderately Likely Very Likely

If someone were to report a sexual assault to your current chain of command, how likely is it that:

34

Chain of Command Support DEOMI calculated an index of command actions related to sexual assault. The mean response (DEOCS Q3, FY14) for Chain of Command Support fell within the range of moderate to great extent for the extent to which respondents perceived command behaviors are targeted toward preventing sexual assault and creating an environment where members feel comfortable reporting a sexual assault. Other results from the Q3 FY14 Army DEOCS report:

• 78% of respondents felt that their chain of command promoted a unit climate based on “respect and trust” to a moderate or great extent.

• 88% answered that their chain of command refrained from sexist comments and behaviors to a moderate or great extent.

• 88% believed that their chain of command actively discouraged sexist comments and behaviors.

• 89% responded that their chain of command encouraged bystander intervention to a moderate or great extent.

• 91% responded that their chain of command encouraged victims to report sexual assault to a moderate or great extent.

• 90% of Soldiers responded that their chain of command created an environment where victims feel comfortable reporting sexual assault to a moderate or great extent.

The 2014 DEOCS results appear to be significantly more positive than some results from the 2012 HR OTS:

• Approximately 60% of respondents indicated that leadership is “very committed” to creating a workplace free of sexual harassment.

• Almost 25% of respondents “agree/strongly agreed” that NCOs and Officers tolerated sexist comments.

According to the 2013 Spring SSMP, 66% of females and 77% of males responded if someone in their unit were to report a sexual assault to their current chain of command, it is “very likely” that the chain would be supportive. Furthermore, 59% of females and 67% of males believed it is “very likely” the chain of command would take some corrective action. These results are consistent with those of the 2012 Spring SSMP.

Retaliation The 2014 DEOCS data on reporting climate appears to be an improvement over

Figure 1-5: Chain of Command (DEOCS)

To what extent does your chain of command:

42%

36%

15%

6%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

Promote a unit climate based on “respect and trust”

Not at all Slight Extent Moderate Extent Great Extent

35

previous data. However, there is still concern over actual and perceived retaliation against those who make a report of sexual assault. Approximately one quarter (26%) of

Army DEOCS respondents felt it was “very likely” or “moderately likely” that the alleged offender(s) or their associates would retaliate against the person making the report. Additionally, 22% of respondents indicated it was “very likely” or “moderately likely” that the career of the person making the report would suffer. It is important to note that this perception of

retaliation appears primarily at the peer / supervisor level. Very little illegal reprisal as defined in Title X, United States Code, section 1034, is occurring in the Army. Previous findings from the 2012 Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of Active Duty Members (WGRA) conducted by the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) also noted Soldiers’ concerns related to retaliation:

• Fewer than half of Soldiers surveyed indicated they did not report a sexual assault because they were concerned about retaliation from the offender or his friends (not professional retaliation from the chain of command).

• 44% of female Soldiers indicated they didn’t report unwanted sexual contact because they were afraid of retaliation/reprisal from the offender or their friends.

• 33% of female Soldiers believed their performance evaluation or chance for promotion would suffer if they filed a report.

The 2013 Spring SSMP also indicated concerns about potential retaliation: • 29% of female and 25% of male Soldiers said that it was “moderately, or very

likely” that the reporting person would be labeled a troublemaker. These results are consistent with the 2012 Spring SSMP.

• 27% of female and 22% of male Soldiers said that it was “moderately, or very likely” the reporting person would not be believed. These results are consistent with 2012 Spring SSMP.

• 27% of female and 23% of male Soldiers said that it “moderately, or very likely” that the reporting person’s career would suffer. These results are consistent with 2012 Spring SSMP.

The Army is taking action to address retaliation through messaging, training and punishment. On June 19, 2014 the Secretary signed Army Directive 2014-20, Prohibition of Retaliation Against Soldiers for Reporting a Criminal Offense (http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/ad2014_20.pdf). In this directive, the Secretary states that “no Soldier may retaliate against a victim, an alleged victim or another member of the Armed Forces based on that individual’s report of a criminal offense.”

Figure 1-6: Retaliation (DEOCS)

9%

13%

19%

59%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

The career of the person making the report would suffer*

Not at all Likely Slightly Likely Moderately Likely Very Likely

If someone were to report a sexual assault to your current chain of command, how likely is it that:

36

Prevalence The primary source used to determine the prevalence of sexual assault in the military was the WGRA survey, conducted by DMDC in 2006, 2010 and 2012. In 2014, DoD employed RAND to significantly change and conduct the WGRA. RAND constructed the new survey (the 2014 RAND Military Workplace Study) to provide a specific distinction between offenses along the sexual misconduct continuum of harm. Critics of the 2012 WGRA survey suggested that the behaviors it asked about did not directly reflect the offenses described in military law. The RAND Military Workplace Study survey questions address sexual harassment and sexual assault, including specific questions about penetrative and non-penetrative offenses. Subsequent to recommendations by the Response Systems to Adult Sexual Assault Crimes Panel, and other professionals, RAND designed the 2014 Military Workplace Study to mirror the language of the UCMJ, Article 120. This is intended to create a more legally precise estimate of the prevalence of sexual misconduct in the Armed Forces, by type of offense. To provide a means of comparison between previous WGRA surveys and the RAND Military Workplace Study, RAND fielded both versions to different, representative samples of military service members. In this way, RAND can estimate how prevalence rates differ depending on how the question is asked. The survey was fielded between August 13 and September 20, 2014. During that time, approximately 217,000 Soldiers received letters and emails inviting their participation. Preliminary results of the 2014 RAND Military Workplace Study are discussed in the next section of this report.

37

Part 2 – U.S. Army Statistical Report Data Call: Reported Sexual Assaults for the Period October 1, 2013 through September 30, 2014

1. Analytic Discussion 1.1. Provide an analytic discussion of your Service’s Statistical Report. This section should include such information as:

• Notable changes in the data since FY13 (in percentages) and other time periods (at least FY12, FY13 and FY14), as appropriate.

• Insight or suspected reasons for noted changes, or lack of change, in data • Implications the data may have for programmatic planning, oversight,

and/or research • How reports of sexual assault compliment your Service’s scientifically

conducted surveys during FY13 or FY14 (if any) • Prevalence vs. reporting (the percentage of Service member incidents

captured in reports of sexual assault (Restricted Reports and Unrestricted Reports) (Metric #2)

• Total number of Sexual Assaults (Restricted Reports and Unrestricted Reports) over time (Metric #12)

• Other (Please explain) As displayed in Figure 2-1 below, there were 2,128 unrestricted reports and 397 Restricted Reports of sexual assault in the Army during FY14. The total number of reports (restricted and unrestricted) increased 8% from FY13. The FY14 data equates to 3.9 Service Member (SM) victims per 1,000 active duty Soldiers, compared to 3.3 per 1,000 in FY13 and 2.3 per 1,000 in FY12. The FY14 number of SM victims and the FY14 rate per 1,000 are both the highest recorded since the Army began keeping these statistics.

Reports of Sexual Assaults (Rate/1,000)

FY 2007

FY 2008

FY 2009

FY 2010

FY 2011

FY 2012

FY 2013

FY 2014

Unrestricted Reports1 1,342 1,476 1,658 1,482 1,520 1,398 2,017 2,128

Restricted Reports 271 256 283 299 301 174 318 397

Total Reports1 1,613 1,732 1,941 1,781 1,821 1,572 2,335 2,525

Total SM Victims2 1,248 1,337 1,397 1,316 1,378 1,248 1,766 1,967

SM Victim Rate/10002 2.4 2.5 2.5 2.3 2.4 2.3 3.3 3.9

CID Investigations3 1,245 1,328 1,512 1,390 1,394 1,249 1,831 1,926

Figure 2-1: Reported Sexual Assaults in the Army & Rate/1000 (Metric #12) 1: As of FY14, one victim equals one report, per DoD guidance. (FY07-FY13 adjusted to one victim per report).

2: Includes only SM victims in restricted and unrestricted reports for incidents occurring while in the military. 3: Used as number of unrestricted reports prior to FY14. May include multiple victims and/or offenders subjects).

NOTE: FY14 is the first full year using the Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database (DSAID) as the source for sexual assault data. Designated Army SARCs entered sexual assault case data into DSAID based on information received directly from victims, information provided by a VA and/or information from

38

CID investigators. Subject and case disposition data populates DSAID from a system interface with the Army Criminal Investigation/Criminal Intelligence (ACI2) system and manual entry by SARCs and HQDA OTJAG through the DSAID Legal Officer module. A comparison of DSAID data with CID sexual assault investigation data for FY14 indicates data for more than 150 sexual assault incidents may not be in DSAID. This discrepancy impacts reporting and analysis of victim, subject, offense and disposition data. The Army continues to work with its DSAID users and DoD to improve reporting using an aggressive quality control process.

The Army believes the increase in the number of reports of sexual assault since FY12 does not equate to an increase in actual assaults. The unprecedented priority placed on sexual assault prevention and response by Army leaders since FY12 has seemingly encouraged victims, who heretofore were reluctant, to come forward and report. This conclusion, however, requires current survey data depicting the prevalence of sexual assault in the Army. As stated in Part 1 of this report, the primary source for estimating the prevalence of sexual assault in the military was the WGRA, conducted by DMDC in 2006, 2010 and 2012.

Prevalence vs. Reporting (Metric #2) FY10 FY12 FY14

Percent of female Soldiers who said they experienced “unwanted sexual contact” based on responses to WGRA Surveys and the 2014 Military Workplace Study

6.0% 7.1% 4.6%

Percent of male Soldiers who said they experienced “unwanted sexual contact” based on responses to WGRA Surveys and the 2014 Military Workplace Study

1.0% 0.8% 1.2%

Estimated number of Soldiers who were sexual assault victims based on responses to WGRA Surveys and the 2014 Military Workplace Study

8,600 8,800 8,500

Soldier Victims who Reported Sexual Assaults 1,316 1,248 1,967

Soldier victims reporting a sexual assault vs. responses to WGRA Surveys and the 2014 Military Workplace Study (Reported/Estimated)

15% 14% 23%

Figure 2-2: Prevalence vs. Reporting (Metric #2)

Figure 2-2 depicts estimated prevalence data for FY10 and FY12 based on the percent of male and female Soldiers who said they experienced “unwanted sexual contact” in their responses to WGRA Surveys. Figure 2-2 also depicts preliminary data from the 2014 RAND Military Workplace Study. This FY14 data, combined with the increase in reports per 1,000 (from 2.3/1000 in FY12 to 3.9/1000 in FY14), significantly narrows the gap between prevalence and reporting. As a result, 23% of Soldiers who responded that they experienced “unwanted sexual contact” in the FY14 survey actually reported the incident, compared to 14% in FY12. Although the FY14 data shows improvement, the Army’s prevention efforts still require continued emphasis and leader engagement. To that end, the initiatives described in the report are intended to enhance sexual assault prevention efforts and facilitate increased leader engagement. As these initiatives mature, the Army will assess their effectiveness and make necessary changes in order to continue to reduce prevalence and increase reporting.

39

2. Unrestricted Reporting 2.1. Victim Data Discussion and Analysis. This section should include an overview of such information as:

• Type of offenses • Demographic trends • Service referrals • Experiences in Combat Areas of Interest (CAI) • Military Protective Orders issued as a result of an Unrestricted Report (e.g.,

number issued, number violated) • Approved expedited transfers and reasons why transfers were not

approved • The number of victims declining to participate in the military justice

process (Metric #8) • Others (Please explain)

Figure 2-3 shows the breakout of victims (Service Members and Non-Service Members) and each type of sexual assault offense for unrestricted reports in FY14. Excluding attempts and cases where the offense code was not available, DSAID data shows the proportion of assaults that were the more serious penetrative offenses (specifically rape, aggravated sexual assault/sexual assault and forcible sodomy) was 42% in FY14, compared to 55% in both FY12 and FY13. This proportion was 66% in FY11. However, CID investigation data shows the penetrative rate at 48% for FY14, still a decrease from FY12 and FY13. This trend may suggest that Soldiers are increasingly recognizing the non-penetrative (“unwanted touching”) offenses as criminal behavior that can and should be addressed.

Offense Type

(Unrestricted Reports)1 Service

Member Victim Non-Service

Member Victim Total

Victims Percent of

Total

Rape 258 118 376 18%

Forcible Sodomy 7 3 10 <1%

(Aggravated) Sexual Assault 324 109 433 20%

Aggravated Sexual Contact 29 4 33 2%

Abusive Sexual Contact 860 211 1,071 51%

Wrongful Sexual Contact 15 5 20 1%

Indecent Assault 6 1 7 <1%

Attempts 13 2 15 <1%

Offense Code Not Available 132 16 148 7%

Total 1,644 469 2,113 100%

1: Does not include restricted reports from previous years that converted to unrestricted in FY14. Figure 2-3: Victim Status by Offense Type (FY14 Unrestricted Reports)

Some demographic trends have remained consistent over the past few years. For example, 81% of Army victims in FY14 completed investigations were E1-E4; compared to 83% in FY12 and FY13. Also in FY14, 69% of victims in completed investigations were 24 years old or younger. This is higher than FY12 and FY13 (both 64%), however

40

DSAID data cites “unknown age” for 17% of victims in completed investigations. CID data shows that 64% of victims in FY14 in completed investigations were 24 years old or younger, identical to FY13 and FY12. One noticeable change is the percentage of male Soldier victims, which jumped to 27% in FY14, compared to 18% in FY13 and 17% in FY12. This appears to show that the Army’s goal to reduce the stigma of reporting is having a positive effect. The lag in reporting by male victims has always been much greater than female victims. Victims in reported sexual assaults in CAI continued to be older and of higher rank than victims in Army-wide cases. Specifically, only 65% (FY12/13=74%) of Army victims in CAI reported cases in FY14 were E1-E4, compared to 81% of victims Army- wide. Similarly, 44% of victims in CAI reports were 24 years old or younger (FY13=48%), compared to 69% Army-wide. Commanders issued 272 Military Protective Orders (MPO) in FY14. Four were reported to have been violated by subjects (FY13=93 issued/0 violated; FY12=189/0). The U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) processed 295 Permanent Change of Station expedited transfer requests in FY14, six were denied. Two Soldiers were pending UCMJ action, two were pending separation and two were under investigation. The Commanding General, HRC made the final decision in each denial. (FY13=192 requests/1 denied; FY12=66/0). Additionally, Army commands reported 20 Soldiers requested expedited unit transfers (to remain on their current installation). None of these requests were denied. (FY13=38/0 denied; FY12=20/2). The percentage of victims who declined to participate in the military justice process, precluding any command action (Metric #8) for subjects where evidence supported command action, has steadily decreased from 7% in FY12 to 6% in FY13 to 5% in FY14. 2.2. Subject Data Discussion and Analysis. This section should include an overview of such information as:

• Demographic trends • Disposition trends • Experiences in CAI • Command action for Military Subjects under DoD Legal Authority (to be

captured using the most serious crime charged (Non-Metric #1) • Sexual Assault Court-Martial Outcomes (to be captured using the most

serious crime charged) (Non-Metric #2) • Other (Please explain)

Data regarding alleged offenders continue to show similar trends. Identified alleged offenders were 95% male in FY14; compared to 97% in FY12 and FY13. Also, 42% of known alleged offenders in FY14 were 24 years old or younger; compared to 41% in FY13 and 42% in FY12. However, the percentage of alleged offenders who were E1- E4 decreased to 52% in FY14, compared to 57% in FY13 and 59% in each year from FY09-FY12. Subjects in reported sexual assaults in CAI during FY14 also tended to be older and

41

higher rank than subjects in Army-wide cases. Specifically, 26% of Army subjects in FY14 CAI (FY13=19%, FY12=36%) reported cases were E1-E4 compared to 52% of subjects Army-wide. Similarly, 27% of known subjects in CAI reports were 24 years old or younger (FY13=13%, FY12=27%), compared to 42% in Army-wide reports. Figure 2-4 shows the breakout of subjects (alleged offenders) and each type of sexual assault investigation completed during FY14 for unrestricted reports. Excluding attempts and cases where the offense code was not available, the proportion of FY14 cases with service member subjects was 81%, unchanged from in FY13 and slightly lower than 84% in FY12 cases. The percentage of unidentified offenders in FY14 was 15%, also unchanged from FY13, but slightly more than 12% in FY12.

Offender Status by Assault Type1 (Unrestricted Reports)

Service Member

Offenders

Non-Service Member

Offenders

Unidentified Offenders Total

Percent of Total

Rape 318 16 90 424 21%

Forcible Sodomy 9 1 7 17 1%

(Aggravated) Sexual Assault 335 25 74 434 21%

Aggravated Sexual Contact 29 1 4 34 2%

Abusive Sexual Contact 916 39 103 1,058 51%

Wrongful Sexual Contact 40 0 3 43 2%

Indecent Assault 11 0 3 14 <1%

Attempts 3 3 5 11 <1%

Offense Code Not Available 11 2 11 24 1%

Total 1,672 87 300 2,059 100%

1: Preliminary data from DSAID. Figure 2-4: Offender Status by Assault Type (FY14 Unrestricted Cases)

A commander is not limited to a single disposition choice and may employ more than one disciplinary tool, including administrative actions, to fully address an allegation. The disposition of any offense depends on the unique facts and circumstances of the allegation. Commanders, upon the advice of judge advocates, must use independent judgment to determine the appropriate level of disposition. The authority to dispose of a “penetrative” offense (an allegation of rape, sexual assault or forcible sodomy) is withheld to the SPCMCA at the O-6 (Colonel) level, with a servicing legal advisor. The authority to dispose of a “non-penetrative” offense (an allegation of aggravated sexual contact or abusive sexual contact) is withheld to the O-5 (Lieutenant Colonel) level. The time it takes to make a disposition decision depends on many factors, including; the complexity of the allegation, the availability of evidence, continued investigation, cooperation of victims and witnesses and coordination with civilian authorities. Disposition data trends (illustrated in Figure 2-5 below) continue to reflect a healthy judicial system, in which commanders employ the wide spectrum of disciplinary tools available to address misconduct, from an unwanted touch over the clothing to a forcible rape. Historically, disposition data shows positive trends for cases in which court- martial charges were preferred and negative trend for cases in which no command

42

action is possible. While the number of courts-martial continues to increase, the Army has maintained conviction rates ranging from 75-80%. Note: FY14 is the first year that disposition data is reported using DSAID. The Army continues to verify results with an aggressive quality control process.

Figure 2-5: Percent of Offenders Considered by Commanders for Action (FY09-FY14)

Although the format of this report requires the Army to place each allegation into a single disposition category, the explanations provided below reflect that several disposition categories may be appropriate for a single allegation. Using the provisional data produced by DSAID, there were 972 allegations of sexual assault, ranging from rape to indecent assault, ready for disposition decisions in FY14. (This includes allegations from cases opened in previous years completed in FY14). Of these 972 allegations:

• 445 allegations were disposed of through the preferral of court-martial charges for a sexual assault offense.

• 67 allegations were disposed of through an involuntary, adverse administrative discharge of the subject. Of those subjects, 31 were also given non-judicial punishment, with reductions in rank, forfeiture in pay, extra duty and restriction, prior to separation.

• 176 allegations were disposed of through non-judicial punishment. Each of these offenses involved a non-penetrative sexual assault offense, the vast majority an unwanted touch over the clothing. No penetrative offense (rape, aggravated sexual assault, sexual assault or forcible sodomy) was disposed of with non- judicial punishment.

44%

31%

22% 22%

15%

12%

18%

31%

41% 44%

46% 46%

24%

18% 16%

12% 14%

18%

14%

20%

12% 12% 11%

14%

0% 0%

9% 10%

14%

10%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

FY09 N=1175

FY10 N=975

FY11 N=663

FY12 N=965

FY13 N=978

FY14 N=972

Command Action Not Possible Courts-martial charge preferred (Initiated) Nonjudicial punishments (Article 15 UCMJ) Administrative discharges and actions Action for non-sexual assault offense

43

• 66 allegations were disposed of through other adverse administrative actions. Each one of these offenses involved a non-penetrative sexual assault, the vast majority an unwanted touch over the clothing. No penetrative offense was disposed of with an adverse administrative action.

• 97 allegations provided probable cause only for a non-sexual assault offense. In these allegations, there was insufficient evidence to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt of the founded sexual assault offense and punitive action was taken for a non-sexual assault offense, such as adultery, fraternization or indecent acts. In 13 of these cases, court-martial charges were preferred. In 15 of these cases, the subject was administratively discharged for the non-sexual assault offense. In 51 of these cases, the subject was given non-judicial punishment and in 18 cases the subject was given other adverse administrative actions.

• 45 allegations were complicated by the refusal of the victim to cooperate in a military justice action. Without the cooperation of the victim in these cases, the Army was unable to take any punitive actions against the subject.

• 6 allegations involved an expired statute of limitations. • 70 allegations were determined to have insufficient evidence of any offense.

Although allegations made against the offender met the lower standard for titling in a criminal investigation, there was insufficient evidence to legally prove those elements beyond a reasonable doubt and proceed with a military justice action.

In addition to the 972 allegations, there were 189 allegations that could not be disposed of by the Army:

• 96 allegations involved an unknown subject. • 10 allegations involved a subject who was deceased or had deserted. • 43 allegations were disposed of by a civilian or foreign authority because the

accused was not subject to the jurisdiction of the military. • 40 allegations were disposed of by a civilian or foreign authority although the

accused was subject to the jurisdiction of the Army. In these cases, all of which occurred outside the limits of a military installation, the civilian authority served as the primary investigative agency and determined the allegation merited charges.

2.3. Reporting Data Discussion and Analysis. This section should include an overview of such information as:

• Trends in descriptive information about Unrestricted Reports (e.g., Did more reported incidents occur on/off installation?)

• Investigations • Experiences in CAI • Other (Please explain)

The unrestricted reports discussed above represent sexual assault incidents reported during FY14 in which either the victim or alleged offender was a service member, but neither was a juvenile. CID thoroughly investigates each unrestricted report, regardless if the case is later determined to be unfounded. While other jurisdictions may dispose of reports of sexual assault before opening an

44

investigation, the Army’s practice is to formally investigate every allegation. Although this practice may contribute to a seemingly higher number of cases, it demonstrates the Army’s commitment to thoroughly investigate reports of sexual assault. The average completion time for sexual assault investigations closed by CID in FY14 was 129 days (median=106 days), compared to 109 days in FY13 and 80 days in FY12. Each case is unique and the amount of time it takes to complete an investigation is dependent on several factors, including: type of complaint, delays in reporting the incident, amount of physical evidence and cooperation of witnesses. Also, the greater number of cases reported to CID in FY13 and FY14 affects the timeliness of completing investigations. As a result, 729 of the 1,926 investigations opened by CID during FY14 were pending completion at the end of the fiscal year (FY13=793 pending of 1,831; FY12=379 of 1,249). 3. Restricted Reporting 3.1. Victim Data Discussion. This section should include such information as:

• Demographics trends • Service referrals • Experiences in CAI • Other (Please explain)

During FY14, the Army recorded 495 restricted reports, of which 98 reports later changed to unrestricted, leaving 397 reports that remained restricted (FY13=364-46; FY12=227-53). This includes 21 restricted reports in the CAI (FY13=40; FY12=13), of which two reports later changed to unrestricted (for a net of 19 restricted reports) (FY13=2; FY12=1). Unlike previous years, victims filing a restricted report in FY14 were 24 years old or younger at a comparable percentage to victims filing an unrestricted report. Specifically, 66% of restricted report victims were 24 years old or younger (FY13=57%, FY12=52%), compared to 69% in unrestricted reports (FY13=64%, FY12=65%). 3.2. Reporting Data Discussion. This section should include such information as:

• Trends in descriptive information about Restricted Reports (e.g., Did more reported incidents occur on/off installation)

• Trends in Restricted Reporting conversions • Experiences in CAI • Other (Please explain)

There are some similarities between restricted and unrestricted reports. For example, most reports (restricted and unrestricted) occurred on Friday, Saturday or Sunday. The limited number of reports in the CAI did not yield definitive trends. There were also some notable contrasts between restricted and unrestricted reports. Only 47% of restricted reports were for alleged assaults that reportedly occurred on a military installation (FY13=37%; FY12=30%), compared to 66% for unrestricted reports (FY13=64%; FY12=68%). Also, 28% of restricted reports (for which data was available) were reported more than a year after the incident (FY13=23%), compared to only 15% of unrestricted reports (FY13=14%). Victims who reported a sexual assault in FY14 that occurred prior

45

to their military service were much more likely to do so with a restricted report. Of the 74 reported in FY14 (FY13=116), 45 were restricted reports (FY13=94). 4. Service Referrals for Victims of Sexual Assault 4.1. Unrestricted Report Referral Data Discussion. This section should include such information as:

• Summary of referral data • CAI referral data • Discussion of any trends of interest identified in referral data • Other (Please explain)

Service members receiving victim services for unrestricted reports continue to use military facilities more often than civilian facilities. The percent of victim services performed at military facilities increased from 75% in FY12 to 85% in FY13 to 95% in FY14. There were 29 victims who received services for an incident that occurred prior to joining the military, compared to 22 in FY13 and 16 in FY12. Additionally, there were 156 SAFE exams conducted for unrestricted reports, compared to 136 in FY13 and 168 in FY12. Nearly all (99%) services for victims of unrestricted reports in CAI were performed with military resources, compared to 91% in FY13 and 84% in FY12. There was one SAFE exam conducted in CAI during FY14 for an unrestricted report, compared to eight exams in FY13 and two in FY12. 4.2. Restricted Report Referral Data Discussion. This section should include such information as:

• Summary of referral data • CAI referral data • Discussion of any trends of interest identified in referral data • Other (Please explain)

97% of Service members receiving victim services related to restricted reports of sexual assault in FY14 did so in military facilities; compared to 81% in FY13 and only 70% in FY12. These services included 36 SAFE exams for FY14 restricted reports; compared to 61 in FY13 and 38 in FY12. Most victims receiving services related to restricted reports of sexual assault in CAI during FY14 did so in military facilities. There were no SAFE exams conducted in CAI during FY14; compared to four in FY13. 4.3. Service Referrals for Non-Military Victims Data Discussion. This section should include such information as:

• Summary of referral data • CAI referral data • Discussion of any trends of interest identified in referral data • Other (Please explain)

Most (85%) services provided to non-service member victims in FY14 were performed using military resources, compared to 76% in FY13 and 64% in FY12. These services included 41 SAFE exams for non-military victims (eight restricted and 33

46

unrestricted reports); compared to 66 in FY13 and 45 in FY12. Three non-military victims received services in the CAI during FY14, compared to one in FY13 and none in FY12. Two received services for unrestricted reports and one had filed a restricted report. 5. Additional Items 5.1. Military Justice Process/Investigative Process Discussion. This section should include such information as:

• Length of time from the date a victim signs a DD 2910 to the date that a sentence is imposed or accused is acquitted (Non-Metric #3)

• Length of time from the date a victim signs a DD 2910 to the date that NJP process is concluded (e.g., punishment imposed or NJP not rendered) (Non-Metric #4)

The following non-metrics are new requirements (as of FY14) and are calculated using data from DSAID. Therefore, there is no comparable FY12 or FY13 data.

• The average length of time from the date victims signed their DD2910 to the date a court-martial sentence was imposed during FY14, or the accused was acquitted, was 212 days (median = 211).

• The average length of time from the date victims signed their DD2910 to the date an NJP concluded was 76 days (median = 68).

47

Appendix A: Civilian Declination Cases

The following case synopses were chosen by the Army as anecdotal examples of situations where the military justice process was used to address allegations of sexual assault involving military members, when a civilian or foreign justice process did not or could not fully address the misconduct alleged. These cases were selected by the Service to demonstrate certain aspects of the military justice process and do not reflect the sum total of all such occurrences during Fiscal Year 2014. The Army chose these 10 cases, out of over 50 examples gathered from installations across the Army, not only to illustrate Army commanders’ interests in accountability for Soldier offenders, but also to demonstrate the challenging sets of facts that are common to alcohol-facilitated sexual assault offenses that are rarely prosecuted in civilian jurisdictions. 1. Two female Soldier Victims were sexually assaulted by a male non-commissioned officer Subject. After an off-post party, Victim #1 was too intoxicated to walk and someone carried her into the residence where she fell asleep, fully clothed. The following morning, Victim #1 awoke partially clothed and believed that the Subject had sexually assaulted her. Victim #2 awoke in the night to find the Subject licking her face. Later on that same morning, Victim #2 awoke to the Subject touching her hips and attempting to slide his hands down into her shorts. The Victims reported the allegations to local civilian police. A joint investigation was conducted between local police and the CID office. The local police terminated their investigation because the local district attorney’s office declined to pursue the case. The CID assumed the investigative lead. The CID re-interviewed the Subject and collected his DNA for comparison at the Army crime lab to evidence collected from the Victims. The Subject’s DNA was found in the semen collected from Victim #1’s vaginal swab and her skirt. The Subject’s commander, receiving regular briefings throughout the almost eight month investigation, made the decision to refer charges against the Subject to a court-martial. The Subject entered a guilty plea to charges of Aggravated Sexual Assault against Victim #1 and Abusive Sexual Contact against Victim #2 at a General Court-Martial. He was sentenced to six years confinement, a reduction to E1, total forfeitures of pay and a Dishonorable Discharge. The Subject is required to register as a sex offender. 2. A female Soldier Victim was sexually assaulted by a male Soldier Subject from her unit. The Subject and the Victim were drinking and socializing at an off-post location. The Victim became severely intoxicated and vomited and passed out in the bathroom. She was then put into a bedroom by the owners of the house. The Victim awoke during the night to the Subject sexually assaulting her. The owners of the house heard her scream and ran into the room to find the Subject hiding in the bathroom and the Victim crying hysterically. The allegation was reported to local civilian authorities, who began investigating. Shortly thereafter, the local district attorney expressed an interest in prosecuting. However, the investigation and the charging decisions by local authorities were taking too long and when the Army learned that the prosecutor was negotiating with the Subject for a plea agreement for a deferred prosecution with probation only, the Subject’s commander made the decision to refer charges against the Subject to a court- martial. The Subject was convicted at a General Court-Martial of Sexual Assault and

48

was sentenced to eight years confinement, reduction to E1, total forfeitures of pay and a Dishonorable Discharge. The Subject is required to register as a sex offender. 3. Multiple female civilian Victims, all recruits, were sexually assaulted by the male non- commissioned officer Subject, their recruiter. The Victims reported to civilian police that the Subject would bring them in after hours to conduct body fat calculations, and have them fully undress and grope them during the measurements. The local civilian police department investigated and the local district attorneys declined to prosecute the case. The Subject’s commander made the decision to refer charges against the Subject to a court-martial for three separate Victims. The Subject was convicted of Abusive Sexual Contact and violations of recruiter regulations and was sentenced to 30 months of confinement, reduction to E1, total forfeitures of pay and a Bad Conduct Discharge. The Subject is required to register as a sex offender. 4. A civilian female dependent family member Victim was sexually assaulted by a male Soldier Subject. While attending an off-post party in a Soldier’s residence, the Victim became substantially incapacitated due to alcohol intake and went to sleep in one of the bedrooms of the house. The Victim awoke to being sexually assaulted by the Subject. The Victim reported to local civilian authorities, who led the investigation and initially indicted the Subject for rape. However, the local civilian district attorney, citing the mandatory minimum sentence for rape and questioning the quality of the evidence to secure a conviction, indicated to the Victim that the case would be pled down to a lesser included offense, likely to result in a sentence of probation only. The Subject’s commander directed CID to request that the civilian authorities suspend their prosecution to allow the commander to refer charges against the Subject to a court- martial. The civilian authorities agreed and the Subject was convicted of Sexual Assault at a General Court-Martial and sentenced to eight years confinement, reduction to E1, total forfeitures of pay and a Dishonorable Discharge. The Subject is required to register as a sex offender. 5. A civilian female dependent family member Victim was forcibly sodomized by a male Soldier Subject at her off-post residence. The Victim and her husband invited the Subject over to their home for the evening. After a few drinks, the Victim and her husband went to bed and told the Subject he was welcome to sleep on their couch. At some point, the Victim got up to check the locks on the front door and found the Subject on the couch, talking on his phone. She went to check on him and offer him a blanket. As she turned around to leave the Subject grabbed her ponytail and pulled her over the couch. She stumbled over and he bent her over the couch, with her head in the seat cushions, holding her down. He continued to hold her down with one hand while inserting his penis into her rectum. She said no multiple times but froze up physically and did not struggle against him. After the Subject ejaculated, he left the home and returned to his home across the street. The Victim reported the offense to civilian law enforcement within hours. The civilian police investigated but the civilian district attorney declined to prosecute, citing the Victim “doing nothing to stop suspect, no visible injuries, and inconsistent first report” in her email to military prosecutors. After the civilians declined prosecution, CID picked up the case and administered a polygraph, which resulted in admissions by the Subject. The Subject’s commander made the decision to refer charges against the Subject to a court-martial. The Subject offered to

49

plead guilty with a sentence limitation. The convening authority accepted the offer because the Victim did not want to testify at trial and wanted to move on with her life. The military judge sentenced the Subject to 15 years confinement, reduction to E1, total forfeitures of pay and a Dishonorable Discharge. The confinement was reduced in accordance with the guilty plea agreement. The Subject is required to register as a sex offender. 6. A female Soldier Victim was sexually assaulted by a male Soldier Subject. After a night of socializing, to include consuming alcoholic beverages, the Victim returned to her off-post apartment with three other Soldiers, including the Subject, and she fell asleep. The Victim awoke to the Subject sexually assaulting her. The Victim reported to local civilian authorities. After learning of the details of the assault, the local police department declined to conduct further investigation into the allegation, and CID assumed sole investigative responsibility. The Subject’s commander, briefed on the investigation, made the decision to refer charges against the Subject to a court-martial. The Subject was convicted of Sexual Assault at a General Court-Martial and was sentenced to six years confinement, reduction to E1, total forfeitures of pay and a Dishonorable Discharge. The Subject is required to register as a sex offender. 7. A civilian female dependent family member Victim was sexually assaulted by a male Soldier Subject. The Victim consumed alcohol with her boyfriend and his two friends, including the Subject, at his off-post residence. The Subject recorded the Victim and her boyfriend in the bathroom, without their consent, while they were engaging in sexual activity. The boyfriend became ill and passed out from alcohol consumption in a spare bedroom. The Victim passed out outside and was carried to the bedroom by the Subject and friend. While the Victim was passed out on the bed the Subject touched the Victim’s buttocks and face with his penis and penetrated the Victim’s mouth, vagina and anus with his penis. The Victim reported to civilian law enforcement, which declined investigative jurisdiction of the incident. CID investigated the offense and the Subject’s commander made the decision to refer charges against the Subject to a court-martial. The Subject was convicted of Conspiracy to Commit Sexual Assault, Abusive Sexual Contact, Sexual Assault and Indecent Visual Recording. The Subject was sentenced to eight years confinement, reduction to E1, total forfeitures of pay and a Bad Conduct Discharge. The Subject is required to register as a sex offender. 8. A female Soldier Victim was sexually assaulted at a party off-post by a male Soldier Subject. The Victim became heavily intoxicated at the party and fell asleep. The Victim awoke several times to Subject sexually assaulting her to include kissing her neck, cheek and mouth, groping her buttocks and penetrating her vulva with his finger. The Victim awoke the third time and was coherent enough to verbalize to the Subject to stop, which he did. These assaults occurred after the Subject groped another Victim’s buttocks earlier in the night while she was also asleep. The offense was reported to civilian law enforcement, but the local district attorney declined prosecution and relinquished jurisdiction to military authorities. The Subject’s commander made the decision to refer charges against the Subject to a court-martial. The Subject was convicted of Sexual Assault and Assault Consummated by a Battery. The Subject was sentenced to two years confinement, reduction to E-1, total forfeitures of pay and a Bad Conduct Discharge. The Subject is required to register as a sex offender.

50

9. A female civilian Victim, the partner of a female Soldier, was raped by a male non- commissioned officer Subject in her partner’s unit. The relationship between the Victim and her Soldier partner was known to the Subject and many other Soldiers in the unit. Although the Subject was married and knew that the Victim was in a lesbian relationship, the Subject struck up correspondence with the Victim via text message and Facebook that was at times flirtatious on both parts. One evening the Subject went to the Victim’s home to hang out, watch football and drink. After the Victim’s children went to bed, both the Subject and the Victim began drinking at a faster pace and became inebriated. When the Subject began kissing the Victim in the kitchen, she froze in shock. The Subject then carried her to a bathroom, shut the door, pulled down the Victim’s pants, exposed his penis and pulled her hand onto his penis. The Victim pleaded with him to stop, but he kept kissing her and insisting they have sex. Sobbing, the Victim told him to “get it over with” and she cried as he had intercourse with her. The Victim reported the sexual assault to her partner several months later. The Victim reported the rape to the local civilian police, who did not take the case seriously given the prior interactions between the Victim and the Subject and the lack of resistance, and the civilian district attorney formally declined prosecution. Three months later, the Brigade Sexual Assault Response Coordinator reported the case to CID at the urging of the Victim’s partner. CID immediately opened an investigation. The Subject’s commander made the decision to refer charges against the Subject to a court-martial. The Subject was convicted of Aggravated Sexual Assault and Aggravated Sexual Contact. The Subject was sentenced to 14 months confinement, reduction to E-1, total forfeitures of pay and a Dishonorable Discharge. The Subject is required to register as a sex offender. 10. A male civilian Victim was sexually assaulted by his housemate, a male commissioned officer Subject. Victim awoke one evening in his room to the Subject sitting on the Victim’s bed touching the Victim’s penis and placing the Subject’s mouth on the Victim’s penis. The Victim called the local civilian police, who responded immediately, and took the Victim for a sexual assault exam at a civilian hospital. The civilian police referred the case to the civilian district attorney’s office. After two years of inaction, the district attorney deferred the prosecution and asked the Army to take jurisdiction. The Subject’s commander made the decision to refer charges against the Subject to a court-martial. The Subject was convicted of Abusive Sexual Contact and False Official Statement, sentenced to 24 months confinement, total forfeitures of pay and a Dismissal. The Subject is required to register as a sex offender.

51

Appendix B: Glossary of Acronyms

1SG – First Sergeant

AAA – Army Audit Agency

ACOM – Army Command

ACS – Army Community Service

AEAC – Army Education Advisory Committee

AFOSI – Air Force Office of Special Investigations

AIT – Advanced Individual Training

ALARACT – All Army Activities message

ALMS – Army Learning Management System

AMEDD – U.S. Army Medical Department

AMSC – Army Management Staff College

AOR – Area of Responsibility

AR – Army Regulation

ARI – US Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

ARNG – Army National Guard

ASA M&RA – Assistant Secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs

ASCC – Army Service Component Command

ASI – Additional Skill Identifier

ATRRS – Army Training Requirements and Resources System

BCT – Basic Combat Training

BOLC-A – Basic Officer Leader Course – Accession (ROTC)

BOLC-B – Basic Officer Leader Course – Branch

CAI – Combat Areas of Interest

CASH/A – Cadets Against Sexual Harassment/Assault

CATEP – Confidential Alcohol Treatment and Education Pilot Program

CES – Civilian Education System

CAPIT – Child Abuse and the Prevention Investigative Techniques Course

CID – US Army Criminal Investigation Command

CONUS – Continental United States

52

DA – Department of the Army

DA PAM – Department of the Army Pamphlet

DAC – Department of the Army Civilian

DAIG – Department of the Army Inspector General

DCAP – Defense Counsel Assistance Program

DCCS – Deputy Commander for Clinical Services

DEOCS – Defense Equal Opportunity Climate Surveys

DEOMI – Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute

DEW – Defense Enterprise Working Group

DFE – Digital Forensic Examiners

DMDC – Defense Manpower Data Center

DoD – Department of Defense

DoDIG – Department of Defense Inspector General

DoJ – Department of Justice

DRU – Direct Reporting Unit

D-SAACP – Department of Defense Sexual Advocate Certification Program

DSAID – Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database

DTF-SAMS – Defense Task Force on Sexual Assault in the Military Services

DVIT – Domestic Violence Intervention Techniques Course

E1 – Enlisted 1 (Private)

E4 – Enlisted 4 (Specialist)

ELITE – Emergent Leader Immersive Training Environment

ER – Emergency Room

EXORD – Execution Order

FETI – Forensic Experiential Trauma Interview

FIE – Forensic Investigative Equipment

FIFC – Foundation Instructor Facilitator Course

FORSCOM – US Army Forces Command

FST – Forensic Science Technician

FY – Fiscal Year

GAO – Government Accountability Office

53

GCMCA – General Court-Martial Convening Authority

GO – General Officer or General Order

GOLO – General Officer Legal Orientation

GOSC – General Officer Steering Committee

HQDA – Headquarters, Department of the Army

HQE – Highly Qualified Expert

HR OTS – Human Relations Operational Troops Survey

HRC – Human Resources Command

I. A.M. Strong – Intervene. Act. Motivate.

ICRS – Integrated Case Reporting System

IET – Initial Entry Training

IMT – Initial Military Training

IG – Inspector General

IMCOM – Installation Management Command

IT – Information Technology

JAG – Judge Advocate General

JAGC – Judge Advocate General Corps

JBLM – Joint Base Lewis-McChord

JCS – Joint Chiefs of Staff

LOE – Line of Effort

MCIO – Military Criminal Investigation Organizations

MEDCOM – US Army Medical Command

MJO – Military Justice Online

MOS – Military Occupational Specialty

MPO – Military Protective Order

MTF – Military Treatment Facility

MTT – Mobile Training Team

NCIS – Naval Criminal Investigative Service

NCM – Nurse Case Manger

NCO – Non-commissioned Officer

NCOER – Non-commissioned Officer Evaluation Report

54

NDAA – National Defense Authorization Act

NOVA – National Organization for Victim Assistance

NJP – Non-judicial Punishment

OCCH – Office of the Chief of Chaplains

OCONUS – Outside Continental United States

OER – Officer Evaluation Report

OIP – Organizational Inspection Program

OMPF – Official Military Personnel File

OPMG – Office of the Provost Marshal General

OSD – Office of the Secretary of Defense

OTJAG – Office of The Judge Advocate General

OTS – Operational Troops Survey

OTSG – Office of the Surgeon General

PCC – Pre-Command Course

PME – Professional Military Education

PMS – Professor of Military Science

POSH – Prevention of Sexual Harassment

ROI – Report of Investigation

ROTC – Reserve Officers Training Corps

RR – Restricted Report

SAAM – Sexual Assault Awareness Month

SABH – Sexual Assault Behavioral Health

SACC – Sexual Assault Care Coordinators

SACP – Sexual Assault Clinical Providers

SAFE – Sexual Assault Forensic Exam

SAI – Sexual Assault Investigator

SAMFE – Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examiner

SAMM – Sexual Assault Medical Management Conference

SAMMO – Sexual Assault Medical Management Office

SANE – Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner

SAPR – Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program

55

SAPRO – Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program Office

SARB – Sexual Assault Review Board

SARC – Sexual Assault Response Coordinator

SART – Sexual Assault Response Team

SES – Senior Executive Service

SHARP – Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention Program

SHARP-RC – SHARP Resource Center

SJA – Staff Judge Advocate

SME – Subject Matter Expert

SMS – Strategic Management System

SOLO – Senior Office Legal Orientation

SPCM – Special Court-Martial

SPCMCA – Special Court-Martial Convening Authority

SSMP – Sample Survey of Military Personnel

SVC – Special Victim Counsel

SVUIC – Special Victim Unit Investigation Course

SVNCO – Special Victim NCO

SVP – Special Victim Prosecutor

SVUIC – Special Victim Unit Instructor Course

TCAP – Trial Counsel Assistance Program

TJAG – The Judge Advocate General

TJAGLCS – The Judge Advocate General’s School and Legal Center

TRADOC – US Army Training and Doctrine Command

TSP – Training Support Packages

UCMJ – Uniform Code of Military Justice

UR – Unrestricted Report

URT – Unit Refresher Training

USACC – US Army Cadet Command

USACIL – US Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory

USAMPS – US Army Military Police School

USAREC – US Army Recruiting Command

56

USC ICT – University of Southern California Institute for Creative Technologies

USMA – United States Military Academy

VA – Victim Advocate

VWL – Victim Witness Liaison

WGRA – Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of Active Duty Members

WO – Warrant Officer

57

1

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION AND RESPONSE OFFICE

SAPR Progress Report to the President

Executive Summary

INTRODUCTION

The Department of the Navy (DON) is deeply committed to achieving a culture of gender respect – where sexual assault is never tolerated and ultimately eliminated; where victims receive effective support and protection; and where offenders are held appropriately accountable. There is no precedent for what we seek to achieve, and we accept the challenge to break new ground.

The Department of the Navy Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office (DON- SAPRO) is a Secretariat organization whose Director reports directly to the Secretary of the Navy. While respecting important distinctions, DON-SAPRO operates in partnership with Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) programs of the United States Navy and United States Marine Corps. Since 2009, Departmental strategy has included the following: leadership engagement on an unprecedented scale; new and innovative training tools designed for Service-wide use; and pilot initiatives to assess the efficacy of sexual assault prevention. In 2010, the Department set a goal of achieving within six years a demonstrable reduction in the frequency of sexual assault among Sailors and Marines.

Inquisitive efforts have included the following: civilian expert consultations; site visits worldwide with stakeholder interviews and focus groups; forensic reviews of criminal investigation case synopses; DON-wide sexual assault surveys in 2011 and 2013; pilot initiatives since 2011 at Great Lakes, Illinois; and ongoing sexual assault surveys at 19 post-recruit training programs. Separately, in 2010, we convened the first-ever, DON- wide summit of Sexual Assault Response Coordinators, and, in 2011, we expanded that forum to include installation and regional commanders, along with presentations by two male victims of sexual assault. We’ve since reached out to major Navy and Marine Corps sites with live training and education, and we’ve deployed several new training tools, including a first-ever training program developed specifically for DON civilians.

Several achievements have resulted. First, sexual assault reporting has dramatically improved as Sailors and Marines have become more confident about SAPR support. Second, accumulated experience at Great Lakes has demonstrated the possibility of sustained reductions in the risk of sexual assault among young Sailors in post-recruit vocational training. Finally, sexual assault surveys conducted by DON-SAPRO provide early evidence of Department-wide reductions in the frequency of sexual assault.

2

IMPROVED REPORTING

Across the Navy and Marine Corps, the annual number of sexual assault reports (including restricted reports) began rising sharply in Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 and has increased since then to more than twice its preceding baseline (see Figure 1 below). This recent trend contrasts dramatically with almost no change during FYs 2009-2011. The increase in sexual assault reporting correlates closely with the broad deployment of new SAPR initiatives and training tools in 2010-2011.

Figure 1. Unrestricted and Restricted Reports of Sexual Assault in the Navy and Marine Corps, by Year

Evidence suggests the increasing number of sexual assault reports has resulted from improved confidence to report a sexual assault. First and foremost, literally thousands of Sailors and Marines in hundreds of focus groups since 2012 have told us directly that they or their friends would now feel more comfortable reporting a sexual assault. In addition, our 2013 DON-wide sexual assault survey revealed that over 70% of male participants (out of 65,000) and 63% of females (out of 12,000) are now more likely to report a sexual assault, while only 3% of males and 5% of females felt less likely. From the same survey, even larger majorities knew who their Victim Advocate was and also felt their command leadership would quickly identify and address misconduct. Encouraging trends, within the larger yearly totals of sexual assault reports, are also most consistent with increasing victim confidence. First, over the last several years, especially among females, a progressively increasing proportion of reports have involved incidents that occurred much earlier. During FY 2013, 25% of unrestricted reports by female victims and 20% of those by male victims involved assaults that occurred prior to that FY. Second, the number of reports made by male victims, who

3

usually are very reluctant to come forward, increased substantially for the first time in FY 2013, to almost triple their number in FY 2012. Also, the proportion of reports involving non-penetrating sexual contact has progressively increased. Over 40% of unrestricted reports by Navy women during FY 2013 involved non-penetrating sexual contacts.

PILOT SUCCESS IN SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION

Initiatives at Great Lakes, Illinois have produced a sustained reduction in the number of reported sexual assaults among Sailors in post-recruit vocational training. The initiatives began in 2011 as pilot efforts through a partnership of DON-SAPRO, senior Navy leaders, and local stakeholders. Over a 44-month period, compared to the same interval prior, reports of any sexual assault (including restricted reports) have decreased by 47%, and reported penetrating sexual assaults have decreased by 61% (see Figure 2 below).

Figure 2.* Reports of Sexual Assault (Including Restricted Reports) at Training Support Command, Great Lakes, by Month of Reported Occurrence

Site visits and focus groups have provided subsequent confirmation of a positive command climate, confidence in SAPR program support, and comfort in reporting sexual assaults. Initial plans to also assess trends with paper-based sexual assault surveys proved to be logistically unsustainable. In its place, ongoing electronic sexual assault surveys since 2013 of all departing graduates confirm a consistently low incidence of sexual assault.

Our early interest in pilot initiatives reflected the absence of a documented precedent for achieving sexual assault prevention, and we did preliminary work to identify suitable

4

partners. In 2010, after visiting diverse military training sites, we concluded the training environment itself is not a risk factor, but sexual assaults are more common anywhere among the youngest Sailors and Marines. Our review of criminal investigation synopses supported this observation and helped identify candidate pilot sites. We lacked data to compare sexual assault frequencies at different locations, but we found the number of investigations then at Great Lakes resembled the totals for much-larger facilities, suggesting a higher risk. We came to recognize Training Support Command (TSC) Great Lakes as a large population of at-risk young Sailors, led by concerned commanders, where sequential assessments were feasible. The command is located on a relatively isolated Naval Station about 90 minutes north of Chicago, where it supports an average of 4,000 students enrolled in five major training commands. Most students are young Sailors newly arrived from nearby recruit training. Additional work led to a two-day, on-site “Stakeholder Planning Summit on Sexual Assault Prevention Strategies” in early 2011, attended by DON-SAPRO, civilian experts, Navy leaders, and local stakeholders. With professional facilitation, the group identified many initiatives in several functional categories. Some were new training programs that needed special funding by DON-SAPRO, while many were local efforts implemented immediately. These included updated student orientations and SAPR curricula, restructured liberty policies, senior students tasked to look after juniors at the on-base club, open “non-judicial punishment” sessions and published decisions, engagement with Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) to combat hotel-room drinking parties, command support for local peer-mentoring programs, and a visible command presence at many student activities. In addition, the Navy Region commander began periodic “drumbeat” meetings to oversee and coordinate activities. The visible engagement of leaders, at all levels, in multiple simultaneous efforts, triggered rapid impacts on command climate and the incidence of sexual assault. Initial impacts notably preceded the start-up of formal new SAPR training programs, some of them civilian contracted. Transformed activities at Great Lakes are now the norm, and the current staff no longer thinks of them as a “pilot project.” Navy leadership is already applying its lessons Service-wide. The success of ongoing student surveys, begun at several key places in 2013, has now led to their sequential implementation at all 19 Navy “A” School (initial post-recruit military vocational training) locations. Surveys at each site are conducted by DON- SAPRO in partnership with Navy leadership. The survey process is voluntary, anonymous, web-based, and continuous. Over 9000 Sailors have completed the survey, and participation has recently averaged about 30-40% of all graduates.

DEPARTMENT-WIDE IMPACTS

Sexual Assault Surveys conducted in 2011 and 2013 suggest a 30% reduction in the projected total number (both genders combined) of active duty Sailors and Marines who experienced either “penetrating” sexual assault or non-penetrating (and unwanted) sexual contact in the prior year. The great majority of overall impact was from survey- projected reductions in non-penetrating sexual contacts, especially among males.

5

Survey trends are confusing with regard to penetrating sexual assaults among females. We believe they are best explained by two separate and superimposed factors. First, we have recently changed (for the better) how survey participants interpret and respond to survey questions about unwanted sexual contacts. As a result of new and widely implemented SAPR training programs, Sailors and Marines are now much better educated about “consent” and “non-consent” in the context of sexual activity. This key concept is written into most sexual assault survey questions. Second, our results also suggest preliminary evidence of new reductions in the risk of penetrating sexual assault among the very youngest cohorts of female Marines. Both Sexual Assault Surveys were Department-wide efforts. Each time, senior leaders invited all Sailors and Marines to participate. Each survey built on prior survey experiences in 2005 and 2009. Several features helped promote individual participation – both surveys could be taken from any computer or smart phone with internet access; both were intentionally short; and all responses were completely anonymous. In 2011, over 115,000 active-duty personnel (22% of the force) participated, including 21% of men and 27% of women. In 2013, over 78,000 (15% of the force) did so, including 15% of men and 18% of women. Both surveys included questions about non-consensual experiences that duplicated formats used elsewhere by the Defense Manpower Data Center. We organized positive multiple-choice responses into two categories – (a) any combination including a “penetrating” sexual assault, and (b) those indicating only unsuccessful attempts or non- penetrating sexual contacts. We recognize that any form of sexual assault or unwanted sexual contact can be equally traumatic to individual victims. Our differentiation corresponds roughly to categories in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and also the different circumstances and trending patterns of the two groupings. Inappropriate sexual touching more often occurs in the workplace, and has more convincingly declined than penetrating sexual assaults. Baseline survey data from 2011 helped clarify some basic insights about sexual assault in military populations. Results for “penetrating” sexual assaults showed a clear relationship between sexual assault risk and young age, especially among females. Sailors and Marines of the same gender and age showed almost identical results. The highest annual risk of “penetrating” sexual assault was about 5% among 17-19 year old females (both Sailors and Marines) – the same as reported by the Department of Justice in 2007 for college women in America – but declines to about 1% or less for those in their late 20’s and older. Males have a lower risk of sexual assault, but they constitute such a large majority of military populations that we project a larger number of individual male victims than female victims annually for both the Navy and Marine Corps. Our findings here expand some insights and validate many others. Both Sailors and Marines strongly indicate they are now more comfortable reporting a sexual assault than in the past, and many say they personally know of someone intervening to prevent a sexual assault. Virtually all have received recent SAPR training, and the vast majority

6

found that training impactful. The vast majority also say their command leadership would quickly identify and address misconduct. Concern about confidentiality is a key influencer of reporting behavior. Most assaults occur in off-duty settings, and offenders are typically co-workers or other active-duty personnel. Alcohol is a common but not universal co-factor. Risk factors include young age and new arrival at a first Fleet assignment after initial military training, but assaults also occur in other settings. These insights have directly informed sexual assault prevention activities across the Department.

OTHER ACCOMPLISHMENTS

DON-SAPRO has also produced special training and professional tools:

In 2010, the first-ever DON “Sexual Assault Response Coordinator’s Summit” was attended by all Sexual Assault Response Coordinators (SARCs) from across the Navy and Marine Corps. The 2½-day agenda included presentations by senior military and civilian leaders, outside civilian experts, and two sexual assault victims – a female Sailor and a female Marine.

In 2011, an expanded 3-day “Sexual Assault Prevention Summit” included all SARCs and added every Navy and Marine Corps shore installation and regional commander. Presenters included the Secretary and Under Secretary of the Navy, the Service Chiefs of both Services, the senior enlisted leader of both Services, White House staff, outside civilian experts, and two sexual assault victims – a male Marine and a male retired Navy officer.

In 2012, DON-SAPRO conducted SAPR forums at Navy and Marine Corps operational concentration sites. Over 5,000 Navy and Marine officers and senior enlisted personnel attended half-day leadership sessions at eight sites world-wide. The training offered new perspectives on victim behavior and the persona of many perpetrators. Additional sessions involved live-acted, vignette-based stage programs for enlisted Sailors and Marines.

In 2013, DON-SAPRO conducted “No Zebras, No Excuses …” training to large audiences during visits to over 30 Navy and Marine Corps locations world-wide. These live-acted, vignette-based programs emphasized bystander intervention. Over 41,000 Sailors and Marines attended. Civilian expert presentations were also conducted for commanders and other stakeholders at eight sites.

In 2014, DON-SAPRO is conducting live-acted “InterACT” programs at training sites and other diverse Navy and Marine Corps locations. The interactive sessions use audience participation to explore healthy relationships and specific bystander intervention techniques. Over 16,000 Sailors and Marines have attended thus far.

“One Team, One Fight” is a one-hour program tailored for civilians, combining video segments and facilitated discussion. It was deployed DON-wide in 2013 and remains in use for new hires. In 2014, DON-SAPRO deployed two other new SAPR training programs. “Make a Difference, Be the Solution” is tailored for pre-commissioned

7

officers, including midshipmen at the Naval Academy and at civilian college Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) programs, along with candidates in training at Officer Candidate School (OCS). “Empowered to Act” is tailored for prospective commanding officers and is in use at the Naval Leadership and Ethics Center. Both include scenario- based videos and facilitated small group discussion.

Work is already underway for products expected in 2015. These include the following: a SAPR training program tailored for the Navy Senior Enlisted Academy; a separate training program for recruits in training at Navy Recruit Training Command; a video library of short videos from previous training to illustrate specific issues of consent, incapacitation, and victim reactions; and “Understanding, Preventing, and Responding to Sexual Assaults: A Fresh Approach to Commander Training” which will use war- game techniques to educate Commanding Officers and Executive Officers.

The “SAPR Commander’s Guide” is a 22-page, glossy-format booklet developed by DON-SAPRO in 2012. It summarizes Departmental priorities, background data, and suggestions for managing local cases. Over 40,000 copies have been distributed to command leadership across the Navy and Marine Corps. In 2014, an updated and expanded 50-page second edition is being published. It includes new sections written respectively by judge advocates, criminal investigators, chaplains, medical personnel, and the reserve component.

Comprehensive Overview by LOE LEADERSHIP ENGAGEMENT

• The Department of the Navy (DON) initiated more direct involvement by senior civilian and military leadership to emphasize the importance of preventing sexual assaults, supporting victims, and providing the resources necessary to fully investigate any allegations.

• Top-down engagement of senior leadership has been a defining feature since 2009 of efforts to combat sexual assault in the DON. In September 2009, the Secretary of the Navy personally led a 2-day “Sexual Assault Prevention Summit” that brought senior military and civilian leaders together with 10 outside experts. Immediately thereafter, the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) and the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) convened Service-level planning.

• Later in 2009, the Secretary created the Department of the Navy Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office (DON-SAPRO) as a new entity within the Navy Secretariat. Its Director is one of the Department’s most senior civilian executives. She reports directly and often to the Secretary. As a result, the DON has three active centers of Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) effort – DON-SAPRO, and Service-level counterparts of the Navy and Marine Corps – working in collaboration and reflecting partnership of the Secretary, CNO, and CMC. The DON is still the only Military Department with a dedicated SAPR organization reporting directly to the Secretary.

• In 2013, the Secretary, the CNO, and the Superintendent of the United States Naval Academy (USNA) each addressed the Brigade of Midshipmen on the critical

8

importance of preventing sexual assault and supporting sexual assault victims. The Superintendent, the Commandant of Midshipmen, and the USNA Sexual Assault Response Coordinator (SARC) also addressed the entire Brigade shortly afterward.

• Continuously since 2009, the Director, DON-SAPRO has conducted an active schedule of site visits to Navy and Marine Corps locations world-wide. Each of her visits includes discussions with senior commanders about sexual assault prevention, SAPR program and policy issues, and specific local challenges. In addition to their prominent role in Department-wide program assessment (see LOE #5 below), these high-visibility visits, on behalf of the Secretary, serve to reinforce DON priorities for senior leaders and key stakeholders literally around the world.

1. Line of Effort (LOE) 1—Prevention

• Department-Wide Summits: ○ In March 2010, DON-SAPRO convened the first-ever DON “Sexual Assault

Response Coordinator’s Summit.” The 2½-day agenda included presentations by senior military and civilian leaders, civilian experts, and two sexual assault victims – a female Sailor and a female Marine. It was attended by virtually all SARCs from across the Navy and Marine Corps.

○ In May 2011, DON-SAPRO expanded its prior forum into a 3-day DON “Sexual Assault Prevention Summit” attended by Navy and Marine Corps SARCs, this time accompanied by all shore installation and regional commanders. The agenda included presentations by the Secretary, Under Secretary, CNO, Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps (ACMC), Master Chief Petty Office of the Navy (MCPON), Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps (SgtMajMC), White House staff, outside civilian experts, and two sexual assault victims – this time a male Marine and a male retired Navy officer.

• New SAPR Live Training: ○ During mid-2012, DON-SAPRO conducted SAPR forums at Navy and Marine

Corps operational concentration sites. Over 5,000 Navy and Marine officers and senior enlisted personnel attended ½-day leadership sessions at eight sites world- wide. Leadership sessions were presented by a leading civilian expert on sexual assault criminal investigation and offender profiling. The training offered new perspectives on victim behavior and the outward “nice guy” persona of many perpetrators. Additional sessions involved live-acted, vignette-based stage programs for enlisted Sailors and Marines.

○ During mid-2013, DON-SAPRO conducted “No Zebras, No Excuses …” training to large audiences during visits to over 30 Navy and Marine Corps locations world- wide. These live-acted, vignette-based programs emphasized bystander intervention. A special program recorded on a Navy ship in 2012 was professionally edited and has been distributed throughout the Fleet.

○ During mid-2013, DON-SAPRO conducted large-audience training for commanders and other stakeholders at eight Navy and Marine Corps sites. Mr.

9

Steve Thompson, a civilian expert, discussed sexual assault criminal investigations and offender profiling.

○ In 2014, DON-SAPRO is conducting live-acted, theatrical-based “InterACT” programs on a quarterly basis at several initial military training sites in addition to one-time presentations at sites across the Department. The interactive sessions use audience participation to explore healthy relationships and specific bystander intervention techniques. Our intent is to build on prior training experience with an enhanced and more interactive follow-on program. Over 16,000 Sailors and Marines have attended thus far.

• Chaplain Corps Initiatives: ○ The Navy Chaplain Corps (CHC) serves both the United States Navy and the

United States Marine Corps. In 2014, the CHC in collaboration with DON-SAPRO is moving forward to provide two prevention initiatives. The “Sexual Assault Prevention Workshop” will supplement existing command-level sexual assault prevention efforts and is based on the United States Coast Guard “WorkLife” program. This workshop will be provided through the Chaplain Religious Enrichment Development Operation (CREDO).

○ “Clean Conscience” is intended to prevent recidivism of previous sexual assault perpetrators and to assist those struggling with negative thoughts or actions regarding sexual assault. The program leverages the special confidentiality offered by chaplains. A messaging campaign will be directed to these individuals, underscoring the availability of help from chaplains to resist or correct violent behaviors, while keeping their counseling sessions confidential. Application of this initiative will be CHC-wide.

• New SAPR Training Tools: ○ In 2013, DON-SAPRO developed “One Team, One Fight,” a one-hour training

program tailored for civilians, which combines video segments and facilitated discussion. It was deployed Department-wide by the Office of Civilian Human Resources (OCHR) and remains in use for new hires. In 2014, OCHR built and deployed a computer-based module for annual follow-on training of DON civilians.

○ In 2014, DON-SAPRO is deploying two related but separate new products. “Make a Difference, Be the Solution” is a one-hour program tailored for pre-commissioned officers, including midshipmen at the Naval Academy and at civilian college Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) programs, along with candidates in training at Officer Candidate School (OCS). Staffs from all three training programs were actively engaged in its development. “Empowered to Act” is a two-hour pre- command program tailored for prospective Commanding Officers (COs), Executive Officers (XOs), and Command Master Chiefs (CMCs) attending the Naval Leadership and Ethics Center in Newport, RI, whose staff was especially supportive in its development.

○ Work is already underway for products expected in 2015. These include the following: a one-hour SAPR training program tailored for the Navy Senior Enlisted Academy, which every E-8 attends; a separate two-hour training program for Navy

10

recruits in training at Recruit Training Command (RTC) Great Lakes, IL; a video library of short videos from previous training to illustrate specific issues of consent, incapacitation, and victim reactions; and “Understanding, Preventing, and Responding to Sexual Assaults: A Fresh Approach to Commander Training” which will use war-game techniques to educate Commanding Officers and Executive Officers. DON-SAPRO has contributed substantial funding for these projects.

• Sexual Assault Prevention Pilot Demonstration Projects: ○ Since 2010, DON-SAPRO has partnered with Navy leadership and local

commanders to implement and assess multiple simultaneous initiatives at Training Support Command (TSC) Great Lakes, the Navy’s largest single concentration of post-recruit occupational training schools for new Sailors. An on-site summit in February 2011 set the stage for major new SAPR training programs, aggressive anti-alcohol efforts, visible leadership engagement in both Sailor discipline and mentoring, and active coordination across organizational lines by regional senior leaders. One result has been a 63% reduction in reported sexual assaults, sustained over a 30-month period. Separate anonymous sexual assault surveys confirm positive effects, and individual Sailors consistently tell us they are now more comfortable reporting sexual assaults, including some that occurred prior to enlistment. This effort has benefitted from periodic liaison with experts from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta and the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC). Since 2013, the Navy has been working with regional senior leaders to distill key insights and apply them in different settings elsewhere.

○ Since 2013, DON-SAPRO has collaborated with diverse Navy stakeholders to explore support programs for victims of prior sexual assault. The goal is to develop voluntary, confidential mechanisms to help young Sailors gain personal strength and tools to succeed as Sailors and avoid re-victimization. Some Fleet and Family Support Centers (FFSCs) have had initial success with individualized, gender-specific support groups. DON-SAPRO supported special six-week training of two counselors at Naval Station Great Lakes, IL.

• Crime Reduction Campaign: The Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) maintains the Crime Reduction Program (CRP), a community outreach initiative designed to address criminal threats affecting the Department. On a quarterly basis, the CRP focuses the efforts of investigative personnel on educating and increasing the awareness of military members and their dependents on criminal threats in an effort to deter crime and victimization. The CRP is led by NCIS and includes both law enforcement and community service partners within DON. The campaigns frequently focus on sexual assault awareness. During these three-month campaigns, NCIS representatives provide sexual assault awareness briefings to commands and the military community. Due to the demand, sexual assault awareness campaigns occur once a year, and the next iteration is scheduled for January 1 to March 31, 2015. This yearly campaign immediately precedes the nationally recognized Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month in April. In concert with the Secretary of the Navy’s 21st Century Sailor and Marine Initiative, the goal of this campaign is to prevent sexual assaults and highlight bystander action and intervention.

11

Sexual Assault Awareness Briefing Program

Fiscal Year Number of Briefs

Marine Officers

Marine Enlisted

Navy Officers

Navy Enlisted

Other Services Civilians

Number of Personnel

2011 670 980 9,576 2,423 22,187 6,617 1,691 43,474

2012 806 11,138 21,374 19,231 52,983 16,524 4,654 125,904

2013 588 1,206 12,803 3,480 15,127 2,061 2,357 37,034

*2014 996 2,336 18,547 7,065 35,717 18,102 7,955 89,722

*2014 – Quarters 1, 2, and 3

○ In 2013, NCIS worked at length with producers of the television series “NCIS” on an episode concept involving sexual assault. Calls to DoD Safe Helpline nearly doubled when the episode aired in April 2014, and there was also an increase that night in civilian calls to the National Sexual Assault Hotline operated by the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network (RAINN).

○ In 2014, NCIS worked with the producers of “NCIS” to create four Public Service Announcements with actress Pauley Perrette. Plans are underway to broadcast them world-wide on the Armed Forces Network, in coordination with a poster campaign developed by NCIS Special Agents.

2. LOE 2—Investigation

• Since 2012, the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery (BUMED) has trained over 900 healthcare providers to perform Sexual Assault Forensic Exams (SAFE) and established the capability to perform SAFE exams at 97 Military Treatment Facilities (MTFs) world-wide and in over 250 Fleet deployed settings. In addition, each MTF has victim care protocols in place and conducts mock SAFE drills that test SAPR team coordination. These efforts serve the dual purposes of enhancing compassionate medical support for sexual assault victims while also improving the professional collection of forensic evidence for criminal investigations and prosecutions.

• The NCIS is a Department-level Military Criminal Investigative Organization (MCIO) that supports both the United States Navy and the United States Marine Corps. The NCIS has sponsored three advanced training courses for investigators: Advanced Family and Sexual Violence training, Advanced Adult Special Victims training, and a Mobile Training Team (MTT) course on “Sexual Assault Investigation and Prosecution.” The MTT was a collaborative effort by NCIS, the Judge Advocate General of the Navy, and the Judge Advocate of the Marine Corps.

12

• Text Tip Campaign. In December 2011, NCIS established its Text Tip campaign, “See something, say something.” To date, they have received 99 tips pertaining to sexual assaults.

• In July 2013, NCIS received 54 additional billets authorized by the Secretary of the Navy in response to increased sexual assault reporting. These billets included 41 Special Agents and 13 support staff. In addition to the Special Agents, the new billets include an Investigative Analyst, five Forensic Consultants, four Cyber Specialists, three Evidence Technicians, and one Laboratory Support position. The Special Agents have completed the nearly six-month-long Special Agent Basic Training Program at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) and reported to their assigned field offices, where they are participating in the Field Training Evaluation Program (FTEP). During the FTEP, new Special Agents investigate common law crimes, such as larcenies, burglaries, and drug offenses, to gain experience and further develop their investigative skills.

• Adult Sexual Assault Program (ASAP) Teams. In support of Department of Defense (DoD) requirements for a Special Victim Capability (SVC), NCIS created ASAP. The program pairs Special Agents and Investigators, dedicated specifically to the investigation of sexual assaults, in order to expedite the investigative process and enhance continuity. By surging efforts and collaborating early, the program improves the timeliness and ultimate benefit of sexual assault criminal investigations. Team members collaborate throughout the investigative process with local law enforcement, prosecutors, healthcare providers, Victim Advocates, Victim-Witness Assistance Program (VWAP) personnel, and others. Since the implementation of ASAP, the timeliness of NCIS sexual assault investigations has improved markedly, without a concomitant degradation of investigative quality. Teams have been established in fleet concentration areas where the volume of sexual assault reports is greatest, including the following:

○ Camp Lejeune, NC (June 2012) ○ Norfolk, VA (August 2012) ○ Okinawa, Japan (September 2012) ○ Camp Pendleton, CA (October 2012) ○ Bremerton, WA (March 2013) ○ San Diego, CA (April 2013) ○ Yokosuka, Japan (August 2013)

NCIS investigation timelines are calculated from initial notification until the date all logical investigative leads have been completed and the case has been presented to command for administrative or judicial action. The average timeline for investigations conducted by ASAP teams in FY 2013 was 110 days, a near 24% decrease from 144 days in FY 2012. Data through the 3rd quarter of FY 2014 indicates the length of investigations increased to 126 days, attributed to the continued increase of sexual assaults reported throughout the year.

13

• Master-at-Arms Augmentation. In an effort to assist NCIS with the increased reports of sexual assault, NCIS partnered with the United States Navy to activate twenty- three NCIS Master-at-Arms (MA) reservists for a period of one year. The reservists are predominantly local and state police officers and detectives who already possess the investigative expertise needed to investigate sexual assault allegations. The MAs have been recalled to active duty and are attending five weeks of instruction on NCIS policy, advanced interviewing and interrogation techniques, crime scene processing and management, and advanced sexual assault training at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC). Upon graduation, they will report to NCIS field offices in the continental United States for duty.

• Additionally, in an effort to professionalize and enhance the investigative capabilities of active-duty MAs, NCIS will commence a pilot program in early FY 2015. Twelve MAs selected from the Fleet who have already attended the eight-week Military Police Investigator’s course will attend the same FLETC course of instruction as their reserve counterparts. Upon graduation, they will report for duty to NCIS field offices, where they will conduct criminal investigation under the auspices of the Special Agent in Charge.

163

136

157

179

105

132 141

129

150

87

129 114

89 78

140 155

90

128 128 112

129

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Camp Lejeune, NC

Norfolk, VA Okinawa, Japan

Camp Pendleton, CA

Yokosuka, Japan

San Diego, CA Bremerton, WA

Comparison of ASAP Offices – Average Days for Active Investigation

FY12 FY13 FY14 (Q1-Q3)

14

3. LOE 3—Accountability

• Since 2012, DON-SAPRO has distributed over 40,000 copies of its 22-page, glossy- format “SAPR Commander’s Guide” booklet, which summarizes Departmental priorities, background data, and specific suggestions on command management of local sexual assault cases. In 2014, an updated, 50-page, second edition is being published (see attachment). It includes new sections written by the Judge Advocate General (JAG), the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS), chaplains, medical personnel, and the reserve component.

• During Fiscal Year 2012, hundreds of uniformed judge advocates from the Navy and Marine Corps received specialized training to improve their ability to assist clients involved in sexual assault cases.

• In July 2013, the Navy and Marine Corps both began publicizing a running list of verdicts from Special and General Courts-Martial for all offenses, including sex assault crimes, in an effort to enhance accountability and increase transparency. The listings include details for each case, such as the type of court-martial, where it was held, the rank of the accused, the crime they were tried for, the verdict, and any punishment awarded – along with the names of offenders who either pled guilty or were found guilty. The effort is intended to show that offenders will be punished, which victim advocates and officials believe is central to stemming sex assaults.

4. LOE 4—Advocacy/Victim Assistance

• Since 2009, DON Office of Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (DON-SAPRO) has conducted over 100 specific site visits to Navy and Marine Corps locations world- wide to assess field-level SAPR program performance. The Navy hired 66 SARCs and 66 SAPR Victim Advocates (VA). The Navy identified locations for additional SARC/VA resources based on sexual assault trend analysis. The Marine Corps has strengthened credentialing requirements for SAPR personnel and increased the number of SARCs and VAs in the field.

• Since 2012, DON-SAPRO has collaborated with Navy and Marine Corps staffs to develop measurable Victim Support Milestones and associated metrics. The goal is to identify key victim-experience milestones in SAPR support and develop measurable performance standard for each. This effort builds on experience since 2011, where sequential audits by the Naval Audit Service, new written standards, and re-engineered processes resulted in dramatically improved 24/7 telephone access to SAPR support for sexual assault victims.

• Since 2012, DON-SAPRO has collaborated with the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Navy Bureau of Medicine and Surgery (BUMED), and local stakeholders to explore the feasibility of telemedicine support for Sexual Assault Forensic Exams (SAFE) at remote sites. Preparatory work and local training began in May 2013 at Naval Hospital Twentynine Palms, and Naval Hospital Jacksonville has since been added as a second pilot site.

15

• In March 2013, DON-SAPRO collaborated with the USNA to review SAPR victim support processes for Midshipmen. Recommended manpower and process changes focused on ensuring independent and confidential support, along with direct access to senior leadership to support command-level case management. All recommendations have been implemented.

• In 2014, the Navy Chaplain Corps (CHC), in collaboration with DON-SAPRO, is developing “Survivors of Sexual Violence Resiliency Retreats” through the Chaplain Religious Enrichment Development Operation (CREDO) program. These retreats will allow victims to reestablish confidence in themselves and restore wholeness in relationships. Additionally, they will help prior victims to reduce their chances of being re-victimized by sexual predators.

5. LOE—Assessment

• DON Site Visits: ○ Since 2009, DON-SAPRO has maintained an active schedule of Departmental site

visits to Navy and Marine Corps locations worldwide. Typical visits include discussions with senior commanders, interviews with individual stakeholders, and confidential focus groups. Key stakeholders interviewed separately include the following: the senior enlisted leader, the Sexual Assault Response Coordinator (SARC), the Fleet and Family Support Center (FFSC) Director, Sexual Assault Nurse Examiners (SANEs) and other Naval Hospital medical personnel, Staff Judge Advocates (SJAs), Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) agents, and Chaplains. Focus groups are conducted as closed sessions with separate groups of Victim Advocates and young (usually gender-specific) Sailors and Marines. During FY2013 alone, in addition to the three special studies below, DON-SAPRO visited 16 sites, interviewed 110 stakeholders, and conducted 14 focus groups with 280 participants.

○ During 2010, DON-SAPRO visited large and small Navy and Marine Corps locations (four total) in Southern California to assess impacts of State law mandating sexual assault reporting by healthcare providers. At that time, each facility, in coordination with local law enforcement, had a different approach to State requirements, and no Military Treatment Facility (MTF) performed SAFE exams.

○ Later in 2010, a DON-SAPRO team visited Navy and Marine Corps training commands at six locations across the United States to explore unique sexual assault risk factors in training environments, and to identify best practices in combating sexual assaults. Site visits included Great Lakes IL, Parris Island SC, Pensacola FL, Camp Johnson NC, Fort Leonard Wood MO, and Athens GA. The team interviewed commanders and stakeholders, and conducted 17 focus groups with 240 participants. Our summary conclusions were that training environments per se are not inherently problematic, but that concentrations anywhere of very young Sailors and Marines, such as during immediate post-recruit training, are especially vulnerable.

16

○ In November 2011, at the request of Commander, Pacific Fleet, a DON-SAPRO team visited Japan to assist the regional Inspector General by conducting an assessment of command climate and SAPR program issues onboard a ship home- ported in Sasebo, Japan.

○ During FY 2013, DON-SAPRO conducted an extensive series of site visits to assess Initial Military Training (IMT) environments. In the immediate aftermath of public scandal at Lackland Air Force Base, the Secretary of the Navy had quickly directed DON-SAPRO to conduct site visits at all three Navy and Marine Corps recruit training facilities. These were already scheduled when the Secretary of Defense (SECDEF) issued expanded guidance for all Services to conduct assessments also encompassing initial post-recruit enlisted training sites and initial training programs for commissioned officers. Our agenda was built from prior experience. It was designed to provide credible insight through an exhaustive process of first-hand observations. A DON-SAPRO team visited 23 Navy and Marine Corps training sites nation-wide. The team met with over 200 commanders and stakeholders, and conducted 180 focus groups with 2,570 participants.

○ During FY 2013, DON-SAPRO conducted site visits to assess Recruiting Environments. The effort was initially directed by the Secretary of the Navy as follow-on to further explore occasional concerning inputs from recent recruits during our review of Initial Military Training environments (see above). Our agenda was built from prior experience, and site visits to recruiting commands had already been scheduled when SECDEF issued parallel guidance. A DON-SAPRO team visited 27 Navy and Marine Corps locations, including recruiting headquarters, training sites, and local stations, along with recruits in training (to discuss prior recruiter interactions). The team met with over 200 commanders and stakeholders, and conducted 33 focus groups with 530 participants. The team also visited Military Entrance Processing Command and two Military Entrance Processing Stations. They also received data on the Naval Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) from the Naval Service Training Command.

○ During FY 2013, DON-SAPRO conducted site visits to assess SAPR issues unique to Reserve Component settings. A DON-SAPRO team visited 12 Navy and Marine Corps reserve locations, including reserve headquarters, large reserve centers, and isolated small locations. They met with 33 stakeholders, and conducted 32 focus groups with 620 participants. The insights developed during these visits have been incorporated into a separate section of the DON-SAPRO’s updated “SAPR Commanders’ Guide.”

• DON Surveys: ○ In June 2011, DON-SAPRO conducted a Department-wide sexual assault survey

intended to update estimates of sexual assault incidence, explore assault circumstances, and identify factors that influence reporting. The survey process was voluntary, anonymous, web-based, and accessible from any computer. Senior leaders encouraged all Sailors and Marines to participate. Over 115,000

17

active-duty Sailors and Marines (22% of the force) provided responses, including 21% of men and 27% of women.

Key findings suggested the risk of sexual assault correlates closely with young age; 5% of 17-19 year-old females experience penetrating sexual assault each year; and sexual assault risk is identical for comparable Sailors and Marines. Males have a lower risk of being sexually assaulted, but more individual victims are projected in mostly-male military populations. Most male victims and over 40% of female victims don’t tell anybody about their sexual assault.

○ In May 2013, DON-SAPRO collaborated with USNA to conduct a paper-based, anonymous sexual assault survey of all Midshipmen. The purpose was to explore impressions of command climate, circumstances associated with sexual assault, and reasons for reporting or non-reporting. At the request of DoD, we did not assess the incidence of sexual assault among Midshipmen.

Key findings include negative impressions of existing sexual assault training, and a strong priority on maintaining victim confidentiality.

○ In October 2013, DON-SAPRO conducted a follow-on Department-wide sexual assault survey, once again intended to update estimates of sexual assault incidence, explore assault circumstances, and identify factors that influence reporting. As in 2011, the survey process was voluntary, anonymous, web-based, and accessible from any computer or smart phone. Senior leaders encouraged all Sailors and Marines to participate. Over 78,000 active-duty Sailors and Marines (15% of the force) provided responses, including 15% of men and 18% of women.

Key findings suggested that most are now more comfortable reporting a sexual assault; many know of someone who intervened to prevent an assault; and confidentiality is a key concern in reporting. Thirty percent fewer victims of any form of “unwanted sexual contact” were projected in comparison to 2011. Most of that reduction involved non-penetrating assaults, especially among males. The Marine Corps may have achieved initial reductions in penetrating assaults among the youngest female Marines.

○ Since 2013, DON-SAPRO has partnered with the Navy Education and Training Command and BUMED to develop and implement a continuous program of sexual assault surveys tailored for young Sailors as they graduate from Navy post-recruit “A” School training. The goal is to assess the incidence of sexual assault at Initial Military Training, explore assault circumstances, and identify factors that influence reporting. The survey process is voluntary, anonymous, web-based, and ongoing. Students are encouraged to participate as they graduate. Survey startup began in August 2013 at Pensacola FL, and quickly was expanded to encompass other large training centers at Great Lakes IL, Meridian MS, Groton CT (Naval Submarine School), and San Antonio TX (tri-Service Medical Education and Training Campus). Initial success has now led sequential implementation at all 19 Navy “A” School locations. Over 9000 Sailors have completed the survey, and participation has recently averaged about 30-40% of all graduates.

18

Key findings suggest that schoolhouse commanders are actively engaged; command climates are positive; and the incidence of sexual assault is comparably lower in IMT environments. Trends are hard to assess due to seasonal load variations, but the incidence of sexual assault may be diminishing. As expected, substantial numbers of male victims appear, despite their lower overall risk.

• DON Case Reviews: ○ Since 2009, DON-SAPRO has reviewed and categorized over 1,900 case

synopses from NCIS to identify those groups at greatest risk, their alleged assailants, and the circumstances surrounding reported assaults.

○ In mid-2013, DON-SAPRO collaborated with USNA to review Command action in all known report of sexual assault involving Midshipmen during the prior five academic years. Results suggested that USNA leadership dealt aggressively with sexual assault cases presented for their action, but that few cases reached that level.

COMMANDER’S GUIDE

SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION & RESPONSE

TOGETHER WE CAN PREVENT SEXUAL ASSAULTS

KEY POINTS

i

Male Victims Male victims of sexual assault are less likely to report. Their risk of sexual assault appears lower than for females, but the predominance of males in the Navy and Marine Corps means the projected number of individual male victims may be quite large—similar to or perhaps even greater than the number of female victims.

False Reports Experts say that consciously false reports are no more common than other serious crimes. Unfortunately, a much larger proportion of cases are difficult to prove.

Alcohol Alcohol is a pervasive factor. In some cases, offenders use alcohol as a weapon to incapacitate potential victims. Alcohol is never the cause of sexual assault.

Investigation Sexual assault cases are difficult to investigate. Close coordination with law enforcement and legal is essential for successful prosecutions. In many cases, the key challenge is to provide evidence supporting the victim’s non-consent to an undisputed sexual contact.

Bystander Intervention Bystander intervention is one key element of sexual assault prevention. It emphasizes the moral responsibility of all Sailors and Marines to protect each other and to actively intervene in circumstances that may escalate to sexual assault.

Most Vulnerable The youngest enlisted Sailors and Marines face the highest risk of sexual assault — 3 to 5% of females aged 17-19 endure the most serious forms of sexual assault each year3. Sailors and Marines seem most vulnerable at their first duty stations after recruit training, when they are still new to the military and just out of the very-structured recruit environment.

Offenders Most Sailor and Marine victims of sexual assault are assaulted by another person in uniform—usually someone they know. Alleged offenders are usually of similar enlisted rank or 1-2 grades senior. Most assaults begin in social settings, both on– and off- base, and both in CONUS and OCONUS. Experts tell us many offenders are skilled predators who carefully select the most vulnerable targets—often those least likely to be believed if they report. Most perpetrators of sexual violence will do it repeatedly, debunking the misperception that most assaults are “an honest misunderstanding between two people who drank too much” or “miscommunication.” Many assaults are committed by repeat offenders.5 This finding has strong implications for your investigations and prevention efforts.

Sexual Assault Sexual assaults encompass a broad range of intentional sexual contacts that are unwelcome and without consent. No form of sexual assault is ever acceptable in the Department of the Navy, and all are crimes under the UCMJ. Several sexual assault terms have specific legal definitions that may differ from their common usage here.

Incidence Anonymous surveys suggest almost 25% of female Sailors and Marines experience some form of sexual assault during their careers, including 6-9% in the past year. Those surveys also suggest 6-8% of female Sailors/Marines have endured rape, forcible sodomy, and/or forced oral sex during their careers, including almost 3% in the past year3.

Reporting Even for the most serious forms of sexual assault, only 1 in 3 Sailor and Marine victims report the crime to authorities. Roughly 25% of Sailors and 35% of Marines don’t tell anyone, including their friends3. The most common reasons for not reporting include feeling uncomfortable making a report, not wanting anyone to know, and fear that they would not be believed3.

ii

Set the tone. You are responsible for your command climate. Sexual assault and sexual harassment are unacceptable—period.

Lead by positive example. Sexual innuendo and jokes may get a few laughs, but they send absolutely the wrong message about your expectations. The same is true of irresponsible alcohol consumption and improper personal relationships.

Address factors that contribute to sexual assault situations. Liberty policies and strategies to address alcohol abuse have been used as successful tools in various places. One CO worked with NCIS and local authorities to break up alcohol-fueled hotel-room parties. Senior enlisted have been effective in programs to mentor younger Sailors and Marines.

Take sexual assault reports seriously. Use your Sexual Assault Response Coordinator (SARC) as a key asset. Partner with your SARC as your subject matter expert to help on all SAPR issues.

Remember that a primary concern for many victims is to preserve their privacy as much as possible. Don’t accidently wound them in well-intended group comments.

Respond swiftly and appropriately to stop rumors and gossip surrounding reports of sexual assault.

Forward Unrestricted Reports of sexual assault to NCIS immediately.

Insist on thorough investigations of all reported sexual assaults. You may not be able to go forward or achieve convictions with every case, but thorough investigations will enable appropriate decision making or dispositions, and your approach sends a powerful message in itself.

Make sure that victims have access to local support services, and follow-up on how they are doing. Once again, your SARC is an invaluable resource in this regard.

Make your own conscious plan to protect victims from retaliation and re-victimization. Few things will have worse impacts on your command.

Promote “bystander intervention”—the moral responsibility of all Sailors and Marines to actively protect each other from sexual assault and risky behaviors. Encourage and support those individuals who do stand up to intervene.

Visibly support your SAPR team. Select appropriate victim advocates and ensure they are trained. Attend monthly SAPR Case Management Group (SA CMG) meetings.

Keep information shared regarding reported sexual assaults limited to those with a need-to- know. Respect the victim’s right to privacy.

Meet with your SARC within 30 days of assuming command in accordance with DoDI 6495.02 and receive your SAPR toolkit.

CORE RESPONSIBILITIES

ST E

P U

P. ST E

P IN

.

We still have this challenge of sexual assault. We are making progress, but we are nowhere near being done. I’d ask you to keep the focus on that, remember what we need to do. You deserve a good command climate, one of dignity and respect. Those of you that are leaders, that are part of that team, I expect you to maintain a climate of dignity and respect, continue to push on that and make sure we are doing the right thing by our sailors

– Admiral Jonathan W. Greenert

Chief of Navy Operations

Sexual assault continues to be an “insider threat” with serious impacts on our Navy and Marine Corps. Over the past year and a half we have taken important steps to combat this crime, including consistent leadership, new training methods, and victim-centered support efforts. We have seen progress, including an increase in the number of reports which indicates that our Sailors and Marines believe that their reports will be taken seriously and that victim support efforts are working. But we can’t stop there. We must continue to strengthen the positive elements of our naval culture, and live up to our commitment to our Sailors, Marines and Civilians who work each day to ensure we provide global presence in defense of our country.

– Honorable Ray Mabus Secretary of the Navy

Sexual assault has no place in our Corps. Sexual assault not only has a long- lasting effect on the individual victim, but it also erodes unit readiness and command climate. I see positive progress and indicators that the Marine Corps SAPR Program is going in the right direction. However, I also believe that there is still much work to do… Marines must all work together to create an environment in which crimes of misconduct are not tolerated in any form.

– General Joseph F. Dunford Jr., Commandant of the Marine Corps

iii

VIEWS FROM LEADERSHIP

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREVENTION:

PERSONAL LEADERSHIP 4 CLIMATE & ENVIRONMENT 7

PROGRAM LEADERSHIP 11

RESPONSE:

VICTIM RESPONSE 13

SUPPORT SERVICES:

JAG — Legal 22

NCIS 29

CHAPLAIN 32

MEDICAL (Sexual Assault Forensic Exams—SAFE) 33

ADDENDUM:

RESERVE SERVICES 35

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES & REFERENCES 43

Sexual assault involves nonconsensual criminal acts ranging from sexual touching to rape.

Sexual Assault IS… • Intentional sexual contact characterized by use of force, threats, intimidation or abuse of authority or when the victim does not or cannot consent

Sexual Assault INCLUDES… • Rape • Forcible sodomy (oral or anal sex) • Other unwanted sexual contact that is aggravated, abusive, or wrongful • Attempts to commit these acts

Consent IS… • Freely given words or overt acts indicating agreement to sexual activity by a competent person

Consent IS NOT… • Submission due to force or fear • Implied due to dress or previous sexual relationship • Possible if someone is substantially impaired due to drugs, alcohol, or unconsciousness

Sexual assault is OUR problem. The following are estimated projections of Sailors and Marines who have experienced rape, forcible sodomy, and/or non-consentual oral sex during the last 12 months3:  2,847 Navy victims  1,272 Marine Corps victims

Being perpetrated by OUR members7.

 69% of perpetrators against Navy and Marine Corps victims were fellow service members

Being perpetrated on OUR installations3.  51% of assaults against Navy men • 37% against Navy women  60% of assaults against Marine Corps men • 54% against Marine Corps

women Sexual assault is a NATIONAL problem.

 A rape occurs in the United States every 2 minutes9

 Nearly 1 in 5, or 22 million women in the United States have been raped in their lifetimes2

 It is the most under-reported crime in America8

 Approximately 1 in 71 men in the United States report having been raped in their lifetime, which equals roughly 1.6 million men2

Sexual Assault in the

Department of the Navy

1

KEY FOCUS GROUP FINDINGS DON-SAPRO has conducted focus groups with Sailors and Marines around the world. This page identifies some of the common themes and information received from those groups.

Perceptions Regarding Sexual Assault in General Concerns: Alcohol, Transition to Fleet, port visits, house parties Each installation mentions a specific location, area, or environment that is related

to massive alcohol consumption and is perceived as place where Sailors and Marines might be vulnerable to sexual assault

 Spike in reports is related to training and increased comfort in reporting and not related to an increase in incidents

Male on male low-level abusive sexual contact is common within predominantly male commands (e.g., “nut-tapping” – grabbing testicles)

Perceptions Regarding Training

Perceptions Regarding Reporting Confidentiality and privacy are seen as easily compromised False reports are believed to be pervasive  Sailors and Marines are more likely to report now when compared to the past Males are less likely to report than females Knowledge/awareness of who uniformed victim advocates are is not wide-spread

Perceptions Regarding Victim Support High-level awareness of and confidence in using available SAPR resources

Perceptions Regarding Accountability  Believe sexual assault perpetrators are being held appropriately accountable for

their behavior

Recommend/Want:  Small-Group based and interactive Victim testimonials and real case

scenarios Bystander element Edutainment More information about

perpetrators Examples of male victims Clarity on consent, on alcohol and

consent, and on sexual behavior while intoxicated

Mixed-gender groups  Senior leadership attend training

Avoid: PowerPoint Messaging that “All males are

rapists and all victims are women” Large group lecture (e.g.: 100+ in

an auditorium)

Sexual Assault in the Department of the Navy

2

THE MOST POWERFUL IMPACT You, as a leader, can make it unequivocally known that this issue is a priority to you. If in both formal and informal contexts, those under your command understand they will be held appropriately accountable by you for their response to this issue — the rest will follow.

Core Elements of a Command Environment

What am I responsible for? The diagram below depicts the key elements of a Commander’s responsibility for Sexual Assault Risk Management. The elements encompass both Prevention and Response strategies as well as support services. Attention paid to these elements has a positive effect on individuals and overall mission readiness. The remainder of this guide is organized according to these elements.

CLIMATE & ENVIRONMENT

VICTIM RESPONSE

PROGRAM LEADERSHIP

JAG — LEGAL

3

Sexual Assault in the

Department of the Navy

NCIS

PERSONAL LEADERSHIP

PREVENTION RESPONSE

MEDICAL

CHAPLAIN Support services are invaluable to survivors of sexual assault; they can help ensure future

physical safety, as well as mitigate the mental and emotional harm caused

by sexual assault.

SUPPORT SERVICES

Ask yourself:

When you hear about a sexual assault case, how often do you doubt the veracity of the victim’s report and instead focus on characteristics of the victim? For example: what the victim was wearing, if the victim had been drinking, if the victim voluntarily invited the alleged offender to his or her room.

Victims of sexual assault are far more likely to have been assaulted and never tell anyone of the incident (48% Navy male victims, 32% Navy female victims, 41% Marine Corps male victims, and 38% Marine Corps female victims indicated they told no one of their assault3) than they are to have never been assaulted and made a false report (nationally, 2-10% of sexual assault reports are found to be false, the same as any other major crime.4)

How often are you skeptical of an assault because you feel like you can identify with the alleged perpetrator? “I know this man. He’s a good guy. He’s a lot like me when I was younger. He’s a great Sailor/Marine.” In the Navy, only 5% of the sexual assaults committed against women and 8% committed against men were reported to be by strangers. In the Marine Corps, only 8% of the sexual assaults committed against women and 12% committed against men were reported to be by strangers.3 The majority are known to the victim and are often described as “nice guys,” difficult to distinguish from those you may like and respect.

Then consider:

Ask yourself:

Then consider:

4

PERSONAL LEADERSHIP

“Eliminating sexual assault in the military is one of the Department of Defense’s highest priorities. We must continually strive to improve our prevention and response programs.”

— Chuck Hagel, Secretary of Defense

Ask yourself: How often do you assume that a sexual assault is more likely to be a sexual encounter between well intentioned individuals who simply had too much to drink or had a misunderstanding of consent?

Then consider: Every case stands alone. Studies indicate that many of the sexual assaults committed by someone the victim knew are

committed by repeat offenders5. In one study, the average number of victims for each rapist was seven, and in another study it was eleven1. Common tactics used to commit the assault include: ignoring victims’ efforts to communicate, incapacitating them with alcohol or drugs, physical force, or threats. Every case must be thoroughly investigated by law enforcement so that the facts relevant to that case can be determined.

Ask yourself: Based on your responses to the above questions, how might your biases be impacting prevention and response efforts under your command?

Then consider: What messages can you communicate, formally or informally, that could decrease victim blaming, increase scrutiny of repeated inappropriate behavior, and increase the reporting and help-seeking behaviors of victims?

Eliminating sexual violence is everyone’s responsibility, but ultimately your words and actions as a leader, or lack thereof, set the deciding tone. Identifying potential liabilities in terms of misinformation or biases is a crucial first step.

“If we are going to remain the greatest expeditionary fighting force the world has ever known, we cannot allow this to continue. If we are going to protect our shipmates, we cannot allow this to continue. If we are going to remain the Navy and Marine Corps people look up to, and should look up to, this cannot continue.”

`–Hon. Ray Mabus, Secretary of the Navy

5

PERSONAL LEADERSHIP

4. Actively involve your senior leadership team. 5. Go to SAPR trainings/conferences. Don’t send substitutes. 6. Visibly and consistently express your support for victims and

commitment to prevention; and a fair system of justice. 7. Keep information regarding Unrestricted Reports limited to

those with a need-to know. Consider how message traffic is controlled.

8. Make it personal. Be “real” when discussing this issue. 9. Make sure awareness of the issue extends beyond Sexual Assault

Awareness Month (April). Prompt your leadership with reminders to ensure ongoing attention.

10. Be proactive. Get the message out via multiple venues.

 Ensure adequate resources  Meet with your SAPR team

regularly  Communicate to others about

the SAPR team’s capabilities  Make introductions at SAPR

programs

 Ensure subordinate commanders establish a working relationship with the SAPR team

 Support collaboration and cross- communication with your SARC and first responders

 Webcast, radio, or TV Show  Facebook  Website  Newcomer briefings  Magnets  Commander’s Access Channel

broadcasts

 Weekly newspaper  Mass and targeted e-mail  Commander’s calls  Daily face-to-face communication  Integrate message into existing

vehicles

11. Engage peer mentoring groups such as Coalition of Sailors Against Destructive Decisions (CSADD) and Single Marine Program (SMP).

12. Share your best practices with fellow Commanders.

Strategies: 1. Inform yourself and your command team about key aspects of sexual assault. Review SAPR policies to include DoDD 6495.01, DoDI 6495.02, SECNAVINST 1752.4B, and your service specific instructions and orders.

2. Hold those under your command accountable by directly and personally addressing questionable behaviors. Squash rumors and gossip surrounding reports of sexual assault.

3. Visibly support your SAPR team and partner with your SARC.

6

PERSONAL LEADERSHIP

Ask yourself: What is the real impact of a few off-color jokes, a couple of sexual advances, or over consumption of alcohol to my command climate and ultimately my mission readiness?

Then consider: Environmental factors in the military associated with an increased likelihood of sexual assault include:

• Sexual harassment allowed by superiors

• Unwanted sexual advances or remarks

• Environments where superiors engaged in quid pro quo behaviors, such as when a superior makes inappropriate demands to a subordinate

• Environments where irresponsible consumption of alcohol is glamorized

A hostile climate decreases the likelihood victims will report, thus diminishing your opportunities to hold offenders appropriately accountable.

According to the DON-wide survey in 2013, self- identified victims of sexual assault stated they did not report due to the following barriers:

 They did not want anyone to know — 47% of Navy female victims, 52% of Marine Corps female victims, 24% of Navy male victims, and 22% of Marine Corps male victims.3

 They thought it was not important enough to report — 45% of Navy female victims, 40% of Marine Corps female victims, 42% of Navy male victims, and 39% of Marine Corps male victims.3

• They felt uncomfortable making a report — 42% of Navy female victims, 46% of Marine Corps female victims, 26% of Navy male victims, and 25% of Marine Corps male victims.3

CLIMATE & ENVIRONMENT

7

“It is up to us to declare and commit we will not tolerate sexual assault in our Navy and our Marine Corps.”

`–Hon. Ray Mabus, Secretary of the Navy

Ask yourself: What might a potential offender be thinking if he or she notices leadership is silent in the face of a vulgar e-mail or sexist comments?

Then consider: Officer and enlisted leadership is essential.

 While most who laugh at an off-color joke or forward an inappropriate email do not commit sexual assault – those who do commit this violence often mask and justify their behavior within climates where such behavior is condoned or ignored. Just as peers may provide inadvertent cover for offenders, they are also a very effective tool in both the prevention and response arenas. Emphasize the important role Sailors and Marines can play as active bystanders. Armed with basic education and training on resources and intervention strategies, they are a force multiplier.

 A study by Sadler (2003) shows the occurrence of the ranking officer initiating or allowing others in the unit to make sexually demeaning comments or gestures in a service woman’s presence has been associated with a three- to four-fold increase in the likelihood of rape.6

 “Women reporting hostile work environments had approximately six-fold greater odds of rape…When officers engaged in quid pro quo behaviors, women reported a five-fold increase in rape. Officers allowing or initiating sexually demeaning comments or gestures towards female soldiers was associated with a three to four-fold increase in likelihood of rape.”6

8

CLIMATE & ENVIRONMENT

CONTINUUM OF HARM

Strategies:

1. Communicate clearly and often that there is a direct link between achieving your organizational goals and ensuring each Sailor/Marine feels safe and productive in his or her office.

2. Emphasize the importance of professional military culture and responsibilities including bystander intervention strategies.

3. Increase oversight and accountability for behaviors in the day-to-day workplace and living/community areas.

4. Conduct periodic surveys (DEOCS) to assess elements of your climate. Work with your leadership team to address the elements of greatest concern.

 Meet with your SAPR team to discuss climate and environment issues.

 Solicit information on climate concerns from groups in unique positions to observe, including Command Climate Surveys.

 Conduct informal “walk around” assessments within the command.

5. Encourage peer mentor groups such as CSADD and SMP.

– Talk to people in work areas informally about the climate and environment – Integrate practical safety tips into orientation (locking doors, responsible alcohol use) – Listen for concerns with personnel in family and youth areas – Walk the grounds at night

– Ensure all maintain standards of good order and discipline – Conduct no-notice inspections of barracks/ ships/workspaces – Be clear about your “boundaries” of behavior – Talk to your leaders about expectations

9

CLIMATE & ENVIRONMENT

6. In both formal and informal settings, set the standard for behavior and communication that you want emulated. Challenge your Sailors/Marines to act in the following areas:

 Address behaviors, conduct and attitudes across the Continuum of Harm (see page 8).

 Ensure respect for victims and respect for the investigation and disposition processes.

 Prohibit intimidation, retribution, and/or reprisal of any kind after a report has been made.

7. Encourage all leaders to make active efforts to stay current and responsive to climate concerns.

8. Do not tolerate sexually demeaning conduct.

9. Develop a climate within which bystanders feel empowered to act.

 Support the Bystander Intervention Training programs (e.g.: the Navy’s BI2F and the USMC’s Take A Stand).

 Encourage Sailors and Marines to take action in the face of destructive behaviors that could lead to a potential sexual assault.

 Have leadership introduce key trainings and events pertaining to sexual assault prevention and response.

 Acknowledge Sailors and Marines who intervene or speak up in potentially high-risk situations.

10

CLIMATE & ENVIRONMENT

“Sexual assaults undermine teamwork, morale, unit cohesion and operational readiness. It is our duty to ensure that the conditions are established where every Sailor is treated with dignity and respect.”

–MCPON Michael Stevens

Ask yourself: Does your command know your policy on sexual assault?

Then consider: Sexual assault is completely unacceptable in the Navy and Marine Corps. Your ultimate goal as a leader is a command climate of gender respect where sexual assault is never tolerated and ultimately is completely eliminated.

There is no single easy method to prevent sexual assault. It will require our sustained commitment to multiple approaches — mentoring young Sailors/Marines; confronting alcohol issues; educating all Sailors/Marines about our shared responsibility as bystanders; and actively eradicating sexism and sexual harassment whenever encountered. Studies show that a coordinated response by a multi- disciplinary approach improves a victim’s experience as well as offender accountability.

11

PROGRAM LEADERSHIP

Strategies: 1. Meet with your Sexual Assault Response Coordinator

(SARC) within 30 days of taking command. 2. Establish a command climate of sexual assault prevention

that is predicated on mutual respect and trust, recognizes and embraces diversity, and values the contributions of all its members. Be visible in your support and promotion of the SAPR program.

3. Carefully select those who will fill SAPR program roles in your command. Consider the sensitivity and maturity required in dealing with these issues. Ensure they are trained and Victim Advocates (VA) are credentialed.

4. Maximize each opportunity to interface with first responders. Build relationships with your SARC, law enforcement, legal, chaplains, and health care providers.

5. Invite your SARC to be present at all SAPR trainings and activities. Support your SARC when there are events. Let it be known you expect leaders in all echelons, both officer and enlisted, to be present and follow up if they are not.

6. Create opportunities for collaboration (e.g., training for first responders, host/participate in symposiums, awareness events, etc.) to showcase Command policy and address the issue of eliminating sexual assault.

Strategies:

12

PROGRAM LEADERSHIP

“Commanding officers are responsible for setting and enforcing a command climate that is non-permissive to sexual assault, a climate in which the spirit and intent of the orders and regulations that govern the conduct of our duties will be upheld. There are a number of leadership styles, but the result of any of them must be a group of Marines and Sailors who have absolute trust in their leaders. Trust in the commander and fellow Marines is the essential element in everything we do. Developing this trust, dedication, and esprit de corps is the responsibility of the commanding officer. They do this by setting standards, training to standards, and enforcing standards.” – Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., Commandant of the Marine Corps

7. Ensure appropriate SAPR training is conducted for all members of your command.

8. Foster an environment that promotes and rewards bystander intervention.

9. Ensure your SARC is notified of all sexual assault reports and a VA is provided.

10. Refer all reports of sexual assault to NCIS, or the appropriate MCIO, for investigation. DO NOT conduct internal command-directed investigations or delay contacting NCIS, or the appropriate MCIO, while attempting to assess the credibility of the report.

11. Follow sexual assault response protocols for Unrestricted Reports. (Available from your SARC.)

12. Chair or attend the monthly Sexual Assault Case Management Group (SACMG or CMG), as appropriate.

13. Provide victims with Unrestricted Reports monthly updates regarding the current status of their case within 72 hours of the last SACMG or CMG.

14. Protect sexual assault victims from coercion, discrimination, retaliation, and/or reprisals.

15. Protect SARCs and VAs from coercion, discrimination, or reprisals related to the execution of their SAPR duties and responsibilities.

16. Make a rapid determination on Expedited Transfer Requests. Service members who file an Unrestricted Report of sexual assault have the option to request a temporary or permanent expedited transfer from their assigned command or installation, or to a different location within their assigned command or installation.

17. Ensure proper investigation of allegations while also understanding and communicating that the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

18. Understand and respect the rights of the accused. 19. Know the resources that surround your base. This

is particularly critical for non co-located Reserve units who rely on community-based resources (e.g., rape crisis centers, shelters).

VICTIM RESPONSE

Ask yourself: What does a victim look like?

Then consider: Victims of sexual assault are trauma victims. Trauma affects everyone differently. There are preconceived notions of how a “real” victim of sexual assault should look and act, as well as respond. When a victim does not conform to these expectations, often the veracity of his or her experience is doubted.

Ask yourself: Why is reporting often delayed?

Then consider: A victim may not report right away for a variety of reasons, including fear of the perpetrator; public humiliation; a hostile environment for victims; fear of being disbelieved or blamed due to collateral misconduct (underage drinking, substance use); and blaming themselves for the assault.

Ask yourself: Why don’t victims fight back?

Then consider: Victims may be incapable of resisting due to intoxication, or may submit out of fear, to avoid further harm or

heightened violence, or due to a physiological reaction, and/ or because of perpetrator threats.

Ask yourself: Are most victims hysterical or emotional?

Then consider: There is not one “typical” response for victims of sexual assault.

Ask yourself: Are most victims expected to be able to provide accurate recollections of their trauma?

Then consider: It is well established that memory processing is disrupted during traumatic events. Commonly occurring psychological reactions to trauma may impair a victim’s ability to accurately recollect and talk about their sexual assault.

13

Ask yourself:

Then consider:

Ask yourself:

Then consider:

Ask yourself:

Then consider:

What do you do when you don’t really believe the victim?

As a leader, it is essential that you follow the process and maintain objectivity. Take every case seriously. Each allegation of sexual assault should be considered independent of victim’s character, behavior, or other allegations of past or present victim misconduct. When I think about sexual assault, how often do I think only of female victims?

There are additional stereotypes and myths that impact men’s ability to face their sexual assault and seek support or services, including:  Men are immune to victimization.

 Men should be able to fight off attacks.

 Men shouldn’t express emotion.

 Men enjoy all sex, so they must have enjoyed the assault. What are my assumptions about sexual assault offenders? When the victim was a Navy female, the perpetrator was a coworker 48% of the time, and another military service member 25% of the time. For Marine Corp female victims, the perpetrator was a coworker 47% of the time, and another military service member 24% of the time. When the victim was a Navy male, the perpetrator was a coworker 39% of the time, and another military service member 19% of the time. When the victim was a Marine Corps male, the perpetrator was a coworker 38% of the time, and another military service member 18% of the time.3

These are NOT true!

14

VICTIM RESPONSE

“If an assault occurs, we have to support sexual assault victims and encourage them to seek help.” — Hon. Ray Mabus, Secretary of the Navy

Ask yourself: Why won’t victims just report so we can hold the offenders appropriately accountable?

Then consider: This is a question often asked by leadership out of well- intended frustration at feeling helpless to act in the face of an assault. The reality is that reasons victims gave for not reporting include things within a Commander’s reach to address. These include:

 Did not want superiors to know

 Fear of being treated badly if they report

 Concern for protecting their identity

 Did not trust the reporting process

 Afraid of retaliation by either their command or socially by their peers

 Thought nothing would be done

 Perception they could handle it on their own The responsibility for an increase in reporting is not the victim’s. Note what is being communicated within your command that may contribute to barriers to reporting, and address it. An increase in reporting will be unlikely until the response is strengthened and improved.

“If we prove to our young men and women who have been assaulted that we are serious about changing this culture, perhaps we’ll get the reporting.”

– Honorable Robert O. Work Under Secretary of the Department of Defense

15

VICTIM RESPONSE

Strategies:

1. Take every case seriously and make sure your concern is apparent.

2. Protect victims from re-victimization and retaliation.

3. Ensure victims receive needed support—best done in coordination with the SARC.

4. Insist on a thorough investigation of every Unrestricted Report of sexual assault.

5. Respect victims’ choices about reporting. If a victim chooses Restricted Reporting, respect that choice and trust your team to work the process.

6. If possible, defer action on issues of collateral misconduct while sexual assaults are being investigated and decided upon.

7. Ensure that transfer requests are expeditiously processed (72 hours).

8. Ensure adequate attention is paid to the selection, training and oversight of the SAPR team (SARC, VA/UVA, POC, DCC, SAPR Command Liaison).

9. Make sure the SAPR team has command access and support.

• Attend the monthly SAPR Case Management Group (SACMG or CMG) meeting • Speak at VA/UVA training (e.g.: welcome participants)

• Do not pressure SARCs or VAs/UVAs to disclose Restricted Reports

10. Ensure training for first responders is available and effective (medical, NCIS, VA/UVA, SARC, chaplains, VLC, JAG).

11. Ensure first responders are collaborating and doing their work effectively.

12. Ensure a strong Victim Witness Assistance Program (VWAP).

13. Remember that complications and delays occur in military and civilian courts. These cases are rarely resolved quickly.

14. Ensure case outcomes are thoroughly reviewed and communicated to each victim by you as the Commander.

16

VICTIM RESPONSE

R e p o r t i n g Options:

Unrestricted Reporting:

Res t r i c t ed Reporting:

There are two reporting options available: Unrestricted and Restricted, defined below.

A process used by an eligible individual to disclose that he or she is the victim of a sexual assault. Under these circumstances, the victim’s report to the SARC, healthcare personnel, a VA/UVA, command authorities, or other persons are reportable to law enforcement and may be used to initiate the official investigation process.

A process used by an eligible individual to report or disclose that he or she is the victim of a sexual assault to specified officials on a requested confidential basis. Under these circumstances, the victim’s report and any details provided to the SARC, healthcare personnel*, or a VA will not be reported to law enforcement to initiate an official investigation unless the victim consents or an established exception is exercised under DoD Directive 6495.01.

RESTRICTED UNRESTRICTED

Yes CONFIDENTIALITY No Sensitive/need to know

Active Duty and Reservists on Active Status, and their

dependents 18 years or older

ELIGIBIITY All personnel

No LAW ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATION Yes

No COMMAND INVOLVEMENT Yes

Available SEXUAL ASSAULT KIT Available

Available* MEDICAL SERVICES Available

Restricted/Unrestricted Reports

Available COUNSELING SERVICES Available

Available VICTIM ADVOCATE SERVICES

Available

Available VICTIMS’ LEGAL COUNSEL SERVICES

Available

17

VICTIM RESPONSE

*In some states, including CA, medical providers are required to report sexual assault to law enforcement, and cannot offer a Restricted Report.

Why the

Restricted Reporting Option Is Critical

The Restricted Reporting option is a critical tool in the organizational response to sexual assault. It is the option developed specifically to increase mission readiness and increase reporting by addressing the initial needs of a victim for more control over their environment — including time, privacy, and medical and emotional support. It is best described as a window into information previously unknown. Prior to this reporting option, most victims of sexual assault simply attempted to deal with the trauma on their own and hoped they could still function in their personal and professional lives. As this is a very difficult trauma to successfully self-treat, some struggled on and many others departed the Navy and Marine Corps, often for reasons related to their trauma.

While the goal is to have every Restricted Report go Unrestricted, some victims may never go beyond the Restricted Reporting step. Others will find themselves able to move their report into the Unrestricted realm in due time, and not only get help for themselves but also participate in holding their offender appropriately accountable. Honoring a victim’s choice for Restricted Reporting is critical. It demonstrates our commitment to support victims of sexual assault in ways that are relevant to them, in spite of the fact that it delays an investigation into the allegation and your ability as leaders to “care for your Sailors/ Marines.”

18

VICTIM RESPONSE

“You will all be counted on to lead in helping eliminate sexual harassment and sexual assault of your sisters and brothers in uniform. You’ve seen what these crimes do to the survivors, their families, institutions and communities. You know how they tear people and units apart, how they destroy the bonds of confidence and trust at the very core, the center, the heart, of our military. We’re all accountable. From new recruits to four-star admirals and generals, from second lieutenants to the secretary of defense, we all have to step up and take action when we see something that hurts our people and our values.” — Chuck Hagel, Secretary of Defense

Respecting a victim’s choice for this option demonstrates that you and the Navy and Marine Corps care about him or her first, and the desire to investigate the crime second. This is very important as victims strive to adjust to the shock of their circumstances, regain their bearings, and prepare to move forward. Rest assured that your SAPR team is working with victims to help them understand the importance of an immediate Sexual Assault Forensic Exam (SAFE) kit to preserve evidence for future use. The SARC is also working to help them understand the process of changing to an Unrestricted Report if and when they want. Initial medical care, both physical and mental, coupled with quality time to work with a SARC and VA creates a safe zone for victims. This tends to translate into a victim being much more willing to participate in the investigative and disposition process.

Bottom Line: A Restricted Reporting option puts the victim’s voice first, ensures they get immediate help, and may eventually improve the Commanders ability to pursue an alleged perpetrator on a case converted to Unrestricted that may have been otherwise unknown, while helping a victim more quickly return to mission ready status.

19

VICTIM RESPONSE

I am committed to eliminating sexual assault and together, we must provide a comprehensive and synchronized effort to ensure the entire Department is aligned in working towards this goal. –Hon. Ray Mabus, Secretary of the Navy

VICTIM RESPONSE

Active Duty:

Reservists:

Military Dependents:

Eligible to file a Restricted Report or Unrestricted Report Full SAPR support services from a SARC and a SAPR Victim Advocate (VA) Eligible to file a Restricted Report or Unrestricted Report When sexually assaulted while performing active service and inactive duty training, have full SAPR support services from a SARC and a SAPR VA When sexually assaulted prior to entering service or while not performing active service or inactive training (civilian status), have immediate crisis SAPR support services from a SARC and SAPR VA and connected to appropriate resources Eligible to file a Restricted Report or Unrestricted Report if they are:  18+ years old  Eligible for treatment in the military healthcare system  At installations CONUS and OCONUS  Victims of sexual assault perpetrated by someone other

than a spouse or intimate partner Full SAPR support services from a SARC and a SAPR VA (The Family Advocacy Program covers adult military dependent sexual assault victims who are assaulted by a spouse or intimate partner, and military dependent sexual assault victims who are 17 years old and younger.)

Reporting Options Eligibility

20

VICTIM RESPONSE

Civilians Eligible for Treatment in

Military Healthcare

Facility:

All Other Civilians:

Eligible to file an Unrestricted Report Immediate crisis SAPR support services from a SARC and SAPR VA and connected to appropriate resources Civilian Employee Assistance Program (CEAP) (e.g. dependents, retirees, civilians stationed or performing duties OCONUS)

Follow civilian reporting options for their State/Region Immediate crisis SAPR support services from a SARC and SAPR VA and connected to appropriate resources Civilian Employee Assistance Program (CEAP)

Reporting Options Eligibility Continued

21

“Sexual assault has no place in our Corps. It shatters the trust that must exist between Marines. All of us have a moral obligation to our fellow Marines in preventing sexual assault and to support any Marine or Sailor who falls victim to this crime. — Sgt. Maj. Michael P. Barrett, Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps

JAG — LEGAL

Allegations of sexual assault trigger specific investigative responses and command requirements unlike those required for allegations of other crimes. Your close coordination with your SJA and trial counsel is critical to a thorough investigation and a fair and effective disposition process. Your legal advisors and SAPR team receive extensive training on how to handle allegations of sexual assault and should be consulted concerning any question you have about these processes or any military justice concerns. What follows is a general description of the investigative and disposition process, to include referral of charges to court-martial. Unrestricted Reports are fully investigated and reviewed for prosecution or other disposition. All allegations of sexual assault, both penetration and contact offenses, must be reported immediately to NCIS, who will open an investigation. While already required by DoDI 6495.02, Section 1742 of the FY 14 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) now also mandates that unit commanders who receive Unrestricted Reports of sexual assault must immediately refer the matter to the servicing military criminal investigation organization (e.g. NCIS). Victims may request an expedited transfer to another command or duty station. Rather than transferring the victim after a report of sexual assault, commanders may instead transfer the suspect. However, no action against a suspect should be made until after consultation with NCIS and the command’s staff judge advocate or legal advisor. Military protective orders are often issued against the suspect, ordering the suspect to have no further contact with the victim, but should only be issued after consultation with NCIS so it does not interfere with the ongoing investigation. During the investigation, NCIS will interview the victim to document what happened. NCIS will also interview other witnesses and gather any evidence present at the crime scene. When the investigation is complete, NCIS will send the investigation to the suspect’s commanding officer for appropriate disposition.

Sexual Assault Investigative and

Court-Martial Processes

Unrestricted Reports and the Investigative

Process:

Expedited Transfers, Victim Safety, and

the Investigative Process:

22

Program to provide independent legal counsel to eligible sexual assault victims. This responsibility has been codified in Section 1716 of the FY 14 NDAA.

VLCs are attorneys working to protect and preserve the rights and interests of Navy and Marine Corps sexual assault victims, and in the case of investigation and prosecution, to assure victims understand the process, can exercise their rights, and are able to effectively participate by having a voice in the process.

VLCs form an attorney-client relationship with eligible victims. All communications between VLCs and their clients are confidential and privileged. VLCs advise victims on sexual assault reporting options; provide legal representation and advice during the investigative and court-martial process; advocate on the victim’s behalf; represent the victim in military justice proceedings where the victim has an interest and right to be heard by the court; and provide other legal advice and services connected with a report of sexual assault. VLCs cooperate and coordinate with other support providers including SARCs, VAs, chaplains, and medical personnel, to provide full spectrum assistance to victims.

Eligible victims include Navy and Marine Corps active-duty, Navy and Marine Corps Reserve personnel while on active duty or on inactive-duty training at the time of the assault, other service personnel and retirees when assaulted by an active-duty Navy and Marine Corps member, adult and child dependents of active-duty Navy and Marine Corps members when assaulted by an active-duty Navy and Marine Corps member, and some overseas DON civilians. Other Reserve personnel may be eligible on a case-by-case basis.

Victims can seek assistance from a VLC at any point following a sexual assault. Victims are not required to contact or consult with a VLC — the choice remains with the victim. When contacted, VLCs will immediately form an attorney-client relationship with an eligible victim and provide legal advice, assistance, and advocacy for that victim as appropriate. Victims can contact a VLC directly or seek VLC contact from other support personnel including SARCs, VAs, trial counsel, NCIS, SJAs, chaplains, and medical providers.

Victim’s Legal Counsel Background:

Mission:

Duties:

Eligible Victims:

VLC Contact:

23

JAG — LEGAL

Throughout the entire investigative and military justice process, the victim has certain rights. For example, a victim has the right to communicate, typically through the VLC or trial counsel, his or her position regarding disposition decisions of the case. Although the convening authority is not bound to dispose of the case as the victim desires, the victim’s views must be carefully considered. Article 6b of the UCMJ, is a new statute that applies, with minor modifications, the federal Crime Victims’ Rights Act to victims of crimes under the UCMJ at all stages of the military justice process. Those rights include:

 Be reasonably protected from the accused;  Reasonable, accurate and timely notice of:

1) public pretrial confinement hearings of the accused; 2) preliminary hearing under Article 32; 3) court-martial proceedings; 4) public proceedings of the clemency and parole board; 5) release or escape of the accused;

 Not to be excluded from any public court proceeding related to the offense, unless the preliminary hearing officer or military judge determines by clear and convincing evidence that the victim’s testimony would be materially affected if he or she heard other testimony at the preliminary hearing or trial;

 To be reasonably heard at the following: 1) public pretrial confinement hearings of the accused; 2) sentencing hearing related to the sexual assault offense; and 3) public proceeding at the clemency and parole board;  Confer with the trial counsel;  Receipt of available restitution, if appropriate;  Proceedings free from unreasonable delay;  Be treated with fairness and respect for dignity and privacy.

Additionally, in the FY 14 NDAA victims were provided the right to submit matters to the Convening Authority prior to action being taken on the findings and sentence following conviction in a court-martial. The Navy and Marine Corps established a Victims’ Legal Counsel (VLC)

Crime Victim Rights

24

JAG — LEGAL

Depending on the offense alleged, the investigation may need to be forwarded up the chain of command to a Sexual Assault Initial Disposition Authority (SA-IDA). The SA-IDA is at least a captain/ colonel (O-6) who is a Special Court-Martial Convening Authority. The offenses that require forwarding to the SA-IDA are those that involve allegations of penetration, offenses of rape, sexual assault and forcible sodomy, and attempts to commit these offenses. The SA-IDA will, after consulting with his or her Staff Judge Advocate and trial counsel, determine how the case should proceed. If there are allegations of collateral misconduct by the victim then disposition of those alleged offenses are also withheld to the SA-IDA. If the SA-IDA decides that there is sufficient evidence of an offense of sexual assault, they may proceed towards a court-martial. Before any case can be sent to a General Court- Martial, an Article 32 preliminary hearing must be conducted (unless waived by the accused). Depending on the nature of the offenses alleged, the SA-IDA may also dispose of the allegations at a summary or special court-martial, non-judicial punishment, process the accused for administrative separation, or other administrative means. Penetration offenses may only be referred to General Court-Martial and some decisions to not refer charges to a court-martial must be submitted for higher level review. Consult your legal advisor for specific advice for these cases. The court-martial process is initiated when charges are preferred (sworn to), and will proceed differently depending on the type of court-martial. The three types of courts-martial each have different maximum punishments that can be adjudged. A Summary Court- Martial cannot adjudge confinement exceeding one month for enlisted personnel, may not confine an officer, and a punitive discharge may not be adjudged for either officers or enlisted personnel. The maximum punishment for a Special Court-Martial is a bad conduct discharge and confinement for one year for enlisted only and may not confine or discharge an officer. A General Court-Martial can adjudge a dishonorable discharge (or a dismissal for officers) or a bad conduct discharge, and depending on the maximum punishment allowed per offense, in some cases may adjudge death or a period of confinement up to life without the possibility of parole for officer or enlisted.

Convening Authority Decisions SA-IDA:

Offenses:

Case Procedure:

Court- Martial

Process:

25

JAG — LEGAL

A trial counsel (prosecutor) begins working a sexual assault case with NCIS during the investigation. Trial counsel and the VLC (if the victim is eligible for and requests one) will explain to the victim all of his or her rights under the UCMJ and explain the military justice process to the victim as the case moves forward. Trial counsel are specially trained for prosecuting sexual assault cases as part of a congressionally required special victim capability.

Once charges are preferred, the suspect becomes known as the accused and is provided a military defense counsel to represent him or her. Depending on the nature of the charges, they may be immediately referred to a summary court-martial or special court- martial, but before a case can proceed to a general court-martial, the accused has the right to have the charges considered at an Article 32 preliminary hearing.

The accused will be present at the Article 32 preliminary hearing and will be represented by counsel who may cross-examine witnesses called by the government. The preliminary hearing officer will hear evidence and produce a written report, which will include findings as to whether there is probable cause to believe that the accused committed the offenses charged and a recommendation on forum for disposition of the charges. Based on the preliminary hearing officer’s report, the recommendation of the staff judge advocate, and the decision of the SA-IDA as applicable, a General Court-Martial convening authority may refer the charges to a General Court- Martial. For some less serious offenses, the convening authority may also refer the charges to a summary or Special Court-Martial or impose NJP or, if appropriate, may dismiss the charges.

As a result of Section 1744 of the FY 14 NDAA, there are two new requirements for reviewing decisions not to refer charges to General Court-Martial in certain cases. In cases involving UCMJ offenses of rape, sexual assault, forcible sodomy and attempts to commit these offenses, where the General Court-martial Convening Authority SJA recommends referral in Article 34 advice and the Convening Authority declines to refer any charges, then the case must be forwarded to the Secretary of the Navy for review. Where the General Court-martial Convening Authority SJA recommends not referring charges and the Convening Authority agrees, the case must be forwarded and reviewed by the next superior commander authorized to exercise General Court-martial Convening Authority.

Trial Counsel:

Charges Preferred:

Article 32 Preliminary

Hearings:

Elevated Review:

26

JAG — LEGAL

If the case goes to court-martial, the accused may elect to be tried by a military judge alone or by a panel of “members” who serve as jurors. If the accused is enlisted, he or she can also request that at least one-third enlisted members serve on the panel. The trial counsel will work with the victim, the VLC, and the VA throughout the trial process. The victim will normally have to testify at the trial and may also have to testify in pre-trial motions sessions. Both the prosecution and defense can call witnesses and present evidence during the trial. Before an accused can be found guilty, the members or military judge must be convinced of the accused’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. If the accused is found guilty, the case will proceed to the sentencing phase, during which the military judge or members will decide what punishment to adjudge. During the sentencing hearing, both sides may again call witnesses to testify to help determine an appropriate sentence. The victim can testify about the impact of the sexual assault, which may include the emotional, physical, and financial suffering the victim experienced. If confinement is adjudged, it will ordinarily begin immediately after the sentence is announced at the end of the court-martial. As part of the sentence, an accused may also be reduced in rank, required to forfeit pay and allowances, and/or be discharged from the Navy with a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge (officers may receive dismissal).

Court-Martial Judge or

Panel:

Victim Testimony:

Verdict and Sentencing:

27

JAG — LEGAL

(6-12 months on average)

The following are the “10 Commandments” of UCI to assist commanders and other members of the unit in the lawful exercise of their UCMJ authorities: 1. The commander may not order a subordinate to dispose of a case in a

certain way. 2. The commander must not have an inflexible policy on disposition or

punishment. 3. The commander, if also an accuser, may not refer the case. 4. The commander may neither select nor remove court members in

order to obtain a particular result in a particular trial. 5. No outside pressure may be placed on the judge or members to arrive

at a particular decision. 6. Witnesses may not be intimidated or discouraged from testifying. 7. The court decides punishment. An accused may not be punished

before trial. 8. Recognize that subordinates and staff may “commit” command

influence that will be attributed to the commander, regardless of his or her knowledge or intentions.

9. The commander may not have an inflexible attitude towards clemency.

10. If a mistake is made, raise the issue immediately.

Unlawful Command Influence (UCI)

28

JAG — LEGAL

UCMJ — Article 120 Offenses

Initiation of an

Investigation:

Investigative Process:

29

NCIS

The US Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS), US Army Criminal Investigation Division (USACID), and the US Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) comprise the Military Criminal Investigative Organizations (MCIOs). DoD Instruction 5505.18 requires all Unrestricted Reports of sexual assault against adults be immediately reported to the cognizant MCIO, regardless of the severity of the allegation. NCIS will initiate investigations of all offenses of adult sexual assault of which they become aware that occur within their jurisdiction regardless of the severity of the allegation. When NCIS becomes aware of an allegation of adult sexual assault, the Restricted Reporting option is no longer available to the victim. NCIS will pursue a criminal investigation with or without the victim’s cooperation. Off-base incidents or incidents outside of exclusive federal jurisdiction often result in local law enforcement maintaining primary jurisdiction. When local law enforcement maintains primary jurisdiction, NCIS will provide assistance as requested and will generally monitor the investigation when a service member is the subject. In the event the local law enforcement agency defers to NCIS or terminates its investigation, NCIS may assume the investigation and continue to a logical conclusion. Jurisdiction is a vital issue and Commanders are encouraged to proactively discuss jurisdiction with their staff judge advocate, trail counsel, and local NCIS office. Investigative procedures and practices are standardized for an investigation. However, some investigative procedures may be precluded depending on the circumstances of an individual investigation. Forensic examination of the victim is recommended by DoD for incidents occurring within seven days of the report and evidence is often recovered for incidents occurring fourteen days prior to the report. In general, the sequence of investigative activity is; 1) initial contact with the victim to determine the basics of the allegation; 2) forensic exam of victim (if applicable); 3) crime scene examination (typically concurrent with forensic exam); 4) in-depth victim interview; 5) witness interviews; 6) subject interview; 7) forensic lab examination (if applicable); 8) follow-up leads developed from previous investigative activity.

Within 48 hours of receiving a report of sexual assault, NCIS contacts specially trained local trial counsel who work with NCIS as part of the Navy and Marine Corps Special Victim Capability. In each investigation, NCIS attempts to identify and collect evidence. Often, evidence is located on cell phones, tablets, computers and other electronic media storage devices. The collection of these items always impact the victim and subject, and may lead to frustration with NCIS, the command, and the military justice process. In the majority of cases, the victim knows and has communicated with the suspect prior to and after the assault. Many times, both suspect and victim communicate with others regarding the assault. Properly securing the content of these communications is vital to the investigation. Commanders should work with NCIS to explain to impacted victims and subjects the necessity of evidence collection and collaboratively identify solutions that may reduce the impact. It is important to note, each investigation is unique, which makes it impossible to predict the time required to complete. NCIS strives for thorough and timely investigations but NCIS will not sacrifice thoroughness for timeliness. DoDI 5505.18 requires the Commander of the service member who is the subject of an adult sexual assault investigation to provide the MCIO, in writing, all disposition data, to include any administrative, non-judicial punishment or judicial action taken as a result of the investigation. On August 11, 2014, the Secretary of the Navy issued ALNAV 061/14 to implement the new Sexual Assault Disposition Report (SADR). For Navy commands, the alleged offender’s commander or commanding officer shall complete the SADR NAVPERS 1752/1. For USMC commands, the convening authority who disposes of the sexual assault allegation, shall ensure completion and submission of the USMC SADR Form. Disposition data provided to NCIS ultimately is reported in the DoD Annual Report on Sexual Assault in the Military, as well as other high profile reports. Disposition data is a significant element within the SAPR program.

Investigative Process

Continued:

Final Disposition:

NCIS

30

NCIS maintains a worldwide capability to respond to allegations of sexual assault. In every region, NCIS has Family and Sexual Violence investigators who are trained and capable of conducting sexual assault investigations. In large fleet concentration areas, NCIS established the Adult Sexual Assault Program (ASAP) teams who are solely dedicated to conducting sexual assault investigations. As part of the investigative process, NCIS Family and Sexual Violence investigators participate in the multidisciplinary committees supporting each installation and are available to support each command. Continuity is a cornerstone of the ASAP concept. In remote locations or on smaller installations, NCIS provides equally trained and capable investigators. In partnership with the U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps, NCIS conducts a Crime Prevention and Awareness Program. Each quarter, NCIS, in collaboration with the services, conducts briefings in an effort to educate Marines, Sailors, and Department of Defense (DoD) civilians on various crimes and ways to avoid becoming a victim. At least one quarter is dedicated to Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention and is intended to coincide with Sexual Assault Awareness Month. These briefings provide the opportunity for commands to interact directly with NCIS agents and investigators to gain knowledge on the topic before a sexual assault is reported. With NCIS support, the goal of the program is to prevent sexual assaults instead of just reacting to them.

NCIS Adult Sexual

Assault Program:

Prevention:

NCIS

31

CHAPLAINS

Actions to Support Victims:

Support Steps:

Chaplains provide support and care to victims in multiple ways.  Provide pastoral care, support, and counsel  Prevent further harm  Reduce fear and anxiety  Re-establish some sense of personal control and self-

determination If needed, contact your supervisory chaplain to verify SAPR procedures and response. Once safety has been established:  Continue pastoral care, support, and counsel  Confidentiality

 Advise victim on confidentiality (with chaplains, VAs, VLCs, etc.)

 Victims may desire total confidentiality, not wishing to disclose beyond the chaplain

 If victim wishes to file a report, explain Unrestricted and Restricted Reporting.

 When appropriate: discuss medical care and forensic exam options (SAFE Kits), collateral misconduct (fear of punishment should not hinder reporting), and Military Protective Orders (MPO)

 Ensure victim has a safe place to return  Ensure “warm handoff” of victim to SARC, SAPR VA, or

healthcare personnel (if victim releases the chaplain from confidentiality and desires victim support beyond the chaplain)

 Report referrals to command SARC for entry into DSAID

32

MEDICAL

What is a Sexual Assault Forensic Exam (SAFE)? SAFE is offered as an option to sexual assault victims.  The exam can take 4-6 hours to perform and is performed

by a SAFE provider.  A SAFE provider will perform a full physical exam, which

includes collecting evidence (DNA and toxicology) and photographing injuries.

 Evidence collected from the patient may then be used in court to prosecute the offender.

Where are SAFEs performed? SAFE capability is available within operational medical departments, military treatment facilities, civilian rape crisis centers, and emergency departments. Commanders must ensure that SAPR management options (Restricted and Unrestricted) are known and SAPR team members are available to respond at both military and civilian medical facilities for care of military members and their families affected by sexual assault 24 hours a day. Is SAFE evidence collection offered for both Restricted and Unrestricted Reporting options? Yes. The same level of medical and forensic care is offered for patients regardless of their reporting choice.  Restricted SAFE kits are not processed by the criminal

investigative laboratory, for evidence in court, unless a victim changes their reporting option to Unrestricted. Restricted SAFE kits are stored by NCIS Consolidated Evidence Facility up to 5 years.

 Unrestricted DoD SAFE kits are sent immediately to US Army Criminal Investigation (USACIL) Laboratory if deemed necessary by NCIS and legal for use as evidence in court. Unrestricted DoD toxicology kits are collected for sexual assaults in which drugs or alcohol are suspected. These kits are sent to the Armed Forces Medical Examiner by NCIS.

Ask yourself:

Then consider:

Ask yourself:

Then consider:

Ask yourself:

Then consider:

33

How do SAPR and SAFE teams connect? SAPR team members (SARC, VA, Command Liaison) respond, monitor, and/or coordinate on all known cases of sexual assault in both civilian and military settings.

SAFE providers will conduct the exam and refer patients for medical and behavioral health follow-up care. SAFEs performed within MTF and afloat in the Fleet are reported monthly to the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery. SAPR team members produce reports on progress of care in Unrestricted Reports to include voice SITREPs, message SITREPs, Sexual Assault Incident Response Oversight (SAIRO) Report, Commander Assessments within 30 days, and provide victim case updates from initial report through adjudication of the case.

Ask yourself: Then consider:

34

MEDICAL

“Navy Medicine provides compassionate, competent, medical care that is victim-centered, gender-sensitive and takes into account the reporting preferences of the individual. In support, Navy Medicine is committed to the success of the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program and to ensuring the availability of sexual assault forensic exams (SAFE) at shore and in afloat settings.”

–VADM Matthew L. Nathan, Surgeon General of the Navy Chief of the Navy’s Bureau of Medicine and Surgery

RESERVE COMPONENT

Critical Steps:

Upon assuming the role as a Unit Commander, there are critical steps to improve the ability to offer the best support for sexual assault victims and how to hold alleged offenders appropriately accountable. Meet with your SARC. The first step a Unit Commander should take is to personally meet with the SARC and VA if a major installation is in close proximity to your location. Ensure Unit VAs are assigned and trained. A Unit Commander should also develop a short list of resources to assist victims. If in an isolated location it is imperative to contact and establish a relationship with local civilian resources in addition to contacting the area’s assigned SARC. This will assist in providing immediate victim advocacy and resources to a reservist who reports a sexual assault regardless of a victim’s eligibility for services. For cases involving sexual assaults that are reported while a reservist is in a non-duty status, or on “civilian time,” the Department of Defense Safe Helpline (877-995-5247) is specifically designed to assist members in locating the closest resources anywhere in the continental United States.

35

“Honor. Courage. Commitment. These values have guided our Corps for more than two centuries and it is our responsibility as Marines to adopt and live out these values. Integrity, responsibility, accountability; do the right thing, in the right way, for the right reasons; devotion to the Corps and fellow Marines. Sexual assault in our ranks goes against everything we stand for and is in direct conflict with our core values – it won’t be tolerated. All Marines should be knowledgeable about our Sexual Assault Prevention and Response program – get educated, and above all else, get reacquainted with our values. I expect you to live them 24 hours a day, every day.” –LtGen Richard P. Mills, Commander, Marine Forces Reserve & Marine Forces North

Key Findings:  Sexual assault is less likely to

occur during a drill weekend than when a reservist is deployed, recalled to active duty, during annual training (AT), or other similar type of orders.

 Sexual assaults may occur

outside of military time, i.e., civilian time, but there is no requirement for a reservist to report such incidents.

 Isolated locations were

identified by reservists as high risk locations secondary to isolation, stress, and access to alcohol.

 Individuals deploying as an

Individual Augmentee (IA) perceived a greater risk than those reservists deploying as part of a unit.

 Increased risk is perceived

among reservists working alongside host country civilians and third country nationals.

 Our general insight and understanding of sexual assaults in Navy and Marine Corps Reserve Forces is more limited than that of the active duty population. However, data retained from anonymous surveys, site visits, and focus group meetings show that sexual assault among reserve personnel appears to be less common when compared to the active duty population.

 Younger age, in general, is

associated with an increased risk of sexual assault. The Reserve population tends to be older than the active force. The average age of Reserve component personnel who report sexual assault is 26 years as compared to 18-22 in the active duty population.

36

RESERVE COMPONENT

Reserve Specific Sexual Assault Considerations All military members are entitled to the advocacy services of a SARC and/or VA. Other services, e.g., medical, counseling, or legal, are dependent on the duty status of the reservist when an assault occurs. A member may report to reserve unit leadership an assault that occurred while on orders such as AT, ADT, ADSW or during a drill (inactive duty training (IDT) weekend and are afforded full SAPR services and support, including Restricted and Unrestricted Reporting. Members may also report to reserve unit leadership an assault that occurred on civilian time and are eligible to receive limited, immediate short-term SAPR support services from the SARC or SAPR VA including Restricted and Unrestricted options. VLCs are available on a case by case basis. These members should then be connected with local appropriate resources for further care and assistance.

Consideration #3 SA while on AD orders and delayed/not reported Individuals may delay reporting a sexual assault for numerous reasons. This is especially true for a reservist who is assaulted while away from home on temporary active duty. In this scenario a reservist may delay or avoid reporting a sexual assault to ensure staying focused on the mission, avoid jeopardizing return date, or waiting to report until re-engaged with home support network. It is important for unit leadership to understand the complexities that exist for reservists when re-engaging back into the civilian world, the potential needs of a victim and the processes involved to best support them.

If an individual reports a sexual assault after the return to reserve status a LOD determination must be made. A member must report a case within 180 days of return for it to be considered under the LOD determination. If in an authorized duty status the reservist is eligible to access medical treatment and counseling for injuries and illness incurred from the sexual assault under the LOD determination. However, there is some variation depending on whether or not the case is Restricted or Unrestricted (see Line of Duty Key Points on page 39).

Consideration #1 Sexual assault occurs on civilian time

Reservists are not required to report sexu- al assault that occurs while on civilian time, but one may opt to report an assault in order to receive advocacy and emotion- al support. These cases should be re- ferred to a SARC or SAPR VA who can provide victim advocacy and assist in determining what services may be availa- ble to best support a victim. When a SARC or SAPR VA is not available or located near the reserve unit, it is impera- tive for reserve unit leadership to have an understanding of available services in the local community that may be utilized.

Consideration #2 SA occurs while on orders and is reported

Reserve Component (RC) personnel who incur an injury, illness or disease while in a duty status are eligible for the Line of Duty (LOD), this includes those who report a SA while in a duty status. The LOD determination statement will specify the benefits for which the member is eligible. The reporting mechanism under which the report was made, either Restricted or Unrestricted), will have an impact on benefits eligibility (see Line of Duty Key Points on page 39).

37

RESERVE COMPONENT

Reserve Commander Core Responsibilities Legal: The core legal concepts are generally unchanged in regards to the rights of the victim and the accused. But there are unavoidable jurisdictional complexities that may have to be anticipated including but not limited to jurisdictional limitations outside drill periods, oversight of civilian berthing during IDT Drill weekends and response to actions of offender and option for continued military service.

In some cases local law enforcement may assume jurisdiction over the case. Laws will vary by state and may include things such as who must conduct SAFE kit exams and retain evidence and exercise jurisdiction. In these cases, it is essential to have your SJA and NCIS engaged as a liaison with the local law enforcement to assist your victim with maintaining awareness as well as offering legal counsel.

In some cases it may be necessary to offer the reserve victim of a military related sexual assault (i.e.: military on military sexual assault which occurred between members drilling in the same unit) an alternative drill assignment.

As per NAVADMIN 132/12, MARDMIN 227/12, and MCO 1752.5B the command should allow for separate training on different drill weekend or times from the alleged offender or with a different unit in the home drilling location to avoid undue stress on the member or members family.

Medical & Advocacy: Address the needs of the reservist victim of sexual assault by utilizing available medical and mental health services. The immediate core medical concepts are generally applicable given the circumstances for reservists but eligibility for services is dependent upon LOD determination as to whether the sexual assault incident occurred in an active duty or inactive duty training status.

Unique caveats apply to Reserve populations in regards to benefits that include, but are not limited to, entitlement benefits available depending upon the reporting type of Restricted versus Unrestricted, and duty status.

Provide advocacy to Reserve victims of sexual assault. Understand that Reserve members are entitled to advocacy services but that unintended complexities may exist such as limited access to medical facilities due to geographical location, sparse local community resources, and limited access to local SARC expertise.

38

RESERVE COMPONENT

Line Of Duty (LOD) Key Points  Available to Reserve personnel to

determine, whether an injury, illness, or disease was incurred or aggravated while in an authorized duty status. This includes travel to and from the authorized duty location.

 Reserve personnel are able to access

medical treatment and counseling for injuries and illness incurred from a sexual assault while in an authorized duty status. Members must report a case within 180 days to be considered for LOD benefits.

 LOD Determination should be

made without the victim being identified to law enforcement or command, solely for the purpose of enabling the victim to access medical care and psychological counseling and without identifying injuries resulting from a sexual assault.

 Unit Reserve Commanders should

identify an appropriate individual within the unit or command to process LODs. Designated individuals shall possess the maturity and experience to assist in a sensitive situation and, if dealing with a Restricted Report, to safeguard confidential communications. These individuals are authorized to receive confidential communications for the purpose of determining LOD status.

 The appropriate SARC will brief the designated individuals (identified in the previous bullet point) on Restricted Reporting policies, exceptions to Restricted Reporting, and the limitations of disclosure of confidential communications. The SARC and these individuals may consult with their servicing legal office, in the same manner as other recipients of privileged information for assistance, exercising due care to protect confidential communications by disclosing only non-identifying information

 The SARC may provide

documentation for LOD determinations to substantiate the victim’s duty status and the filing of the Restricted Report to the designated official.

 If medical or mental healthcare

is required beyond initial treatment and follow-up, a licensed medical or mental healthcare provider must recommend an ongoing treatment plan and submit documentation monthly.

39

RESERVE COMPONENT

 The LOD process for Restricted Reporting does not extend to pay and allowances or travel and transportation incident to the healthcare entitlement. In addition the Incapacitation Benefit is not available to Restricted cases to cover financial losses incurred if a reservist is unable to resume normal military duties and/or civilian employment. However, at any time the Service member may request an Unrestricted LOD to be completed in order to receive the full range of entitlements.

 If an LOD review does not resolve in less than 90 days or the case is not progressing toward resolution then the case is submitted for a Medical Board. This can be completed at any MTF, DoD, or VA facility and the member must be present. The case may be sent for further evaluation by a Physical Evaluation Board for duty eligibility determination based on the results of the Medical Board. The LOD process is limited to one year, after this a military physician can request an extension or the case is transferred for Medical or Physical Evaluation Board.

 In the case of a member of a Reserve Component on active duty who is the victim of sexual assault committed while on active duty and who is expected to be released from active duty before the LOD determination is made, the member may request and receive orders to be retained on active duty until completion of the LOD determination.

 In the case of a member not on active duty who is the victim of sexual assault that occurred while the member was on active duty and when the LOD is not completed, the member may request and receive orders to return to active duty for such time as necessary for completion of the LOD determination.

 A request submitted by a Reservist to continue on active duty or to be ordered to active duty, respectively, must be decided within 30 days from the date of the request. If the request is denied, the member may appeal to the first General Officer or Flag Officer in the member’s chain of command and a decision on the appeal must be made within 15 days from the date of the appeal.

 Once the LOD determination is made, if requested by the member and approved, services available to active duty personnel (as outlined in the SECNAVINST 1752.4B) may be provided to the Reservist. If the Service Member is determined not in the line of duty and the appeal is denied, the SARC or SAPR VA should provide available resources in the local community.

40

RESERVE COMPONENT

Victim Resources  Reserve personnel may elect either the

Restricted or Unrestricted Reporting option and have access to the advocacy services of a SARC or SAPR VA. Advocacy services are available regardless of the duty status at the time of the incident or at the time they are seeking advocacy services.

 Regardless of reporting option, reserve personnel have access to medical treatment and counseling for injuries and illness incurred from a sexual assault occurring while performing active duty services or inactive duty training. However, other entitlements remain dependent on a LOD determination as to whether the incident occurred in an active duty or inactive duty training status.

 If a victim reports a sexual assault that occurred while in civilian status Reserve personnel have no requirement to report the incident to unit leadership. Should a member report, advocacy services are available through the unit victim advocate and assigned SARC. If feasible, Reservists may also report to either Navy Fleet and Family Services or Marine and Family Programs within Marine Corps Community Services to receive advocacy care.

 Eligibility for resources beyond advocacy is determined by member’s status at the time of the sexual assault. Resources may be limited for victims who are either not eligible based on when the assault occurred or when reservists are located in areas remote from DON installations.

 It is imperative that relationships be developed with local resources to provide support to the Reservist that is not eligible for care within the DoD. State and local programs serve victims of sexual assault by providing free confidential crisis counseling, advocacy, information, and referrals to other available services in the local area.

 Reservists who file an Unrestricted Report may request a temporary or permanent expedited transfer or reassignment. A transfer may include provisions to perform inactive duty training on different weekends or times than the alleged offender, or with a different unit in the home drilling location as to avoid undue burden on the Service member. Transfer of the alleged offender instead of the victim should also be considered if applicable.

 Provide opportunity for Reserve member who reports a military related sexual assault to consult with a VLC, and in cases that involve possible collateral misconduct, to consult with defense counsel. Victims shall also be referred to the Victim Witness Assistance Program (VWAP) (SECNAVINST 1752.4B Encl 5).

 Reserve personnel who report a sexual assault may be encouraged to seek a civilian protective order. Should a Reserve member opt to move secondary to a civilian protective order etc. they should follow normal process to request transfer to another Navy Operational Support Center (NOSC) or Major Subordinate Command (MSC).

41

RESERVE COMPONENT

Summary Commanders of Reserve Component Personnel

When receiving an Unrestricted Report of a sexual assault, immediately

refer the matter to NCIS or other appropriate MCIO regardless of the severity of the allegation, offense or potential punishment authorized by the UCMJ.

Contact your SARC and VA to make contact with victim.

If, a SARC or VA is unavailable contact Safe Helpline at 1-877-995-5247 to locate available resources.

Active Duty and Reserve personnel who are victims of sexual assault are

entitled to VLC services.

Conduct a LOD Investigation to determine level of care and legal direction for investigation and prosecution. If a Restricted Report the member is still eligible for LOD determination with limitations on benefits as outlined in section III, Line of Duty as well as SARC and SAPR VA services.

If the victim is a remotely located service member identify local medical resources available to the member.

If the accused is a civilian, discuss with the victim the options of reporting the assault to local law enforcement.

Contact your legal counsel for guidance on reporting as there are unavoidable jurisdictional complexities that may have to be anticipated including but not limited to jurisdictional limitations outside drill periods, oversight of civilian berthing during IDT Drill weekends and response to actions of an offender and option for continued military service.

If the accused perpetrator is active duty, review the need for and if necessary issue a Military Protective Order.

Take the time to review all requirements as outlined in SECNAVINST 1752.4B dtd 08 Aug 2013 and your Service specific directives.

42

RESERVE COMPONENT

Directives & Instructions

DoD Directive 6495.01—Sexual Assault Prevention & Response Program (1/23/2012)

DoD Instruction 6495.02—Sexual Assault Prevention & Response Program Procedures (3/28/2013)

SECNAVINST 1752.4B—Sexual Assault Prevention & Response (8/8/2013)

OPNAVINST 1752.1B—Sexual Assault Victim Intervention Program (12/29/2006)

MCO 1752.5B—Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program (3/1/2013)

Websites

For additional information, please visit the following websites:

www. donsapro.navy.mil (DON SAPRO)

www.sapr.navy.mil (Navy Policy and Training)

www.cnic.navy.mil/ffr/family_readiness/fleet_and_family_support

_program/sexual_assault_prevention_and_response/resources.html (Navy

Resources & Reporting)

www.manpower.usmc.mil/sapr (USMC SAPR)

www.jag.navy.mil (Navy JAG)

www.hqmc.marines.mil/sja/UnitHome.aspx (HQMC SJA)

www.jag.navy.mil/legal_services/VLC.htm (Navy VLC)

www.marines.mil/sja/Branches/VictimsLegalCounselOrganization(VLCO).aspx

(USMC VLC)

www.ncis.navy.mil (NCIS)

www.sapr.mil (DoD SAPRO)

www.myduty.mil (DoD SA Resources)

www.SafeHelpLine.org (Sexual Assault Support)

43

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

References 1Abel, GG, Becker, JV, Cunningham-Rather, J., Mittelmann, MS, & Rouleau, JL.

(1988). Multiple Paraphilic Diagnoses Among Sex Offenders. Bulletin of the American Acadmey of Psychiatry and the Law, 16, 153-168.

2Black, M.C., et al. (2011). The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey: 2010 Summary Report, Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

3Department of the Navy. (2013). Sexual Assault Survey. 4Lisak, D., Gardinier, L., Nicksa, S.C., Cote, & Ashley, M. (2010). False

Allegations of Sexual Assault: An Analysis of Ten Years of Reported Cases. Violence Against Women, 16, 1318.

5Lisak, D., & Miller, P.M., (2002). Repeat Rape and Multiple Offending Among Undetected Rapists. Violence and Victims, 17(1), 73-84.

6Sadler, Anne G., Booth, Brenda M., Cook, Brian L., & Doebbeling, Bradley N. (2003). Factors Associated With Women’s Risk of Rape in the Military Environment. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 43, 262-273.

7U.S. Department of Defense. (2013). Department of Defense Annual Report on Sexual Assault in the Military: Fiscal Year 2013.

8U.S. Department of Justice. (2005). National Crime Victimization Survey.

9U.S. Department of Justice. (2008-2012). National Crime Victimization Survey.

44

REFERENCES

Department of the Navy Sexual Assault Prevention & Response Office (DON SAPRO)

1000 Navy Pentagon RM4E615

Washington DC 20350-1000 www.donsapro.navy.mil

Encourage Marines to interfere. The first time I was raped there were other Marines in the room, next door, and duty in the barracks. No one stopped it or stood up for me even though I was screaming for the first few minutes. I had a horrible experience with NCIS, Chain of command, and my unit. I was sober and the rapist was not. Marines should be encouraged to drink responsibly. Chain of command should not punish or threaten someone’s career when they step forward. (USMC female)

 I have been told that since I was not hurt on a ship. For example, like having a broken leg. What happened was horrible but it isn’t the Navy’s problem. From being a victim myself that discourages me from getting any further treatment or help for fear that I will be separated out of the Navy because I admit to having psychological problems such as anxiety, depression, paranoia, and sleep deprivation from the assault. I am on a second Limited Duty not of my choice because of it and every day is a struggle to not cave into suicide or alcohol abuse, yet on the other hand I feel discarded by the Navy which I fought so hard to get into in the first place. (Navy female)

 I have been a victim, have had family members who have been victims and I know of others in the Marine Corps who have been victims. The psychological stigma is huge and the emotional turmoil is lifelong. (USMC male)

 I was a victim of sexual assault. I had my genitalia grabbed and the report was made. On four different occasions, my CO and XO re-victimized me saying it poses a negative light on me and it’s all perception that I was at the wrong place at the wrong time. (Navy male)

 … I made a report the first three months on board about another shipmate of higher ranking than me. Since then I still haven’t been able to let it go, people still look at me differently, and still bring up the incident. They call me liar and troublemaker. Just in the past week I have been slapped on the ass, got threatened that I would be spanked on the ass with a spatula if I didn’t do something. Also, a shipmate was trying to play drums on my boobs hitting my boobs with papers. I told them over and over again to stop and I don’t know if they took me seriously. If I had the chance to get off the ship I would. I hate it here. I feel like I’ve always been labeled that girl… (Navy female)

 I was raped, filed a Restricted Report, diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and placed on Limited Duty to receive mental health treatment; which prevented me from complying with my normal sea/shore rotation and returning to sea duty. … After I told my peers of my Limited Duty status, one of them responded “Well gee, what do you expect…you have a vagina.” And I sarcastically responded, “Well gee, that was professional and what I’d expect a Chief to say.” … While my co- workers did not know of my assault and I’m sure intended no malice in their comments, that moment devastated me. It was that type of environment that prevented me from reporting my assault for 2 years… (Navy female)

As an E3, I was sexually assaulted along with an E4 … Neither of us reported … for fear that we would be thrown out of the Navy for having sex with another male, even though it was forced. … I had pretty much blocked out the whole event until recently when we had the Sexual Assault stand down, and attended the training. Male on male assaults were mentioned, and that was when the whole event came back to me almost 20 years later. Had it happened to me now, I would have had no problem reporting it, but at the time it happened, there was no way I was going to report it. The Navy is going in the right direction, and I’m glad I’ve been in long enough to see this change. (Navy male)

NOT ON MY WATCH…

Step Up. Step In. Prevention is everyone’s responsibility!

Anonymous Comments from the DON SAPRO 2013 Sexual Assault Survey

Department of Defense (DoD) Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR)

Progress Report to the President (POTUS): United States Navy Program Overview

Executive Summary Sexual assault is a significant threat to the United States Navy. It adversely impacts readiness, morale, and retention. Navy takes this threat seriously and is fully committed to sexual assault prevention, supporting victims, and appropriate offender accountability with due process of law. In the last three years, Navy dedicated extensive resources to reducing sexual assault and improving response measures.

Navy’s primary goal is to eliminate sexual assault. Success is when each and every Sailor understands the definition of sexual assault, how it harms other Sailors and the Navy, how to prevent it from occurring, and how to respond if prevention fails. Success is when every Sailor behaves in a manner consistent with Navy Core Values of honor, courage, and commitment, and treats others with dignity and respect. Sexual assault prevention requires multiple, layered efforts at all levels working in concert. Navy sexual assault prevention incorporates cultural improvement through engaged leadership, innovation, education and awareness, intervention, accountability, and partnerships across Navy organizations. Policy alone will not stop sexual assault; it requires execution at the fleet level and involves all leaders. Navy leadership recognizes sexual assault prevention cannot be accomplished in isolation. Much like cities that reduced major crime by simultaneously focusing on and eliminating lesser crimes, Navy Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) efforts follow a similar strategy. Navy understands the criticality of creating a culture at all levels intolerant of unacceptable actions and behaviors in order to prevent more serious or criminal behaviors. Navy efforts are focused on the concept of a continuum of harm of destructive actions and behaviors to include a renewed emphasis on the prevention of hazing, sexual harassment, and alcohol abuse. The 21st Century Sailor Office was established to provide coordinated efforts in Sailor resiliency and readiness programs, and integrate efforts to counter destructive behaviors. THE CONTINUUM OF HARM AND 21ST CENTURY SAILOR OFFICE In Navy’s efforts to prevent sexual harassment and sexual assault, a key concept is the continuum of harm, shown in Figure 1. Towards the “left” end of this continuum are a range of destructive attitudes and behaviors, such as demeaning or discriminatory comments, stereotyping, and unequal treatment. More serious acts of sexual assault such as groping, forced sexual activity, and rape are to the “right” of the continuum. A command environment that allows inappropriate behaviors to exist increases the

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

2

likelihood for incidents of sexual harassment. Further, environments that permit sexual harassment behaviors to exist increase the likelihood for incidents of sexual assault. Leaders at all levels set the conditions for success by creating environments which exude and reward inclusive behavior, while at the same time crowding-out destructive actions by safely intervening well before they can manifest themselves in criminal acts.

Figure 1: The Continuum of Harm

The 21st Century Sailor Office, led by a Navy Admiral, is responsible for policy, resourcing, and oversight for a portfolio of programs, to include the goal of measurably reducing and eliminating sexual assault. The portfolio also includes operational stress control and suicide prevention; physical readiness and nutrition; sexual harassment prevention; equal opportunity; hazing prevention; and drug and alcohol abuse prevention. The 21st Century Sailor Office addresses the need for coordination and synergies among these critical Sailor-focused programs across the entire continuum of harm by strategically enabling each level of accountability within the Navy: institutional, command, and individual. NAVY SAPR STRATEGY Navy requires an inclusive approach based upon true equality, respect, and diversity, understood by all, and executed by leadership. Leaders at all levels create the cultural conditions for success. Every person in Navy, uniformed and civilian, in different degrees and with various responsibilities, is a leader. Navy’s sexual assault strategy focuses on setting the conditions and creating a culture in which sexual assault is not tolerated, ignored, or condoned. This strategy uses a multi-pronged approach that includes prevention at the institutional, command, and individual levels. Key prevention strategy components are leadership and Sailor engagement, stakeholder and community involvement, training and awareness,

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

3

appropriate offender accountability, and continuous assessment. Accountability at all levels is vital to this approach. As Navy focuses on prevention, response capabilities continue to be implemented and matured. Increasing reporting of this universally underreported crime is central to the response strategy. Reporting of sexual assaults is a bridge to victim support and appropriate offender accountability. Navy will continue to ensure Sailors understand their reporting options and how to report. The increase in Navy reporting, coupled with recent command climate survey results, is considered a positive Sailor reaction to efforts to increase trust and confidence in the sexual assault response system. Navy continues to assess the effectiveness of prevention and response methodologies through collected data, metrics analysis, surveys, focus groups, and other feedback mechanisms. As Navy increases its knowledge of circumstances surrounding these incidents, it improves its ability to target prevention efforts and respond properly. SAPR LINES OF EFFORT Navy’s SAPR efforts are aligned with the Department of Defense’s (DoD’s) five Lines of Effort (LOEs): Prevention, Investigation, Accountability, Victim Assistance and Advocacy, and Assessment. Prevention (LOE 1) involves a multifaceted approach to stop sexual assault. Engaged leadership is responsible for creating a command climate that does not tolerate unacceptable actions and behaviors. Sailors receive specialized SAPR training on how to recognize sexual assault, how to get help, how to report, and how to prevent it from occurring. Recent results from the 2014 RAND Military Workplace Study (RMWS) indicate that estimated prevalence of unwanted sexual contact in the Navy decreased since the 2012 survey. While this trend shows that initiatives from the recent years have begun to gain traction, Navy must continue to aggressively pursue prevention and response efforts. Leaders and Sailors offer peer-to-peer support, and Navy-wide partnerships work together towards prevention. A sexual assault report initiates the response process. The Investigation phase (LOE 2) includes gathering evidence and facts of the crime through Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) investigations within Navy’s jurisdiction. Modified training to improve investigative skills and an increase in the number of special agents resulted in more timely and thorough investigations. NCIS collaborates early in the investigative phase with trial counsel and/or staff judge advocates to ensure early and ongoing collaboration at the senior trial counsel and supervisory special agent level. Accountability (LOE 3) involves the commander’s response to ensure appropriate accountability for alleged offenders. Staff judge advocates and trial counsel support commanders throughout the military justice process. The Office of the Judge Advocate General (OJAG) also deploys extensive resources and legal personnel to support victims and defend alleged offenders throughout the adjudication process. Victim Assistance and Advocacy efforts (LOE 4) provide the needed care and support to help individuals overcome the physical

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

4

and emotional trauma of sexual assault. Finally, Assessment (LOE 5) is a self-check on Navy progress to evaluate the effectiveness of SAPR efforts. Navy collects data and metrics pertaining to reported sexual assaults including demographics, type of incident, and case specifics. This information helps leadership conduct regular assessments of SAPR programs and measure success, improvements, and areas for needed improvement. CONCLUSION Navy continues to focus its efforts on sexual assault prevention and response. Emphasis on response and victim advocacy must and will remain a priority. Preventing sexual assault from occurring is the primary goal of Navy efforts going forward. Navy is dedicated to ensuring sexual assault victims receive timely support and protection, including medical treatment, counseling, legal support, and victim advocacy. Increased reporting is a positive measure of the efforts to grow trust and confidence in Navy’s response system. Navy will continue to develop response capability by providing professional and compassionate victim support; thorough and independent investigations; and an adjudication process that respects the rights of victims and the constitutional and statutory due process rights of alleged offenders. Line of Effort 1: Prevention 1.1 INTRODUCTION Sexual assault is a crime that harms Sailors, damages unit cohesion and trust, and stands contrary to Navy Core Values. Navy endeavors to create an environment in which Sailors do not tolerate, condone, or ignore sexual assault or other inappropriate behaviors. Understanding the realities of sexual assault and the conditions under which it occurs is a continuous requirement to advance cultural change. Navy aims to reinforce cultural imperatives of mutual respect, trust, professional values, and team commitment. Leadership is charged with fostering an environment where sexual assault and the behaviors and actions that may lead to it are unacceptable. Navy’s prevention-based practices focus on institutional, command, and individual actions and accountability. The overarching imperative at all levels of the chain of command is to establish organizational behavior expectations that are clearly communicated and consistently maintained. Cultural elements include the policies, command statements, actions, values, and personal comportment of the entire team. Setting the right command culture is critical to addressing and preventing all destructive behaviors. Within the continuum of harm framework, Navy seeks to prevent all degrees of harmful behavior. This prevention starts with creating command climates and individual perceptions that Navy is intolerant of unprofessional and criminal behavior. Navy’s prevention strategy is designed to foster a culture and environment in

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

5

accordance with Navy Core Values. Navy’s coordinated efforts include: deliberate and engaged leadership, innovation, education and awareness training, presence and intervention, and partnerships across Navy organization. 1.2 DELIBERATE AND ENGAGED LEADERSHIP Navy leadership and commanders play a critical role in preventing sexual assault. Leaders drive the command climate and culture, and ensure a safe and productive working environment. Leaders set an expectation of dignity, mutual respect, and professionalism among shipmates. The actions and attitude of leaders set the example and define Navy’s organizational culture. Flag Officer Engagement Navy’s SAPR efforts directly involve Flag Officers. Since 2010, all Unrestricted Reports of sexual assault are reported to the first Flag Officer in the chain of command. Additionally, since 2012, unit Commanding Officers (COs) deliver personal reports to their respective Flag Officers within 30 days of the initial notification of a report of sexual assault, as operational circumstances allow. These reports provide information about care and support provided to the victim, initiatives the command will take (or has taken) to prevent future occurrences, and the impact to the command’s ability to carry out its mission. The first Flag Officer reports alert senior leadership to any common factors and trends as well as provide insight into any gaps or seams in Navy’s SAPR policy or program initiatives. In July 2013, the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) directed Fleet Commanders to designate a Flag Officer, reporting directly to the Fleet Commander, as the SAPR program leader for each Navy installation/fleet concentration area and associated local commands. This designated Flag Officer established regular conversations with appropriate installation/local command representatives, local community, and civic leaders to review SAPR program efforts. Flag Officers regularly inform Fleet Commanders of prevention and response trends and opportunities for improvement within their area of responsibility. The Flag Officer also ensures that community outreach and engagement are part of each area’s prevention and response measures. COs and all Flag Officers work with stakeholders to discuss command climate and SAPR readiness issues. The Fleet Commanders participate in quarterly SAPR-dedicated video teleconferences with the CNO to discuss trends and recommend future initiatives. Several key initiatives were directed and fast-tracked as a result of the CNO SAPR meetings, including enhanced investigative capability using Navy uniformed investigators; bystander intervention skills training for all Sailors; and simplification of victim support duties within each unit.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

6

Commander Engagement Navy continues to evaluate the tools provided to commanders to ensure they can execute their charge of command. In particular, Navy focuses on improving the development of leadership and character in leaders selected for command. Today, all Navy leaders complete tailored SAPR training. This training, provided by professional mobile training teams, is designed to help leaders identify environmental factors that surround or contribute to sexual harassment or sexual assault, and understand the response requirements when a sexual assault occurs. Because of the inherent responsibility of commanders, the screening processes to select them are rigorous. Commanders must meet strict professional and performance qualification standards as well. Local Leadership Involvement Keeping local leaders informed of the status of the SAPR program within their area of responsibility is critical to their ability to stay engaged and drive results. Beginning in July 2013, Navy created 25 dedicated SAPR Officer billets to directly support the commanders of major staffs, type commands, and Navy regions. SAPR Officers work closely with local Sexual Assault Response Coordinators (SARCs), SAPR program managers assigned to Fleet Commander staffs, and local SAPR stakeholders such as NCIS special agents, Region Legal Services Office staff judge advocates and trial counsel, chaplains, and healthcare providers. SAPR Officers provide program continuity and ensure understanding and proper execution of policy, training, and oversight activities. Another initiative that supports continued command awareness and engagement is the establishment of a permanent Navy Reserve Forces SAPR program manager, who reports directly to the Commander, Navy Reserve Forces Command. This SAPR program manager greatly improves the ability of Navy Reserve Forces Command to provide oversight, manage the SAPR program more effectively, and best support the unique requirements of Navy Reserve Sailors. Training to Support Engaged Leadership Navy developed and executed specialized training over the last several years to enhance the ability of all levels of leadership to comprehend the scope of the sexual assault problem, and the causes and factors which will drive its prevention. Developed in Fiscal Year (FY) 2011, SAPR-Leadership (SAPR-L) training was designed for all leaders in the grades of E-7 and above. Command triads (CO, Executive Officer (XO), and Command Master Chief) delivered the SAPR-L training to their units. The command triads received instruction on how to effectively facilitate SAPR-L training from teams of master trainers, which included staff judge advocates, to ensure all leaders were trained in SAPR legal policies, directives, and updates to the Uniform

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

7

Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). SAPR-L focused on leadership’s role in preventing sexual assaults including encouraging bystander intervention, creating the appropriate command climate, caring for victims, and holding alleged offenders appropriately accountable. Video vignettes and facilitated discussion points provided an open forum for units to have frank discussions about command culture. Navy executed the program aggressively, and 95% of all Navy E-7 and above personnel completed the training in FY12. SAPR-L effectively provided needed context and pragmatic problem awareness for leaders to prevent and respond to incidents of sexual assault. SAPR modules delivered for pre-command training courses and Command Master Chief/Chief of the Boat courses were updated in FY13 to incorporate standardized competencies and learning objectives established by DoD and the Services. Navy utilized portions of the SAPR-L training video in the updated module to ensure continuity of message and relevance for the operational fleet. Department of the Navy (DON) Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office’s (SAPRO) Commander’s Guide is also provided to all current and prospective command triads, to help them manage and execute their command SAPR programs. Extended Leadership Involvement Fleet Commanders stay synchronized with Sailors on the importance of sexual assault prevention in a variety of ways. The Pacific Fleet holds a series of engagements each year throughout its geographic area of responsibility, which feature a number of Sailor and family-related topics and typically include tailored sessions on sexual assault prevention. Additionally, all Pacific Fleet commands completed a mandatory All Hands two-hour “Stamp Out Sexual Assault” stand-down in FY13. The stand-down was designed to solicit non-attributable input on Sailors’ expectations and issues regarding sexual assault, Navy policy, personal behavior, and best practices. U.S. Fleet Forces has similar workshops provided in each major fleet concentration area, including units stationed or deployed overseas. These workshops, conducted by subject matter experts, provide the opportunity for Forces commanders to have discussions with leaders and Sailors regarding intent and expectations of sexual assault prevention, program updates, and policy changes. Cultural change is visible at all levels of command. Targeted top-down approaches in 2012 led to Navy-wide training in 2013, which are now leading to innovation across the fleet. Commander, Naval Surface Forces Atlantic started a Health of the Force initiative that focuses on the interactive nature of all destructive behaviors and their impact to combat readiness. The program tailors prevention efforts to the ship rotation plan, enabling afloat Surface Command Leadership teams to tackle Sailor readiness on the deckplate. The unique aspect of this program is that it enables each command to customize their own program to their unique demographics and deployment cycle.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

8

Commander, Submarine Forces Atlantic is aggressively pursuing the identification of micro-climates within a command that may exhibit the continuum of harm that could lead to sexual assaults and the other destructive behaviors. While many of the commands have a positive command climate, micro-climates in work centers and divisions may run counter to good order and discipline and Navy Core Values. Commander, Strike Group Eight enabled positive dialogue among all battle group commands to exchange best practices for prevention efforts as well as experience in response to sexual assaults. As a result of this effort, minor modifications to the administration and reporting of expedited transfers are being implemented for both the Atlantic and Pacific Fleets to ensure that victim privacy is protected, without losing commander accountability for oversight of legal cases. Several commands developed a pre-planned process for duty officers to respond to reports of sexual assault. The command took standing instructions and converted them to easy-to-use checklists tailored to the variety of watches that may receive reports of sexual assault, reports of bystander intervention, or reports requiring action to prevent a sexual assault. These checklists are being promulgated Navy-wide. Navy Medical Center Portsmouth’s Chief Petty Officer Mess developed a program called “Real Talk, No Rank,” which is being adopted by the afloat force. This program, designed to allow frank and honest discussions in both mixed-gender and gender- specific environments, has led to improved Sailor confidence in the Chief Petty Officer Mess. A forward-deployed unit has developed a risk-reduction analytic tool which will allow commands to better forecast high-risk, inappropriate behaviors based on the ship’s schedule. The tool helps commands analyze their unique schedules and demographics to discern high-risk situations, allowing them to focus their prevention efforts. Another best practice for enhancing collaboration between local leadership came from the Naval Education Training Command, where COs and SAPR program managers participate in monthly strategic SAPR meetings with other area leadership. This synergy allows COs to work with external partners to develop sustained plans based on expert advice in the fields of victim advocacy and law enforcement. These meetings foster open communication between base SARCs, base COs, tenant commands, and local law enforcement to help prevent sexual assault. In 2013, the Pacific Fleet Chaplain and the Religious Programs Specialist Master Chief conducted roundtable discussions with the fleet to dialogue with Sailors in a comfortable environment. The roundtable discussions included 400 E-1 to E-6 Sailors in 15 different forums, fostering grassroots level awareness of sexual assault policies among Sailors from different commands. The roundtables helped identify better ways for leadership to communicate, address challenges pertaining to the tone of the force, and uncover the deckplate perspective on sexual assault problems and solutions. On a routine basis, chaplains provide general insights to commanders regarding the command climate,

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

9

without revealing what Service members share in confidence. Chaplains contribute to improving command climate by providing care and support for all Service members and families, regardless of individual faith beliefs. Chaplains also assist in pointing individuals to the appropriate SAPR resources. In 2014, the U.S. Fleet Forces chaplains joined the Fleet Workshop team to provide awareness and education on chaplain support and resources. In addition, the Fleet Chaplain conducted separate training and discussion sessions in each fleet concentration area for all local chaplains intended to increase their effectiveness in Sailor and family support. Leadership Outreach to Community Because many reported incidents of sexual assault occur off-base, command leaders increased engagement with local communities. Navy made significant progress in increasing its presence off-base. Commands reached out to local hotel proprietors, restaurant and bar owners, and liquor store managers to educate them on sexual assault prevention efforts and make them aware of Navy resources. Command outreach also included coordination and consultation with local law enforcement, hospitals, and taxi cab companies. Representatives from boards of commerce, as well as local establishments, welcomed Navy’s intervention efforts progress is made in curbing incidents of sexual assault and other unacceptable behaviors in the local community. 1.3 NAVY INNOVATIONS By dedicating resources and manpower, Navy implemented new and innovative methodologies. Some of these initiatives grew from dedicated pilot programs to become Navy-wide efforts, while others evolved and were adopted over time. Innovation and creativity drive the development and execution of new programs. Each initiative is directly or indirectly focused on preventing sexual assaults. Great Lakes Pilot Prevention Program Naval Station Great Lakes is home to Navy’s Recruit Training Command, where all enlistees attend basic training. Training Support Command Great Lakes is responsible for administration of Sailors for rate-specific technical training. Navy begins teaching new Sailors from day one about principles of respect and the Navy Core Values of honor, courage, and commitment. These principles are emphasized and enhanced at Training Support Command while Sailors learn their technical skills. Naval Station Great Lakes was identified as an ideal location to launch a sexual assault pilot prevention program. Starting in 2010, DON SAPRO partnered with Navy leadership and local commanders at an on-site summit to implement and assess multiple simultaneous initiatives at Great Lakes. Experts gathered in February 2011 to set the stage for important new SAPR training programs, aggressive anti-alcohol efforts,

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

10

visible leadership engagement in both Sailor discipline and mentoring, and active coordination across organizational lines by regional senior leaders. From the summit meeting, the program developed to become the Great Lakes Pilot Prevention Program in 2012. Based on feedback from Sailors, surveys, and leadership review, Navy realized the value and efficacy of these efforts. Navy adopted and expanded the initiatives from the pilot program to regions in San Diego and Japan initially, and then to all fleet locations in 2013. Alcohol Deglamorization Alcohol plays a role in many Navy sexual assaults. In 2010, Submarine Force Pacific Fleet began fielding alcohol detection devices to Sailors, which grew to become a Navy- wide practice by 2013. The alcohol detection devices are a training and awareness tool to educate Sailors on the effects of alcohol and excessive drinking. Also in 2013, Navy enhanced its alcohol deglamorization efforts with a “Keep What You’ve Earned” campaign to emphasize the dramatic and long-lasting effects of irresponsible alcohol use. Navy updated the policy on the availability of alcohol on base and directed the Navy Exchange Command to limit alcohol sales. Navy removed all distilled spirits from mini-marts and restricted distilled spirit sales to main exchanges or dedicated package stores. Stores limited alcohol displays to no more than 10% of total retail floor space, moved displays to the rear of facilities, and limited alcohol sales to between 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. Navy Exchanges also sell single-use breathalyzers to better educate Sailors on responsible alcohol use. Navy has seen downward trends in incidents of driving under the influence of alcohol and other alcohol-related incidents. Coalition of Sailors Against Destructive Decisions The Coalition of Sailors Against Destructive Decisions (CSADD) is a peer-to-peer, grassroots mentorship program geared toward Sailors 18 to 25 years old to combat destructive behavior and reinforce the culture that “Shipmates help Shipmates.” CSADD has grown in size and strength from a small monthly group of 18 Sailors to a multi-Service organization of 373 chapters. Navy provides technical assistance to local CSADD chapters in support of peer mentoring, positive messaging, and interpersonal communications. Navy continues increased collaboration between the SAPR program and CSADD chapters, often involving SARCs, to foster cross-program collaboration at the installation level. CSADD members connect to their peers in a powerful way using visual media and short vignette films to convey training points. The groups meet regularly to discuss responsible use of alcohol, core values, healthy lifestyle choices, and other Sailor issues and responsibilities. CSADD chapters sponsor recreational events to emphasize that Sailors can enjoy safe and healthy activities without relying on alcohol. CSADD efforts also teach bystander intervention, as it pertains to sexual assault and other decision making.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

11

1.4 EDUCATION AND AWARENESS TRAINING Increased education and awareness ensure that Sailors understand what constitutes sexual assault, the avenues for reporting, available support services, and the importance of eliminating sexual assault from the ranks. Training for Navy members increases in scope and levels of accountability commensurate with their rank, leadership responsibility, and experience. All Navy Service members are required to receive annual SAPR training, which is delivered with face-to-face training. Topics include ways to prevent sexual assault crimes, the continuum of harm from harassment to assault, actions a victim can take if assaulted, and the difference between Restricted and Unrestricted Reporting options. SAPR-Fleet SAPR-Fleet (SAPR-F) is training geared specifically toward E-6 and below Sailors. SAPR-F focuses on a command’s roles, bystander intervention, peer pressure, the impact of sexual assault on victims and the command, and processes for holding alleged offenders appropriately accountable. SAPR-F was originally developed as a one-time Navy-wide training. Every E-6 and below Sailor completed SAPR-F prior to April 2013. Since then, components of SAPR-F were included in various other training forums. Cultural Orientation at Accession Points Navy has various accession points through which approximately 35,000 individuals join the Service as Sailors each year. Navy capitalizes on the opportunity to mentor new Sailors, instill Navy Core Values, and establish the level of expectation for command culture and climate. All accession points provide incoming Sailors initial sexual assault training. Each of the Navy accession venues customized SAPR training embedded in the indoctrination curriculum. These accession points are the U.S. Naval Academy (USNA), Reserve Officer Training Command (ROTC), Officer Training Command, and Delayed Entry Program. In August 2013, Navy Recruiting Command implemented SAPR Delayed Entry Program, a mandatory pre-accession training to civilians pending enrollment into a Navy accession program. The SAPR Delayed Entry Program defines Navy policy standards related to sexual harassment, sexual assault, professional expectations, and potential disciplinary actions for future Sailors. Recruit Training Command at Great Lakes The Recruit Training Command trains individuals to embrace Navy Core Values and the concept of what a shipmate is and does. Recruit Training Command staff members transform civilians into basic Sailors over a 59-day period. Experts provide training in multiple formats. In the first week, new recruits receive a 90-minute SAPR presentation,

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

12

participate in open discussion, and watch a video. Recruit Training Command instructors also deliver SAPR-F training and present information on the UCMJ. The Naval Health Clinic Great Lakes provides a one-hour recruit wellness brief called Reinforcing Education to Achieve Health on several topics including sexual health awareness and good decision making in sexual matters. Prior to graduation and off- base weekend privileges weekend, the Recruit Training Command staff give recruits a liberty brief, emphasizing the importance of shipmates looking after each other, and avoiding situations that place them at risk. United States Naval Academy USNA SAPRO provides annual training and education opportunities for all midshipmen, faculty, staff, active duty, and civilian personnel. Training and education sessions range from large group informational sessions to small, interactive discussions. The primary training for midshipmen is the Sexual Harassment and Assault Prevention Education program, a tiered approach aligned with the four-year USNA curriculum. The curriculum includes embedded concepts of the continuum of harm, as well as building leadership ethics and culture. The program deconstructs cultural myths about accepted behaviors and provides practical intervention tools for leaders. In addition to the formal Sexual Harassment and Assault Prevention Education course, midshipmen receive briefings by SAPRO staff members at the fall and spring brigade reforming and prior to summer training. The briefings increase awareness, identify specific risks, and provide bystander intervention training. Since 2012, midshipmen also receive SAPR-L and SAPR-F training. New Officer Training The Officer Training Command curriculum requires training on SAPR, inappropriate touching, and fraternization. Students receive a brief from the chaplain and initial SAPR training. Over the nine-week program, additional SAPR training covers the definition of sexual assault, reporting options, and the role of the SARC and SAPR Victim Advocates (VAs). The course supervisor also briefs students on bystander innovation during liberty briefs. All students receive brochures and wallet-sized cards during initial SAPR training. Handouts contain explanations of the reporting options as well as the DoD Safe Helpline contact information. The command also provides a designated room and telephone for Sailors to make private Safe Helpline calls. Navy ROTC units provide initial SAPR training to midshipmen during freshman orientation. Sophomore, junior, and senior ROTC midshipmen complete SAPR-F/L training within the first 90 days of the fall semester. Posters in the unit spaces prominently display SAPR and Safe Helpline information.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

13

SAPR Stand-down In 2013, the Secretary of Defense directed a DoD-wide SAPR stand-down. Navy command triads held a two-hour stand-down and facilitated a small-group, open discussion. The conversation focused on generating the right command environment, the role of leadership, sexism and sexual harassment, and fair and equal treatment. The stand-down led to many dynamic conversations that helped connect Sailors and leadership, enhancing command cohesiveness. Sailor response was overwhelmingly positive, many commenting positively on providing a venue in which Sailors could openly communicate with their command leadership. Additional Training and Awareness Navy continually seeks any and all opportunities to enhance and supplement training and awareness, carefully balancing the correct training dosage to ensure effectiveness. Sexual Assault Awareness Month (SAAM) campaigns enable Navy to target demographics within the force and assure consistent messaging of creating a respectful and professional environment. SARCs collaborate with command SAPR personnel to execute more than 575 prevention-based activities annually. In FY13, a wide range of events and programming provided prevention outreach and training to over 113,000 personnel throughout Navy installations. Every April, SAAM commits to raise awareness and promote the prevention of sexual violence with special events and public education. SAAM observance adds to ongoing efforts to reinforce Navy’s commitment to strengthening a professional climate. SAAM plays a role in command climate improvement, teaching the cultural imperatives of mutual respect and trust, team commitment, and professional values. SAAM activities support an environment that prohibits unequal treatment, sexual harassment, and sexual assault. Under CNO’s direction during SAAM 2012, all Navy commands held an unprecedented two-hour SAPR stand-down with face-to-face discussions for all unit members. To facilitate the unit stand-downs, commands were provided training modules and reference material to include facilitation guides and recorded interviews of Navy leaders discussing sexual violence in the Navy. Navy encourages command-level innovation to train and educate Sailors. Initiatives include personal videos, blog posts, web forums, and SAPR-related magazine articles. During SAAM 2012, U.S. Pacific Fleet hosted a SAAM Breakfast to receive direct input on the effectiveness of training from Sailors, and to solicit perceptions on sexual assault issues. Also in support of SAAM 2012, Pacific Fleet Sailors at Joint Base Pearl Harbor- Hickam raised awareness by displaying pairs of shoes to represent the Navy sexual assault victims in the previous year.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

14

Next Training Steps Navy has two new training projects in development. The first is Bystander Intervention to the Fleet training, a peer-delivered skills training to enable Sailors to identify situations that require intervention, and have the skills necessary to actively and safely intervene. The second training, Living Our Core Values: Chart the Course, will combine video vignettes and small group-facilitated discussions to address continuum of harm behaviors including sexism, sexual harassment, and sexual assault. 1.5 INTERVENTION AND PRESENCE In addition to institutional and leadership levels of engagement in prevention efforts, individual Sailors must act to reduce sexual assault incidents. Among other personally driven motives, Sailors learn to intervene and support one another with bystander intervention. Bystander Intervention Bystander intervention is a major tenet of Navy prevention strategy. Bystander intervention positively impacts command climate so that Sailors feel safe among each other, and empowers them to intervene on another Sailor’s behalf, if necessary. Navy emphatically encourages bystander intervention in SAPR-related trainings at all levels. The Great Lakes SAPR program supported a lead initiative by providing a bystander intervention program for all students assigned to advanced skill training sites (A Schools). In FY13, the SAPR program and Fleet and Family Support Center counselors supported 598 classes with over 14,000 Sailors attending. Sailors receive different forms of bystander intervention training to help them recognize situations which require action and understand how to safely intervene. One training scenario uses Sailors and actors to role play real life situations where intervention is necessary. The team training event creates unit cohesion which carries over to Sailors working together to protect and help each other. Additionally, a U.S. Pacific Fleet social media campaign in 2014 developed the hashtag #StepUpStepIn, to promote bystander intervention related to sexual assault. The #StepUpStepIn hashtag appeared on social media more than 100 times since March 2014, resulting in more than 1,000 likes, shares, and retweets. The Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI) Organizational Climate Survey (DEOCS) is a confidential, command-requested development survey focused on issues of equal opportunity and organizational effectiveness. Navy mandates that commands conduct the DEOCS within 90 days of a change of command, and annually thereafter. Navy uses DEOCS results to indicate the effectiveness of bystander intervention training. Figure 2 shows monthly trends from 2014 that Sailors do intervene. A difference in responses between male and female intervention highlights the need for continued focus on training and establishing a standardized perspective to determine high-risk situations. High-risk situations are defined as situations that were,

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

15

or could have led to, a sexual assault.

Figure 2: Bystander Intervention by Gender (2014)

Results also reveal an intervening action gap between ranks. Figure 3 shows that junior Sailors are more likely to observe a high-risk situation, yet are slightly less likely to act, compared to other ranks shown in the graph below. Bystander Intervention to the Fleet training is designed to empower junior Sailors to feel more confident in intervening.

Figure 3: Bystander Intervention by Rank (2014)

Tactical Improvements Navy implemented several tactical prevention initiatives. Command surveys of facilities identified areas that required better lighting, visibility, and other safety improvements to reduce the vulnerability of Sailors. In October 2013, all Navy Fleet Commanders instituted roving barracks patrols, led by senior enlisted personnel or experienced junior officers, to increase the visible presence of leadership to deter behavior that may lead to sexual assault or other misconduct. Personnel assigned as barracks resident advisors are screened to ensure they are mature, effective leaders, and receive resident advisor training. All Sailors residing in barracks attend indoctrination training, which includes a sexual assault prevention module, within 30 days of occupancy.

4% 5% 3%

4% 3% 3% 3% 3%

4%

10% 10%

7% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8%

7%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept.

Pe rc

en ta

ge W

ho O

bs er

ve d

a Si

tu at

io n

Navy: Respondents Who Observed a High-Risk Situation by Gender

Male Female

89% 80%

86% 84% 85% 87% 86% 85% 84%

89% 88% 90% 88% 89% 97%

90% 88% 92%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept.

Pe rc

en ta

ge W

ho T

oo k

Ac tio

n

Navy: Action Taken Among Respondents Who Observed a Situation by Gender

Male Female

88% *82%

*87% *83% *85% *90%

*87% *85% 86%

100%

*90% 89% *94% 94% 94% *93% *95% 92%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept.

Pe rc

en ta

ge W

ho To

ok A

ct io

n

Navy: Action Taken Among Respondents Who Observed a Situation by Gender

Jr Enlisted/NCO All other Ranks

6% 6% *5%

*6% *5% *6%

*5% 5% 5%

2% 3%

*2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept.

Pe rc

en ta

ge W

ho O

bs er

ve d a

S itu

at io

n

Navy: Respondents Who Observed a High-Risk Situation by Rank

Jr Enlisted/NCO All other Ranks

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

16

1.6 PARTNERSHIPS ACROSS NAVY Navy leadership created avenues to ensure a cohesive workflow across organizations. The CNO SAPR cross-functional team is a multidisciplinary forum creating synergy and focused effort among Navy stakeholders. Major stakeholders represent disciplines such as policy and resourcing, investigations, legal, medical support, victim advocacy, and fleet organizations. Stakeholders collaborate on prevention initiatives, response and support, training, and policy and legislation. A U.S. Fleet Forces Task Force combined leadership from Navy fleet and shore infrastructures to undertake initiatives across the five SAPR LOEs. This ensures synergy across Navy, shares knowledge, and coordinates across the Navy enterprise for a comprehensive solution. Most U.S. Pacific Fleet regions have a periodic SAPR council meeting led by the region commander with major Fleet and Force level Flag Officers in the same geographic area. These meetings assist in aligning program goals, sharing best practices, and identifying leading indicators that may require leadership awareness and action. Personal Readiness Summits, co-sponsored by Office of the Chief of Naval Operations and U.S. Pacific Fleet, cover SAPR briefings to leadership, program managers and deckplate supervisors. In FY11, 4,900 Sailors were trained, and the summit grew over the years to reach more than 24 naval installations and nearly 15,000 Sailors of all ranks in FY13. 1.7 POSITIVE TRENDS Navy’s prevention efforts center around creating a command climate that sets the conditions in which sexual assault, and other continuum of harm behavior is not tolerated. Navy uses sexual assault reporting numbers and command climate assessments as two measurement tools to assess progress in prevention efforts. The DEOCS specifically asks Sailors to rate their perceptions of leadership support for SAPR. Sailor perceptions averaged between ‘agree’ and ‘strongly agree’ since this question was added to the DEOCS, and these positive responses continued. Assessing Command Climate through Reports Sexual assault is an underreported crime. Increasing the number of sexual assault reports is an indicator of command climate improvement. When a Sailor trusts the command to respond appropriately, he or she is more likely to make a report. Therefore, Navy aims to increase confidence in the confidentiality and quality of program resources to help Sailors feel empowered to report. Figure 4 shows the positive trend of increased sexual assault reports, in part due to positive command climates where victims feel more comfortable in reporting. FY14 Reports are trending at 10% over FY13.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

17

Figure 4: Navy Reports of Sexual Assault

Perceptions of Command Climate Metrics from the DEOCS indicate Sailors view their command’s climate positively. Results show commands promote a climate based on respect and trust, and actively discourage sexist comments and behaviors. As seen from the 2014 monthly trends in Figure 5, a slight gap exists with females and junior enlisted personnel having a slightly lower perception of command climate at their commands, but these groups still trend positively. Navy will continue to improve the perception of command climate and culture with engaged leadership and a respectful working environment.

Figure 5: Command Climate Index (2014)

Surveyed Estimated Prevalence of Sexual Assault The 2014 estimated prevalence results using the comparable 2012 WGRA survey methodology indicate that 5.1% of women experienced unwanted sexual contact, a decrease from the 7.2% of women in 2012, and 1.1% of men experienced unwanted sexual contact, compared to the 2.7% men in 2012. These results are a step in the right direction, and indicate that Navy’s SAPR efforts are working. Navy will continue with prevention efforts, setting the conditions for a command climate that does not

408 500

604 620 578

755

1,158 1,274

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

N um

be r o

f R ep

or ts

Total

3.4 3.3

3.4 3.3

3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.2

3.1 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug Sept.

M ea

n C

om m

an d

C lim

at e

In de

x

Navy by Gender

Male Female

3.2 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.2

3.7 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug Sept.

M ea

n C

om m

an d

C lim

at e

In de

x

Navy by Rank

Jr. Enlisted/Non-Commissioned Officer All Other Ranks

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

18

condone, tolerate, or ignore sexual assault. 1.8 CONCLUSION Navy maintains high expectations from every member of the Total Force, and is dedicated and determined to foster an environment of complete respect and trust. Preventing sexual assault is a Navy problem that requires a Navy solution. Every member of the Navy team must be actively engaged to prevent sexual assaults from occurring. Strong leaders at the forefront demonstrate Navy’s prevention efforts. Sailors receive specialized training to increase SAPR education and awareness, and support their peers to ensure they stay safe. Innovation and strategic thinking drive the creation and implementation of new programs. Setting and adhering to expectations of professional behavior and an environment of mutual respect is critical to Navy’s success, and will be accomplished through efforts at the institutional, command, and individual levels. All Sailors deserve, and must expect, a safe and secure work and living environment, and a culture intolerant of sexual harassment and sexual assault. Response to sexual assaults is, in itself, a prevention tool. Navy is committed to professional and independent investigative capability, a fair and just adjudication process, and focused and compassionate support and advocacy for victims. Line of Effort 2: Investigation 2.1 INTRODUCTION If prevention measures fail and a sexual assault incident involving a Sailor occurs, Navy responds with thorough investigations, actions to support the victims, and a fair and transparent process to hold offenders appropriately accountable. The DoD Inspector General instruction requires that Military Criminal Investigative Organizations investigate all reports of sexual assault, to include contact offenses. Therefore, all Unrestricted Reports of sexual assault within Navy are referred to NCIS (or another Service Military Criminal Investigative Organization in certain locations), regardless of severity, with the goal of yielding timely and thorough investigations. Commands are specifically directed not to conduct internal investigations for reports of sexual assault and must immediately notify NCIS upon receipt of a report. 2.2 POPULATIONS AFFECTED NCIS is the key organization responsible for investigating Unrestricted Reports of sexual assault within Navy. NCIS investigations will likely involve the victim, alleged offender, and witnesses. Other first responders or entities involved when a sexual assault is reported include SARCs, SAPR VAs, chaplains, healthcare professionals, staff judge advocates, trial counsel (prosecutors), Victims’ Legal Counsel (VLC), and

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

19

other Special Victim Capability (also known as Special Victim Investigation and Prosecution capability personnel), as well as other Victim Witness Assistance Program personnel. Sexual Assault Victim In a continuing effort to improve SAPR efforts, a DoD-wide Survivor Experience Survey was launched in June 2014 to provide a mechanism to receive feedback from sexual assault victims. The survey asks about the victim’s experience with the entire response process, and specifically about their experience with the military investigation process. The results will provide unprecedented insight into how victims perceive Navy’s response system and highlight opportunities for further improvement. Navy anticipates and expects that victims will be kept better informed of the status of their case with the expansion of the victim advocacy team. Victim Advocacy and Assistance (LOE 4) addresses support offered to victims in greater detail. Sexual Assault Response Coordinators SARCs play a key role in investigations as they are often the first responders when Sailors report sexual assaults. The SARCs coordinate appropriate and responsive care to sexual assault victims and notify the victim’s CO of the sexual assault report. Naval Criminal Investigative Service NCIS first established dedicated agents to work on adult sexual assaults, child sexual/physical abuse, and domestic violence crimes in the mid-1990s. Through the years, NCIS continued to build a cadre of agents dedicated to working what are now termed “special victim crimes.”

NCIS receives notification of Unrestricted Reports through various channels including directly from victims, SARCs, commands, local authorities, and friends and family of victims. Command notifications are the most common initiations of investigation. Command personnel are often the first to identify changes in behaviors for the involved parties and sometimes become the first confidants. 2.3 PROCESS/PROCEDURAL UPGRADES AND EFFICIENCIES Uniform Code of Military Justice In June 2012, Congress revised Article 120 of the UCMJ, and in January 2013 DoD policy was revised requiring Military Criminal Investigative Organizations to investigate all allegations of sexual assault, to include contact offenses and attempts, regardless of the severity of the allegation. That change led to an immediate increase in case loads for NCIS as they previously focused primarily on penetration offenses. In addition to the change in policy, reports of sexual assault within the Navy also increased, impacting the

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

20

capacity to conduct investigations and requiring additional manpower to be directed away from other investigations and operations. From June 2012 through 2014, NCIS saw an 85% increase in the number of reported adult sexual assaults. The volume of investigations resulted in NCIS having to recode many criminal investigation billets to support the Family and Sexual Violence mission, which investigates sexual assaults. Due to the increase in sexual assault reporting, NCIS received 54 billet enhancements from DON in July 2013. These billets encompassed 41 special agents and 13 support staff personnel. The special agents completed six months of training at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center and are currently assigned to field offices participating in the Field Training Evaluation Program. During the field training, new special agents investigate crimes such as larcenies, burglaries, and drug offenses to gain experience and further develop their investigative skills. These special agents do not work sexual assaults cases, but their presence allows for the more experienced agents to solely focus on investigating sexual assault cases. In an effort to assist NCIS in investigating the increased number of reported sexual assaults, NCIS partnered with Navy to activate 23 Master-at-Arm (MA) Reservists for a one-year period. Mostly state and local police officers and detectives, these Reservists already possess the investigative expertise needed to investigate sexual assault allegations. Upon activation, the Reservists attended five-weeks of instruction on NCIS policy at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, advanced interviewing and interrogation techniques, crime scene processing and management, and advanced sexual assault training. MAs, under the direct supervision of NCIS special agents, are currently working on caseloads at their assigned duty stations. Additionally, NCIS will begin a three-year pilot program in early FY15 to professionalize and enhance the investigative capabilities of active duty MAs. Upon completion of the same five-week course attended by the Reservists and an eight-week Military Police Investigator’s course, 12 selected active duty MAs will be assigned to NCIS field offices as investigators under the supervision of NCIS special agents. Sexual Assault Forensic Examinations

Sexual Assault Forensic Examinations (SAFE) gather evidence that may aid in an investigation. Medical treatment and access for victims necessitated development of a robust, integrated, interdisciplinary program to ensure 24/7 availability of a SAFE in the major military treatment facilities. Program managers are actively engaged in laying the groundwork for sustaining proficient, confident, caring, SAFE providers to meet the needs of victims of sexual assault. Military treatment facilities around the globe trained a total of 324 Navy SAFE providers. In U.S. Fleet Forces, 287 providers are trained to provide SAFE care on 123 surface, air, expeditionary, and submarine platforms. In the Pacific Fleet, 191 healthcare providers are trained to provide SAFE care on 142 surface, air, and submarine platforms. Additionally, 57 providers attached to the Military Sealift Command underwent SAFE training. All Navy ships have a SAFE trained medical provider assigned.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

21

Interagency Collaboration Navy increased collaboration with other government agencies to improve procedural interoperability for the collection of evidence. Since 2012, DON SAPRO collaborated with the Department of Justice, the Navy Bureau of Medicine and Surgery (BUMED), and local stakeholders to explore the feasibility of telemedicine support for SAFEs at remote sites. BUMED coordination efforts serve the dual purpose of enhancing compassionate medical support for sexual assault victims while also improving the professional collection of forensic evidence for criminal investigations and prosecutions. SAFE kits processed through the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory undergo a quality assurance review and have significantly faster processing times, averaging 70- 78 days, versus 180 days in civilian laboratories. Text & Web Tip Line In December 2011, NCIS established the Text & Web Tip Line program as part of the “See Something, Say Something” campaign. The NCIS Text & Web Tip Line is an anonymous tip collection system that has proven invaluable in collecting actionable intelligence in support of the criminal investigative mission. It gives Sailors a discreet, secure, and anonymous reporting option to report crimes or concerns without fear of retaliation from peers, or perceived pressure from within the chain of command. This encrypted system equipped NCIS with the ability to provide direct feedback and real- time connectivity with the tipster across multiple platforms. The reporting party may remain anonymous or refrain from participating in an investigation. To date, NCIS has received 99 tips pertaining to allegations of sexual assault within Navy. Judge Advocates Serve as Article 32 Hearing Officers Navy continues its practice of using judge advocates to serve as investigating officers for Article 32 hearings in order to enhance competence in the investigation of sexual assaults. On August 14, 2013, the Secretary of Defense implemented seven initiatives to gain greater consistency of effort and enhance oversight, investigative quality, pretrial investigations, and victim support. One of the initiatives mandated judge advocates to serve as investigating officers for all Article 32 hearings on sexual assault offense charges. Navy formally adopted the requirement in policy. 2.4 NAVY INNOVATIONS AND BEST PRACTICES NCIS also expands beyond its primary investigative function to offer education and training to commands with specific briefs focused on awareness, prevention, and bystander intervention. NCIS special agents provide training for SAPR VAs, command stand-downs, and other SAPR-related events. Investigation efforts focus on ensuring due process to both the victim and alleged offender. As a component of Navy’s Special Victim Investigation and Prosecution team, within 48 hours of a reported sexual assault, NCIS collaborates with Navy prosecutors

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

22

responsible for the potential prosecution of the alleged offender. The goal of this collaboration is to ensure the investigation meets the legal standards for prosecution. Adult Sexual Assault Program NCIS created the Adult Sexual Assault Program (ASAP) to provide a distinct and recognizable group of personnel to investigate sexual assault related offenses. This initiative is an operational shift whereby dedicated teams of NCIS personnel investigate reports of sexual assault. Upon receiving a report, ASAP personnel employ a surge team response to complete investigative activity in a timely manner, resulting in the faster delivery of an investigative package to the convening authority (the individual responsible for adjudicating the case). Members of the team collaborate with prosecutors and victim advocate personnel, in accordance with Congressionally mandated Special Victim Capability criteria, also known as Special Victim Investigation and Prosecution capability. ASAP teams are located in the largest fleet concentration areas where the volume of sexual assault reports is the greatest. NCIS established ASAP teams in seven locations. Most importantly, ASAP teams increased investigation performance while sustaining the quality and thoroughness of investigations. Figure 6 shows the implementation of the ASAP’s impact on investigation length by location.

Figure 6: ASAP Offices Average Days for Active Investigation

NCIS investigation timelines are calculated from initial notification until the date all investigative leads are completed and the case is forwarded to command for administrative or judicial action. The average timeline for FY13 NCIS investigations in offices with ASAP teams was 110 days, which is a 24% decrease from 144 days in FY12. However, FY14 shows a spike in investigation timelines to 127 days. This increase can likely be attributed to the increase in the number of reported sexual assaults, and changes in the requirement for Military Criminal Investigative Organizations to investigate all allegations of sexual assault to include contact offenses.

163

136

157

179

105

132 141

129

150

87

129 114

89 78

144 147

92

131 139

114 126

0 20 40 60 80

100 120 140 160 180 200

Camp Lejeune, NC

Norfolk, VA Okinawa, Japan

Camp Pendleton, CA

Yokosuka, Japan

San Diego, CA Bremerton, WA

FY12 FY13 FY14

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

23

Crime Reduction Program The NCIS Crime Reduction Program continues to publicly address criminal activity that impacts the military community. Partnering with DON, the Crime Reduction Program uses meetings, speeches, and briefs to raise sexual assault awareness, increase victim and Service member confidence, and promote bystander intervention. Crime reduction efforts focus on reducing the occurrence of sexual assaults. 2.5 TRAINING ENHANCEMENTS NCIS made substantial advancements to enhance the quality and quantity of investigation training since 2011. NCIS employs a three-phased approach to sexual assault training covering basic, refresher, and advanced training. These efforts include establishing basic investigative skills, honing core competencies, and advancing subject matter expertise of sexual assault investigations. NCIS develops and conducts training in collaboration with prosecutors, psychologists, OJAG’s Trial Counsel Assistance Program (TCAP) and Criminal Law Division, SARCs, sexual assault nurse examiners, the U.S. Army, and U.S. Air Force. To meet Special Victim Capability requirements, special agents and investigators must attend advanced training in adult sexual assault, child physical and sexual abuse, and domestic violence. Both NCIS courses, Advanced Adult Sexual Assault Investigation Course and the Advanced Family and Sexual Violence Training Program, meet stipulated requirements. NCIS’ goal is to provide advanced training to all personnel who could potentially respond to, and/or investigate adult sexual assault. This advanced training focuses on the effects of trauma on the memory of victims who have been sexually assaulted. Additionally, special agents and investigators training includes understanding and respecting a victim’s immediate priorities; ensuring victims that their criminal complaint will be taken seriously and fully investigated; establishing transparency and trust with the victim; helping to restore the victim’s sense of control; explaining the investigative process to the victim; and understanding interview techniques that can assist the victim’s recollection. NCIS currently employs 1,050 special agents and investigators, with 161 dedicated solely to investigating Special Victim Capability crimes. Since August 2012, 118 of the dedicated personnel and 140 non-dedicated personnel have attended training for adult sexual assault investigations. Prior to the FY14 Q3, satisfying training requirements was difficult, as the only advanced training available to NCIS was the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Division’s Special Victim Unit Investigations Course. The Army course is taught only once per month and NCIS had a limited number of training seats per course. To accelerate training of agents, in FY14 Q4, NCIS developed and commenced a NCIS-specific Advanced Adult Sexual Assault Investigators Course, held at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. To date, 258 NCIS Special Agents and Investigators have attended the advanced training in sexual assault investigations, and with continued funding in FY15, NCIS will offer 11 additional courses.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

24

2.6 CONCLUSION NCIS continues to enhance the skill sets of special agents and investigators as subject matter experts in sexual assault investigations. NCIS will continue to evaluate and revise in-service training for NCIS personnel to ensure it meets statutory requirements and community standards. The quality of NCIS training courses led to improvements on procedural efficiency across the entire Fleet. Navy continues to innovate with programs including SAFE capability, Text & Web Tip, and ASAP. These measures demonstrate the dedication Navy and NCIS put forth to provide commanders with the best information to hold offenders who commit sexual assault appropriately accountable. Navy’s primary goal is to prevent sexual assault by creating an environment in which Sailors and leaders do not tolerate, condone, or ignore sexual assault. However, if prevention efforts fail, Navy is committed to ensuring thorough investigations are conducted of all sexual assaults. Navy will maintain and improve its high competence in sexual assault investigation and foster coordination between investigators and judge advocates. Investigative personnel discover and prepare evidentiary information about the allegation of sexual assault so that commanders, with the advice and assistance of staff judge advocates and trial counsel, have the necessary information available to adjudicate the case and hold offenders appropriately accountable. Line of Effort 3: Accountability 3.1 INTRODUCTION Navy understands, institutes, and emphasizes the importance of accountability at the institutional, command, and individual levels. Accountability is more than a consequence for unacceptable behaviors; it also adds another level of deterrence for conduct throughout the continuum of harm. Command leadership must create a command climate intolerant of sexual harassment and sexual assault. Individual Sailors must treat each other respectfully and watch out for each other. Prevention (LOE 1) addresses these types of accountability for non-offenders. Pursuant to the DoD definition of LOE 3, this section focuses on Navy’s disposition and adjudication processes to hold offenders appropriately accountable. 3.2 POPULATIONS AFFECTED Sexual assault incidents involve multiple populations, services, and agencies in the adjudication of sexual assault cases. In order to hold offenders appropriately accountable and uphold due process of law, sexual harassment and sexual assault cases may proceed through many different disciplinary or administrative forums. Over the past three years, Navy increased the number of dedicated personnel, training, and resources to include judge advocates, Victims’ Legal Counsel, NCIS, Special Victim Capability/Special Victim Investigation and Prosecution personnel, and other legal assistants. Additional personnel, training, and resources improved case load

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

25

distribution, and reinforced experience and expertise in cases involving reports of sexual assault. Commanders SAPR is more than a legal issue, it is a leadership issue. The performance, safety, and climate of a unit begin and end with the commander. As described in the “Charge of Command” that all Navy officers sign in the presence of their reporting senior upon taking command, COs are responsible and accountable for everything that happens on their ships, or in squadrons, or units. By virtue of experience, skill, and training, Navy commanders are the best assessors of their people and are the key to sustaining the readiness of their unit. To implement effective and permanent change in Navy, it must be done through commanders. Navy understands many of the factors surrounding the majority of sexual assaults from analysis of sexual assault reports and cases. The commander is responsible to address these factors by fostering an appropriate command climate of dignity and respect for everyone, and ensure safe workplaces and living areas. Overall, the CO is responsible for good order and discipline of the unit and the well-being of Sailors. The responsibility, authority, and accountability Navy places in the commander requires that he or she is provided with the tools to maintain appropriate readiness and safety every day. Military justice is one of those tools. The fundamental structure of the military justice system and UCMJ, centered on the role of the commander as the convening authority, supported by the staff judge advocate, is sound. Navy commanders are often required to make independent decisions far from shore, in uncertain or hazardous conditions. In this environment, it is essential that commanders be involved in each phase of the military justice process, from the report of an offense through adjudication under the UCMJ. Trial Counsel Navy’s Regional Legal Service Offices have an experienced cadre of litigation specialists, and military justice expert judge advocates serving in litigation-intensive billets. This includes the nine regional Senior Trial Counsels which prosecute the most complex cases while supervising, mentoring, and training junior trial counsel. Navy Regional Legal Service Offices are supported by Navy’s TCAP which provides seasoned advice, assistance, and support throughout all phases of the investigation and court-martial process. TCAP is staffed by both uniformed and civilian personnel, to include a nationally recognized former civilian prosecutor and a highly-qualified expert. Defense Counsel Alleged offenders are provided equally capable and qualified defense counsel through Navy Defense Service Offices. Operating under a four region construct, Defense Service Offices provide zealous defense to members accused of sexual assault.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

26

Similar to TCAP for the prosecutors, defense counselors have reach-back capability to the Navy’s Defense Counsel Assistance Program which also has a highly-qualified civilian expert providing advice, assistance, and training to uniformed defense counsel. Staff Judge Advocates Navy commands are also required to consult with judge advocates in every sexual assault case. In addition, commanders must specify the judge advocate consulted prior to taking final disposition action and submitting the close-out report. This helps ensure visibility of all sexual assault cases and judge advocate consultation prior to a command disposing of a case. Staff judge advocates also provide formal, written legal advice to general court-martial convening authorities pursuant to Article 34, UCMJ prior to the convening authority referring charges to a general court-martial. Victims’ Legal Counsel The Navy VLC Program was established in August 2013. VLCs provide independent legal counsel to sexual assault victims. VLC is considered one of Navy’s best practices because in addition to providing legal advocacy and support for victims of sexual assault during the military justice investigation and adjudication processes, it contributes to victims participating in the entire military justice process. Navy VLCs specifically assist victims to understand and exercise reporting options; work with victims through the investigative and military justice processes; advocate for the victim’s rights and interests; and help victims obtain access to other support resources. Naval Criminal Investigative Service Close coordination between NCIS agents and judge advocates enhances Navy’s ability to share investigative information for proper adjudication. Over the years, two NCIS Sexual Assault Task Forces conducted a pilot program with judge advocate prosecutors to ensure early collaboration and ongoing multidisciplinary review of cases at the Senior Trial Counsel and supervisory special agent level. Navy’s Victim and Witness Assistance Program personnel advise victims and witnesses of their rights. NCIS agents and trial counsel work with Victim and Witness Assistance Program personnel to provide initial notification and information. Trial counsels have responsibility for advising victims at key milestones throughout the courts-martial process. Special Victims Investigation and Prosecution Capability OJAG established a Special Victim Capability for prosecutors, paralegals, and legal support personnel, known as the Special Victim Investigation and Prosecution group. As defined by FY13 National Defense Authorization Act, the Special Victim Investigation and Prosecution group works with all professionals who investigate, prosecute, and provide support for allegations of sexual offenses. This group of skilled professionals includes Military Criminal Investigative Organization investigators, judge advocates, Victim and Witness Assistance Program personnel, and administrative paralegal

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

27

support personnel. In September 2013 and 2014, Navy offered Special Victim Capability Courses to personnel in these roles. Due to the presence of Special Victim Capability personnel at the training, it enhanced the competency of judge advocates and increased collaboration between Special Victim Investigation and Prosecution personnel. This helps ensure a more thorough investigation, enhanced victim support, and appropriate accountability in sexual assault cases. Alleged Offenders Navy policy requires Service members who commit sexual misconduct, to include rape, sexual assault, stalking, forcible sodomy, child sexual abuse, possession or distribution of child pornography, and incestuous relationships to be processed for administrative separation. In FY13, Navy began releasing courts-martial results on a public domain website, and continues to do so to increase transparency of accountability actions and to serve as a deterrent to others. 3.3 NAVY INNOVATIONS AND BEST PRACTICES Military Justice Litigation Career Track In 2007, to improve the overall quality of Navy court-martial litigation, the Judge Advocate General (JAG) Corps established the Military Justice Litigation Career Track. JAG Corps officers apply for designation as military justice specialists or experts based on their litigation experience. Military Justice Litigation Qualified officers are detailed to lead trial and defense departments at Regional Legal Service Offices and Defense Service Offices, which provide Navy prosecutors and defense counsel, respectively. These officers provide proven experience in the courtroom, personally conducting, adjudicating, or overseeing litigation in sexual assault and other complex cases. The capstone position of the Military Justice Litigation Career Track is the Chief Judge of DON. This officer is one of four Assistant Judge Advocates General and is eligible for promotion to the rank of O-7 upon retirement. This position promotes vitality and career progression to Flag Officer rank for Navy judge advocates with significant military justice expertise. The Military Justice Litigation Career Track program increases the experience levels of trial and defense counsel and leverages that experience to enhance the effectiveness of criminal litigation practice. Many mid-career Military Justice Litigation Qualified officers are also sent to a year of post-graduate education and earn advanced law degrees in litigation and trial advocacy. In 2014, Navy made the deliberate decision to elevate the rank and experience of the senior trial and senior defense, assigning officers with approximately 15 or more years of service and experience into the litigation billets at the largest installations that have the heaviest caseloads. This will ensure that not only will the most difficult cases receive the highest levels of advocacy, but that these career litigators will be able to more effectively mentor and groom junior counsel.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

28

Civilian Externships for Prosecutors To further refine the JAG Corps’ litigation capabilities, in 2012 the Navy established an externship program and assigned two mid-level Military Justice Litigation Qualified career officers to work in the sex crimes units in the Office of the State Attorney in Jacksonville, Florida, and the San Diego District Attorney’s Office in San Diego, California. These six-week clinical training externships enabled the officers to gain valuable practical experience and insight into how civilian prosecutor’s offices manage a high volume of sexual assault cases. In May 2014, the Secretary of the Navy submitted an additional request to DoD for assignment of three additional Military Justice Litigation Qualified officers to three other civilian jurisdictions. Victims’ Legal Counsel Best Practices VLCs advise and assist sexual assault victims in understanding and participating in the military justice system. Increased understanding of military justice disciplinary processing assists victims in playing a more effective role in those processes when they choose to do so. As of July 2014, VLCs engaged NCIS/law enforcement on over 600 occasions, trial counsel on more than 1500 occasions, and defense counsel on over 130 occasions in working with victims. VLCs, upon request of their clients, advocate on behalf of victims at pre-trial motions hearings and Article 32 investigations, and are present at courts-martial to answer questions and prepare victims for their testimony. Victims report greater confidence and trust in participating in the military justice process after working with VLCs. Naval Justice School Best Practices The Naval Justice School provides the majority of Navy judge advocate training and prepares each judge advocate for courtroom litigation. From FY11-14, the Naval Justice School trained 264 Navy judge advocates in the Basic Lawyer Course. All judge advocates must complete the 10-week Basic Lawyer Course in order to receive Article 27(b), UCMJ certification. The Naval Justice School also offers Basic and Intermediate Trial Advocacy Courses, as well as a specialty course on litigating complex cases. The Prosecuting Alcohol Facilitated Sexual Assault course specifically addresses cases in which alcohol is a factor. It demonstrates to judge advocates how to make charging decisions in sexual assault cases, analyze credibility and corroboration, and try the case. The Defending Sexual Assault Cases course, in conjunction with the Center for American and International Law, provides defense counsel training on sexual assault litigation. The Prosecuting Alcohol Facilitated Sexual Assault and Defending Sexual Assault Case courses are among the best-attended Naval Justice School military justice courses. The Naval Justice School continues to offer numerous courses and standardized training to judge advocates and senior officers from the fleet that cover sexual assault related topics. The number of graduates for each course is indicative of the success in

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

29

providing SAPR and sexual assault related training in the area of military justice to judge advocates and leaders from the fleet. 3.4 PROCESSES/PROCEDURAL UPGRADES AND EFFICIENCIES Improved Legal Structure for Handling Cases In October 2012, OJAG reorganized the Naval Legal Service Command to meet the Navy’s evolving demands for expeditionary legal services support, while continuing to provide quality military justice services. The realignment changed the way Sailors receive defense services in 12 locations around the fleet. Similar to procedures at sea, Sailors requesting defense services such as representation for courts-martial or administrative boards will make initial contact with an attorney by telephone or other remote communication technology, with subsequent in-person consultation arranged if necessary. As part of the realignment, the JAG Corps refocused the first two years of all new judge advocate careers by implementing a comprehensive training program in prosecuting and defending cases, providing legal assistance, and advising commands. Collaboration Outside of Navy Navy judge advocates also improved efficiencies by working collaboratively with other government agencies and DoD services. Judge advocates attended various outside courses, including those taught by the U.S. Army, U.S. Air Force, Department of Justice, and National District Attorney’s Association. Navy judge advocates attended an advanced trial advocacy course held at and administered by the Center for American and International Law. The course material included substantive lectures and practical segments regarding how to provide an effective defense in sexual offense cases. In Special Victim Capability cases, experts and the government civilian attorney play a key role in enhancing information flow and knowledge sharing, promoting consolidation of government resources and collaboration between investigators and trial counsel located worldwide. These examples demonstrate increased interoperability between Navy, other military Services, and civilian organizations that led to greater cohesion in efforts to combat sexual assault. 3.5 TRAINING ENHANCEMENTS Navy continuously adds new training modules to increase the abilities and capacity of individuals involved in accountability for sexual assault. The Naval Justice School and the Litigation Trial Training Coordination Counsel developed courses unique to sexual assault.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

30

Naval Justice School The Naval Justice School offers several annual trainings for officers in senior, legal, and command roles. The Naval Justice School CO leads a two-hour seminar discussion 14 times per year as part of the Naval War College’s Major Command Course. While the seminar covers a variety of legal topics, the single largest portion concentrates on the commander’s responsibilities in sexual assault cases. Additionally, the Naval Justice School hosts a three-day Senior Officer Course 38 times per year. Students receive special training on issues involving sexual assault, equipping them to properly handle reports of sexual assault incidents. The Naval Justice School also hosts a Legal Officer course at its east and west coast detachments. This three-week course includes SAPR training designed to increase legal officers’ understanding of legal issues they face when a case of sexual assault arises within their command. The Naval Justice School now offers two newly created courses called Trial Counsel Orientation and Defense Counsel Orientation. These courses begin with the basics of trial litigation for new or returning trial practitioners, and move to the intricacies of litigating complex cases such as sexual assaults, child homicide, and child pornography cases. Foundational Judge Advocate Training In 2012, the Navy JAG Corps implemented the First Tour Judge Advocate program, requiring all new judge advocates to complete six-month rotations in legal assistance, trial, defense, and command services for their first two years of service as a judge advocate. Navy Legal Assistance attorneys also received training focused on delivering direct legal assistance to victims, assisting with a wide variety of legal issues associated with sexual assault. These efforts are designed to ensure understanding of victims’ rights and the courts-martial process. Specially Trained Trial Counsel In September 2013, OJAG’s criminal law division offered the first Special Victim Capability course to train prosecutors, paralegals, SAPR VAs, and judge advocates. The training focused on understanding the dynamics of special victim crimes, working with victims, and increasing collaboration of effort within the military justice system. This course improved and enhanced victim care, victim support, prosecution support, and provided a more comprehensive and standardized response to allegations of sexual assault, child abuse, and serious domestic violence offenses. OJAG offered this course again in 2014, with increased attendance and expansion of sexual assault- related topics. The JAG Corps continues to work with the Family and Sexual Violence Units, to include the ASAP teams. ASAPs consist of advanced-trained sexual assault NCIS investigators, and work in collaboration with SARCs, SAPR VAs, and judge advocates through the investigation and prosecution process. The ASAP initiative also includes

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

31

early engagement with legal and victim advocacy personnel. Under direction from OJAG’s Criminal Law Division, the Litigation Training Coordination Council oversees all Navy litigation training. The council identifies and centralizes military justice litigation and trial advocacy training for both the prosecution and defense bars. It provides a macro-level comprehensive review of the training pipeline to ensure that the foundation learned at the Naval Justice School continues to build throughout an attorney’s career. All Senior Trial Counsel and a large majority of trial counsel attended the Prosecuting Alcohol Facilitated Sexual Assaults course and all prosecution offices completed a nine- hour online course of lectures on special victim offenses as of January 2014. The course collaborates with advisors from the Prosecutors Resource on Violence Against Women, to teach trial skills, seminars, and lectures on various aspects of prosecuting alcohol facilitated sexual assault. The Navy continues to staff Military Justice Litigation Qualified judge advocates to serve as Senior Trial Counsel. Additionally, Navy JAG Corps continues to offer fully-funded postgraduate legal education at civilian institutions to help ensure highly-trained and experienced trial and defense counsel. Trial Counsel and Defense Counsel Assistance Programs In October 2010, OJAG established the TCAP and Defense Counsel Assistance Program. In support of this initiative, Navy hired three highly-qualified experts who are former civilian prosecutors or defense counsel, in order to provide legal advice and support for both defense and government counsel on case preparation. Since their inception, the programs continue to grow and provide enhanced military justice training to both the trial and defense counsel, particularly in sexual assault cases.

TCAP supports the trial counsel and the staff judge advocates concerning their representation in the courts-martial and post-trial process. TCAP conducts annual inspections on each prosecution office to ensure compliance with instructions, emphasize new developments, and identify leading practices. TCAP conducts training for trial counsel at every level of experience and expertise to educate and improve counsel judgment and performance. A myriad of training programs provide on-scene and online training to trial counsel in a variety of specialized areas. TCAP training includes annual mobile training team site visits with flexible training sections on special victims’ crimes and process inspection. Mobile training teams conduct week-long training sessions in each of the nine Regional Legal Service Offices in coordination with NCIS, focusing on special victims crimes. TCAP sponsors subject matter experts to conduct an interactive web-based training through Defense Connect Online. TCAP also provides in-person training at the Special Victims Unit Investigations Course in Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri and the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. Highly-qualified experts from the Defense Counsel Assistance Program organized the Defense Counsel Orientation Course, which brought together military and civilian

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

32

defense counsel from all experience levels. This was designed to prepare new defense counsel to represent clients at courts-martial. The Defense Counsel Assistance Program provides enhanced legal knowledge on military justice issues, to include Military and Federal Rules of Evidence; common legal issues encountered in sexual assault trials; and expert assistants and witnesses. Joint NCIS Training The joint NCIS and Navy Prosecutor Advanced Adult Sexual Assault Training Program and Advanced Family and Sexual Violence Training Programs enable frontline NCIS special victims investigators and Navy trial counsel to receive advanced courses on the investigation and prosecution of adult sexual assault cases, including spousal rape, domestic violence, and child abuse. This training is held at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Georgia. Judge advocates also participated in a multidisciplinary Sexual Assault Investigation and Prosecution Course. Mobile training teams comprised of Navy TCAP, U.S. Marine Corps TCAP, NCIS instructors, Army Criminal Investigation Division, and other external instructors presented the course to assist sexual assault investigators and prosecutors. Topics included working with the victim from the initial interview through direct and cross-examination, case corroboration, the undetected rapist, and un-indicted co- conspirators. Specialized SAPR training will continue to enable judge advocates to better advise COs, alleged offenders, victims, and witnesses on SAPR-related issues. 3.6 CONCLUSION Navy ensures judge advocates provide timely and competent advice to COs, alleged offenders, victims, and witnesses on SAPR-related issues; as well as conduct fair trials and other disciplinary and administrative proceedings with due process of law for all alleged offenders of sexual assault. Partnerships between judge advocates and NCIS facilitate efficient processes and synergies for sexual assault accountability. Navy will continue to hold offenders appropriately accountable. Investigation and accountability capabilities are critical to responding to sexual assault. Thorough investigations and trials are also important to victim assistance, which will be discussed in the next section. Navy utilizes information derived from investigations and military justice proceedings to better educate victims about the military justice process. When victims are informed of the judicial process they are more likely to stay involved, often resulting in cases being tried, which is a major factor in the ability to hold offenders appropriately accountable. Line of Effort 4: Victim’s Advocacy and Assistance 4.1 INTRODUCTION Navy strives to care for victims and strengthen their resilience following a sexual assault by providing high-quality response services and a safe environment. Victim support for

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

33

Navy active duty and reserve members relies on a broad coordinated network of support personnel: trained and certified SARCs, SAPR VAs, Deployed Resiliency Counselors (DRCs), chaplains, as well as medical and legal services providers. These victim support personnel are responsible for advocacy coordination, medical services, legal support and counseling for the victim. However, none of these services can occur without the victim first making a report. Victims have the option to make a Restricted Report, which gives them access to medical, counseling, and legal services if they prefer; or victims can make an Unrestricted Report, which alerts the command and initiates an NCIS investigation, in addition to medical help. Navy must instill confidence and trust to motivate victims to report, while striving to continually improve the level of victim support services available. 4.2 POPULATIONS AFFECTED Personnel in a position to make first contact with a victim are critical to Navy’s victim assistance efforts. Navy is working to ensure victim support personnel are accessible to assist victims, which includes availability for Reservists. Sexual Assault Response Coordinators and SAPR Victim Advocates SARCs are critical to providing victim assistance, as they integrate and coordinate victim resources. SAPR VAs are the primary means of ongoing support to the victim and the primary liaison between the victim and command leadership. All Navy SARCs and SAPR VAs are military personnel or DoD civilian employees, certified through the Defense Sexual Assault Advocate Certification Program prior to providing direct services to sexual assault victims. In FY13, Navy executed the requirement of having at least one SARC and at least one full-time SAPR VA assigned to each brigade or equivalent unit level of the Armed Forces. For Navy, this requirement equates to a minimum of 64 SARC and 64 SAPR VAs. Due to the uniqueness of force distribution around the globe, Navy created additional billets to support the demand, ensuring easily accessible and certified personnel for victims. Nine of the SARC billets were established as regional positions to streamline communication and ensure better coordination and consistency of services between Commander, Naval Installations Command, regional leadership, and SARCs in the field. In addition to full-time SAPR VAs, Navy has unit members who volunteer to take collateral duties as Unit SAPR VAs. Unit SAPR VAs also complete the same required training and certification. Over the last three years, Navy added over 2,000 Unit SAPR VAs, increasing the number from 3,352 in FY11 to 5,472 in FY14. Deployed Resiliency Counselors In July 2013, the Navy established DRC positions aboard all aircraft carriers and large- deck amphibious assault ships. The DRC is a civilian licensed counselor who supports

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

34

Sailors in deployed environments and serves as a liaison to shore-based SARCs. DRCs provide Sailors with critical support services during deployment by working cooperatively with military and civilian medical, social service, law enforcement, chaplains, and legal personnel on behalf of sexual assault victims. The DRC provides short-term individual therapy and educational training on Sailor resiliency topics, such as the prevention of sexual assault, suicide prevention, and substance abuse. The DRC ensures immediate victim response, needs assessment, referrals, and other coordination in response to allegations of sexual assault. They also conduct sexual assault awareness and prevention training, and oversee shipboard training and certification for Unit SAPR VAs. All DRCs are certified by the Defense Sexual Assault Advocate Certification Program. Healthcare Providers The victim-centered support for sexual assault victims requires addressing physical and psychological trauma, appropriate coordination of care, and collection of medical- forensic evidence. Civilian medical facilities conduct SAFEs to maintain a 24/7 response capability when such services are not available at the local military treatment facility. Regional program management created and implemented victim care protocols to ensure standardized and coordinated care for victims of sexual assault. BUMED improved communication with the fleet to ensure that all SARCs and SAPR VAs are up- to-date on certification and any new policies, procedures, education and training, and best practices on at least a monthly basis. BUMED promulgates policy to ensure the total array of medical assistance is available to eligible victims of sexual assault. Chaplain Corps The Chaplain Corps provides an important resource for supporting the emotional healing and successful reintegration of victims back into their command, regardless of victim religious affiliation or beliefs. Chaplains and Religious Program Specialists are trained in SAPR policies and procedures. Chaplains provide pastoral counseling to victims and a safe place to talk without fear or judgment. Chaplains also will not report what Service members share in confidence, nor can they be compelled to break confidentiality. Chaplains are an important source for directing individuals to other appropriate resources. 4.3 IMPROVEMENTS TO VICTIM SERVICES AND RESOURCES Navy remains committed to increasing victim confidence to self-report incidents. Continued leadership visibility and support is critical to build victim trust and endurance and ensure confidentiality is maintained in the SAPR process. Improvements to victim resources include the VLC, Safe Helpline, Victim and Witness Assistance Program, expedited transfers, and military and civilian protective orders.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

35

Legal Assistance to Victims and the Victims’ Legal Counsel Program Prior to the implementation of its VLC program in 2012, OJAG trained Navy Legal Assistance attorneys with the focus on delivering direct legal assistance to victims to assist with a wide variety of legal issues associated with sexual assault, to include making sure victims’ rights and the court-martial process were understood. With the implementation of the VLC program, Navy sexual assault victims are provided direct, no-cost access to their own lawyer who can provide legal advice, assistance, and advocacy across a range of victim rights and interests. Confidential communication ensures victims can discuss all aspects of their cases without fear of sacrificing privacy, while promoting an open, honest dialogue. VLC services are optional and available to all eligible sexual assault victims regardless of the type of report they make, or if a report is made at all. VLC services are intended to garner greater victim trust, confidence, awareness, and comfort in the Navy sexual assault response system. The expectation is that VLCs will result in more victims reporting and staying in the military justice process through the conclusion of the case. Victim participation in the process is a major factor in the ability to hold alleged offenders appropriately accountable. The Navy VLC program dedicated 30 judge advocates and 10 administrative employees, providing support at 23 U.S. and overseas Navy installations. Navy VLC personnel assist victims in understanding and exercising their reporting options, work with victims through the investigative and military justice processes, advocate for the victim’s rights and interests, and help victims obtain access to other support resources. At the victim’s request, VLCs can accompany victims to law enforcement, trial counsel, and defense counsel interviews. VLCs also assist victims in providing input to convening authorities regarding case disposition, final action on courts-martial findings, and any alleged offender’s requests for clemency. VLCs complement and augment the support from SARCS, SAPR VAs, and other resources. In FY14, Navy VLC assisted 719 sexual assault victims and advocated for their interests in 351 military justice proceedings, ranging from pre-trial conferences to Article 32 hearings and special courts-martial. Navy VLCs conducted extensive outreach among fleet personnel, leadership, and other victim support providers to promote awareness of VLC services and availability. These briefs addressed both the structure and nature of the VLC mission, highlighting that victims could engage a judge advocate to advance and defend their interests. As of September 2014, Navy VLC had provided 830 Outreach Briefs to over 25,000 personnel. Safe Helpline In April 2011, DoD launched Safe Helpline as a crisis support service for members of the DoD community who are victims of sexual assault. Navy transitioned to use the Safe Helpline as the primary crisis intervention tool across the Navy. The DoD Safe Helpline responds to Navy requests for information or support, with 100% follow up by

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

36

their respective SARC or SAPR VA, if requested. The Safe Helpline aims to increase victim confidence in the SAPR program through consistent responses by trained advocates who connect the victim to SARCs or other first responders at their local installation, anywhere in the world. The DoD Safe Helpline is heavily marketed via printed material and social media sites. A Safe Helpline smart device application can provide individuals direct contact information to first responders (SARC, military chaplain, JAG, medical personnel, or civilian sexual assault service provider) at their location. Navy regularly conducts audits of this contact information to ensure its accuracy and accessibility. Prohibited Retaliation against Victims Navy prohibits retaliation against any person who reports a criminal offense, brings forward a complaint, or cooperates in the investigation process. If the alleged perpetrator is the victim’s CO or otherwise in the victim’s chain of command, sexual assault victims have the opportunity to go outside the chain of command to report the offense to NCIS, other COs, DoD Safe Helpline, or an Inspector General. If a Service member experiences any retaliatory action for making a report of sexual assault, he or she has a number of options to report the retaliation for investigation and appropriate action. To specifically ensure there are no retaliatory separations from the Navy, a Flag Officer reviews the records of any victim who is being considered for involuntary separation within one year of a final adjudication of an Unrestricted Report. DoD collects data on victim retaliation using three sources: DEOCS, WGRS, and Survivor Experience Survey. Combining these three data sources provides a more robust understanding of Sailor perception and personal experiences. Navy will continue to use the three data sources to assess policies and initiatives. Navy SAPR strategy continues to focus on real and perceived barriers to reporting. DEOCS helps Navy assess progress in this area through command climate surveys. There is a decreasing trend in the percent of respondents who perceive barriers to reporting sexual assault. By the end of FY13, 50% of respondents perceived three or more barriers to reporting sexual assault. By the end of FY14, the respondents that perceived three or more barriers to reporting had decreased to 35%. The most frequently perceived barrier to reporting sexual assault was “loss of privacy/confidentiality” followed by “fear of social retaliation for making the report.” Navy continues its commitment to address Sailors’ confidentiality concerns and foster an environment intolerant of retaliation. Expedited Transfers The Navy offers victims who make an Unrestricted Report of sexual assault the option to request an expedited transfer to another command or duty station. Within 72 hours of receiving a request for an expedited transfer, the CO must decide to approve or refer

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

37

to higher authority. If the CO approves the transfer, he or she forwards the request and recommendation to Naval Personnel Command for processing and record filing. In the case of expedited transfer disapproval, the CO must immediately forward the reason in writing to the first Flag Officer, or Senior Executive Service (SES) equivalent, in the requesting Sailor’s chain of command. The Flag Officer or SES must decide to approve or disapprove the request within 72 hours of receiving the command-level recommendation, then forward to Naval Personnel Command to process and file. Selected Reservists who are victims of sexual assault may request expedited transfers, reassignment to a different unit, or a different schedule than the alleged offender. This helps to relieve undue burdens potentially placed on the Service member and their family by a transfer. Military and Civilian Protective Orders Other protection measures available to victims include the issuance of a military or civilian protective order against the accused, prohibiting further contact with the victim. Victim and Witness Assistance Program The Victim and Witness Assistance Program ensures victims and witnesses of crime are afforded their rights throughout the criminal justice process, from investigator’s initial contact through any period of confinement adjudged. Navy policy requires all commands to appoint Victim Witness Liaison Officers to oversee the Victim and Witness Assistance Program in their areas of responsibility. The Liaison Officer works with the Regional Legal Service Office to provide additional support. 4.4 VICTIM SATISFACTION AND CONFIDENCE IN THE SYSTEM Reporting Navy had a 53% increase in sexual assault reporting in FY13, shown in Figure 7. In FY14, the year-to-year rise slowed to 10%. Navy instituted a number of measures to improve Service member confidence and/or victim participation in the investigative and military justice process. Several factors have contributed to the increase in reporting, including better understanding of what defines a sexual assault; awareness of the multiple avenues to report; trust in the command to take all reports seriously; and confidence that the command will support the victim throughout the process.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

38

Figure 7: Reports of Sexual Assault over Time

Fleet Commander and Fleet Master Chief visits to individual commands, fleet workshops, and other fleet sponsored events routinely and consistently address reporting. The key message to Sailors is that leadership wants and encourages Sailors to report sexual assaults and related sexual harassment behavior. Sailors can convert Restricted Reports to Unrestricted Reports. In FY14, Navy’s rate of conversion from restricted to unrestricted was 24%; the FY13 conversion rate was 16%; the FY12 conversion rate was 19%. Navy will continue to build trust in the SAPR program, and encourage more victims to report. 4.5 TRAINING ENHANCEMENTS Sexual Assault Response Coordinators Training Prior to providing direct services to victims, Navy requires SARCs to receive 80 hours of National Advocate Credentialing Program approved training, with 40 hours in-person and 40 hours online. SARC training covers how to supervise staff, case management, trainer skill building, Sexual Assault Case Management Group facilitation, SAPR Command Personnel cross training (SAPR point of contact, SAPR Data Collection Coordinator, SAPR Command Liaison), and other related topics. Every two years, SARCs are required to recertify with Defense Sexual Assault Advocate Certification Program by completing a minimum of 32 hours of approved continuing education. Commander, Naval Installations Command Headquarters SAPR staff also increase SARC’s skills as the local subject matter experts for shore-based and afloat commands. SARCs attended annual training and multiple webinars that provided information and resources for outreach and prevention.

408 500

604 620 578

755

1,158 1,274

294 359 451

478 436 556

902 970

114 141 153 142 142 199

256 304

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

N um

be r o

f R ep

or ts

Total

Unrestricted

Restricted

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

39

SAPR Victim Advocate / Unit SAPR Victim Advocate Training SAPR VA training curriculum emphasizes the importance of treating victims with dignity and respect. Prospective SAPR VAs learn the importance of demonstrating compassion and care for victim welfare and how crucial this interaction is to instill victim confidence in the SAPR program. A portion of the training is designed to familiarize SAPR VAs with local civilian and military resources that are available for victim care and treatment. Overseas, the SAPR VAs tour rape crisis centers in their area to better understand available services and capabilities, as this may be a valuable referral and resource for victims. SAPR VAs also visit the local U.S. Naval Hospital or similar medical facility and receive a briefing by a sexual assault nurse examiner regarding the intricacies of the process to provide support to a victim while undergoing a SAFE. These educational methods assist SAPR VAs in further understanding the resources available to them and their unique capabilities. Periodic trainings and communications with SAPR VAs also serve as continuing education engagements to provide program changes that further expand the range of services offered to victims. Per DoD, Unit SAPR VAs receive 40 initial hours of National Advocate Credentialing Program approved training. Training topics cover dynamic effects of sexual assault, sexual assault in the military, prevention strategies, ethics, trauma, informed care, cultural competency, confidentiality policy, SARC and all SAPR VA roles and responsibilities, crisis intervention, self-care, the military and civilian judicial process, the medical process, resources and referrals, and victims’ rights. BUMED Training Medical personnel receive first responder training at command orientation with annual updates to meet requirements. BUMED’s SAFE training program was successfully transitioned to the Navy Medicine Professional Development Center. Navy Medicine Prospective COs and XOs received briefings on the program and their role in response to reported sexual assaults to ensure appropriate and timely medical support for victims. Discussions included medical care and support, forensic evidence collection, reporting options, and military treatment facility requirement for a 24/7 response capability. 4.6. PROCESSES/PROCEDURAL UPGRADES AND EFFICIENCIES Case Management SARCs collaborative efforts with local military and civilian stakeholders resulted in streamlined protocols in managing cases and increased compliance with Sexual Assault Case Management Group participation. SARCs routinely collaborate with local military and civilian stakeholders regarding meetings and responder-specific training to ensure proper protocols are in place and all roles are clearly understood and performed. Additionally, SARCs work with installation and community responders to increase policy compliance and ensure victim privacy for restricted reporting, SAFE kit documentation, chain of custody, and storage.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

40

Shared Military SAPR Resources Due to dispersed geographic locations, Navy personnel have the option to receive U.S. Army, U.S. Air Force, or other Joint SAPR VA assistance. SAPR VAs from other Services who take a sexual assault report involving a Navy Sailor provide a personal hand-off to the Navy SARC and SAPR VA in order to ensure that any Service-specific reporting and investigation requirements are conducted. Navy and other Services transitioned to the Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database (DSAID) to improve individual case tracking and reporting capabilities. Another method of tracking services is through participation from the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations cross-functional team, which provides a platform to discuss system barriers that may impact victim services. Recommendations to mitigate identified barriers are discussed and solutions implemented. 4.7 CONCLUSION Navy offers extensive care and resources to help and support sexual assault victims. Medical services assist victims in recovering from physical trauma. Counselors and chaplains contribute to resolving emotional and internal pain. Increasingly positive command climates and environments allow for victims to return to work without fear of retaliation for reporting. Credentialed SARCs work to manage SAPR VAs, DRCs, and investigators and legal personnel, all designed to advocate for and assist victims. Navy will continue to increase the capability of response personnel and programs to address victims’ needs. Navy uses assessments, described in the next section, to continually evaluate and improve the quality of services provided. Line of Effort 5: Assessment 5.1 INTRODUCTION Assessment is paramount to ensure that SAPR programs and policies achieve the desired outcome of a command climate where sexual assault and associated behaviors are not tolerated. Navy strives for responsive, meaningful, and accurate systems of measurement and evaluation in every aspect of the SAPR program. Navy draws on authoritative data from sexual assault reports, survey instruments, focus group discussions, and other measures to effectively evaluate the SAPR program and inform strategy and policies. Navy uses multiple tools, including DSAID, to assess progress. DSAID information allows trend analysis, helping tailor effective and efficient initiatives. Navy also collaborates with DoD SAPRO and the other Services to provide alignment and standardization on multiple department-wide survey efforts. Navy executes specific surveys and polls, providing valuable feedback for efforts to eliminate sexual assault.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

41

5.2 EXECUTIVE-LEVEL ASSESSMENT AND OVERSIGHT Navy senior leadership plays a critical role by providing oversight, guidance, and review of SAPR programs. The Navy SAPR Director meets one-on-one monthly with the CNO to discuss program updates and initiatives. The Navy SAPR Director also provides a monthly update to a panel of three-star admirals. All Navy four-star admirals, including the CNO, meet quarterly via video teleconference. The Navy SAPR cross-functional team meets monthly to synchronize stakeholders across the Navy, discuss progress, and share best practices. SAPR is part of the agenda at the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Service Operations Deputies Tank briefings as well as the U.S. Fleet Forces Task Force and U.S. Pacific Fleet Executive Steering Committee meetings. Navy senior leadership have regular, direct, face-to-face engagements with the fleet during fleet visits, where senior leaders hear directly from Sailors and share information about Navy SAPR initiatives. Regional SAPR Officers provide a means to disseminate information and best practices to the regional and local levels. Direction from the Secretary of the Navy requires the Naval Inspector General to inspect, investigate, assess, or inquire into important matters, including SAPR-related programs in all command inspections and area visits. During command inspections and area visits, SAPR programs were found to be well-managed and in compliance with program requirements. These inspections offer additional oversight to assess compliance and quality of programs, and ensure the quality of SAPR efforts executed across the fleet. 5.3 DEFENSE SEXUAL ASSAULT INCIDENT DATABASE Data collection creates the foundational bases for Navy assessments. Properly capturing sexual assault reports is critical to a meaningful and accurate measurement of the success of this program. In July 2012, Navy initiated its transition from the case management system to DSAID as the data collection tool for all SAPR case data. Key SAPR program stakeholders simultaneously managed the data collection and system capability. DSAID provides standardized data entry protocols for SARCs and legal officers, and data transport procedures for NCIS. Metrics and details pertaining to reported sexual assaults (i.e., demographics, type of incident, case specifics) are continually collected, tracked and analyzed across the fleet to inform SAPR policy and procedures within Navy. The standardization facilitates case tracking and trend analysis. DSAID data helped inform Navy policies on restricted alcohol sales on base, implementation of roving barracks patrols, and increased training at all Navy accession points. 5.4 SURVEYS Workplace Gender Relations Survey Navy’s fundamental means to measure the success of its SAPR program is through

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

42

periodic survey of Sailors. The biennial DoD WGRS is the primary tool to estimate the prevalence of unwanted sexual contacts across the Navy. It provides insight and feedback on, among other things, unwanted sexual contact and unwanted sexual behavior. The WGRS utilizes a series of standard questions to measure the incidence of sexual assault over the previous 12-month period. Survey results are compared to actual reports of sexual assault (restricted and unrestricted) to assess Service member confidence in the system and willingness to report. Results from this survey highlight the gap that exists between incidents and reports of sexual assault. Understanding that the decision to report a sexual assault is personal for a victim, Navy continues to focus on eliminating all perceived barriers to reporting. These perceived barriers are assessed in more detail and at higher frequency through the DEOCS instrument. DEOMI Organizational Climate Survey (DEOCS) The DEOCS is a confidential, command-requested organizational development survey used to assess shared perceptions about equal opportunity, SAPR, and organizational effectiveness. Navy uses the DEOCS as a management tool to assess aspects of command organization and effectiveness. Commanders are required to conduct a DEOCS within 90 days of assuming positions of command and annually thereafter to assess command climate, effectiveness of its SAPR policies, and perceptions of Sailors within a unit. The unit CO briefs the immediate superior in command on the results of the survey, along with a plan of action to address any opportunities for improvement. From 2011 to 2013, the DoD surveyed commands using DEOCS 3.3.5 which provided trending information on: (1) perceptions of leadership support for SAPR, (2) perceptions of barriers to reporting sexual assault, (3) bystander intervention climate, and (4) knowledge of sexual assault reporting options. Since 1 January 2014, Navy uses DEOMI’s latest version, DEOCS 4.0, which includes new and revised SAPR climate questions containing seven measures: (1) perceptions of safety, (2) chain of command support, (3) publicity of SAPR information, (4) unit reporting climate, (5) perceived barriers to reporting sexual assault, (6) unit prevention climate with bystander intervention, and (7) restricted reporting knowledge. The two versions of the survey cannot be trended because new items were added, wording of similar items changed, and the response scale changed. Although trends are interrupted from 2011 to the present, general understanding of the data shows continued improvement in command climate. These surveys provide leadership with direct feedback from deckplate Sailors. Local commanders can assess their command climate in comparison with Navy and DoD averages, and take appropriate action as necessary to address specific areas of concern. Examples include local training on proper reporting channels, intolerance of retaliation, and effective bystander intervention methods. Navy uses this information continuously to assess the effectiveness of policy and training initiatives and then refine activities or training. Examples of action taken as a result of DEOCS feedback include revision to the sexual assault training module at Command Leadership School, creation of Navy-wide bystander intervention skills training, and additional training and

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

43

processes to address perceived barriers to reporting. Survivor Experience Survey Launched on 4 June 2014, the Survivor Experience Survey is a survey administered specifically to military victims of sexual assault who filed a report of sexual assault. Initial results from the survey are based on the 22 Navy responses received so far. As survivor survey responses are collected, they will provide feedback on SAPR processes from the victim’s perspective in areas concerning support services, commands actions, and peer responses. This information will play a vital role in assessing Navy’s progress, and help shape future policies and programs. A School Exit Surveys Sailors learn the fundamentals of their technical field at Navy A Schools. Naval Education and Training Command and DON SAPRO continue to develop and expand their collaborative efforts to conduct sexual assault surveys of all Navy A School graduates at Navy’s five largest A school concentration sites: Great Lakes, Illinois; Pensacola, Florida; Meridian, Mississippi; Groton, Connecticut; and San Antonio, Texas. This survey underscores Navy’s commitment to seeking insights and assessing progress in combatting sexual assault. Over 1,800 women and 5,600 men completed the voluntary anonymous surveys since initial fielding in August 2013. Indications continue to suggest that Sailors in A School training environments have a low incidence rate of sexual assault compared to other Navy environments. Results directly reflect the efforts made in training environments and the engagement of local commanders. Navy Quick Polls Navy Personnel Research, Studies, and Technology conducts SAPR Quick Polls to query Sailors on current DoD and Navy SAPR-related issues. Navy leadership encourages maximum participation in these targeted polls. The 2013 SAPR Quick Poll, conducted from April to May 2013, returned 5,118 responses. The Quick Poll measured the effectiveness of SAPR training, different reporting options, perceptions of leadership’s role in tolerating or impeding reporting, and barriers to reporting, to inform policy and training initiatives. SAPR Quick Poll findings indicate that SAPR-L/F training was very well accepted and over 80% of those surveyed said it increased awareness of the problem and appropriate preventative measures. The SAPR Quick Poll found that 94% of enlisted members and over 90% of officers knew who the SAPR point of contact and SAPR VAs were at their command; over 85% responded that sexual assault training is taken seriously at their command; 90% indicated that they knew what to do if they or a friend were sexually assaulted; 80% indicated that they would likely report the sexual assault to Navy authorities if assaulted; over 90% of enlisted and 95% of officers report knowing what

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

44

actions are considered sexual assault; and over 91% correctly identified the difference between Restricted and Unrestricted Reporting. 5.5 FOCUS GROUPS The Defense Manpower Data Center conducted focus groups on behalf of each of the Services in 2014. One training site (Pensacola, Florida) and one operational site (Norfolk, Virginia) were chosen to host the event for each Service. Focus group leaders divided groups by gender and rank to facilitate an honest and open discourse on Sailors’ perceptions of SAPR initiatives in a non-attribution environment. Direct engagements like the focus groups influence decisions to modify delivery of training. Changes such as the desire for more peer-to-peer training have been made, as captured in the new Bystander Intervention to the Fleet training vehicle. 5.6 ASSESSMENT EFFORTS AT LOCAL COMMANDS Several local and regional Navy commands implemented independent assessment tools, such as local databases derived from operations and situation report data and informal surveys to assess local trends. These demonstrate proactive methods to incorporate responsive, meaningful, and accurate systems of evaluation into all aspects of SAPR. Additionally, Fleet and Family Service Centers give clients anonymous quarterly and annual surveys to complete and provide feedback on SAPR services they receive. All regions utilize monthly Sexual Assault Case Management Group to measure SAPR program effectiveness. Case Management Groups provide an avenue to assess the quality of care and support provided to sexual assault victims. BUMED Assessment BUMED conducts site visits to support SAPR and SAFE program implementation, ensures command coordinators are fully aware of the resources available to them, and confirms that commands are in compliance with regulations. Other Assessment Efforts Navy seeks constant feedback on the effectiveness of SAPR programs. Navy measures system responsiveness through feedback from SARCs, SAPR VAs, VLCs and victims themselves. Together, these metrics are reviewed quarterly by CNO and his 4-star Fleet Commanders to ensure alignment to the SAPR program. 5.7 TWELVE DOD-DESIGNATED REPORT METRICS Metric 1: Past year of Estimated Prevalence of Unwanted Sexual Contact The prevalence metric indicates the estimated pervasiveness of unwanted sexual contact and provides a direct indicator of the scope of the sexual assault problem. The data is self-reported and compiled through a biennial survey. The 2014 estimated

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

45

prevalence results using the comparable 2012 WGRA methodology indicate that 5.1% of women and 1.1% of men experienced unwanted sexual contact. The 2012 results showed that 7.2% of women and 2.7% of men experienced unwanted sexual contact. This trend is a step in the right direction. Navy will continue with the efforts made in prevention, setting the conditions for a command climate that does not condone, tolerate, or ignore sexual assault. The goal is a consistent and measurable decrease in prevalence of sexual assault, leading to the ultimate elimination of this threat to Sailors. Metric 2: Estimated Prevalence vs. Reporting The reporting metric compares estimated prevalence, as described in metric 1 above, with the number of reported unwanted sexual contact by Service member victims. The difference between the two metrics is the reporting gap, an important measure of victims’ trust in the sexual assault response system. The number of reported Service member victims rose since 2011, especially from 2012 to 2013 where it increased 52%. This rise was expected due to efforts to raise awareness of sexual assault, educate Sailors on the definition of sexual assault, and provide support for those who report sexual assault. The number of reported victims from 2013 to 2014 increased 13%. 2014 estimated prevalence results using the comparable 2012 WGRA methodology indicate unwanted sexual contact decreased to 5.1% for women and 1.1% for men from 2012 results of 7.2% for women and 2.7% for men. The goal for this metric is a reduction in prevalence of sexual assault, indicating success in prevention. Navy also aims for the number of Service member victims reporting sexual assault to equal the actual prevalence of sexual assault, indicating success in response. With the increase in reports and decrease in prevalence, Navy is making progress in closing the reporting gap. Metric 3: Bystander Intervention Experience in Past 12 Months The bystander intervention metric uses command climate survey responses to describe the self-reported percentage of respondents who, in the past 12 months, observed a situation they believed was, or could have led to, a sexual assault. If observed, a subsequent question asks participants to select from a number of possible responses that most closely resembles their action resulting from the observation. The overall percent of participants observing sexual assault situations was around 5%. Results further indicate that female and junior Sailors consistently observe sexual assault situations more frequently than male and more senior Sailors. This consistent disparity in observation indicates that more work remains to standardize perceptions of appropriate behavior and reduce exposure to risky situations. Female and more senior Sailors are more likely to act when the situations are observed, and it is encouraging that about 85% overall of those observing a sexual assault situation took action. Because junior Sailors are less likely to act than more senior Sailors, a continued focus on empowering them to take action is warranted. To that end, Navy is implementing additional bystander intervention skills training in 2015. The goal for this metric is a reduction in observed sexual assault situations and increased

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

46

intervention by those who observe those situations. Awareness and education efforts are empowering many Sailors to intervene. Metric 4: Command Climate Index – Addressing Continuum of Harm The command climate metric assesses the extent to which the chain of command promotes a climate based on respect and trust, refrains from sexist comments and behaviors, and actively discourages sexist comments and behaviors. The response results from the command climate survey are positive and consistent, averaging between ‘moderate’ to ‘great’ the extent to which commands support positive climates. Sailors believe their commands are intolerant of a climate which may promote actions that may lead to sexual assault. There is a disparity in response between genders and rank. Females and junior Sailors have a lower perception of command climate in regard to respect, trust, and sexist behaviors. While the overall responses are still positive, the disparity indicates a continued need to address this issue. The goal for this metric is a positive climate with consistent responses across gender and pay grade. Work remains to create a better climate for junior Sailors and females. Metric 5: Investigation Length The investigation length metric indicates the time it takes to complete sexual assault investigations, calculated from initial notification until the case is presented to command for appropriate action. It is important to note that this is not a performance metric related to the time it takes to conduct an investigation. Cases must be investigated thoroughly and effectively, ensuring victims’ rights and the due process rights of the accused are protected. Due to the unique nature and complexities of individual cases, a qualitative assessment of the work is more relevant. Investigation length trends show the efficacy of sexual assault investigation policy, resourcing decisions, and whether there is a need for modification to process or resourcing. The average investigation length in FY14 was 126 days, which is a slight increase from 122 days in FY13. In terms of caseloads, completed investigations rose from 621 in FY12 to 839 in FY13. In FY14, completed investigations increased to 1,019. Comparing FY14 to FY13, Unrestricted Reports increased by 68, an 8% increase. Investigation length rose slightly by 4 days, a 3% increase; and completed investigations increased by 180, a 21% increase. This shows that even though investigation time remained about the same, investigative capacity has not lost ground despite a rise in reported cases. Navy will continue to increase investigative resources, ensuring investigation pace is maintained while reducing investigation time prudently. The goal for this effort is thorough, effective, and responsive investigations. The time for investigation completion is a measure of how well the investigation effort is resourced. Despite the rise in caseloads, investigations are being completed thoroughly and effectively due to more effective training and additional resources.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

47

Metric 6: All Certified SARC and SAPR VA Personnel Currently Able to Provide Victim Support The victim support metric shows the resources available to support sexual assault victims. Navy is above the mandated number of 64 SARCs, and on track to exceed the required number of 64 full-time SAPR VAs. This means the personnel are in place to support victims who come forward. Understanding the value of SARCs and SAPR VAs, Navy increased the number of positions to 82 and 67, respectively, in October 2013 to better support the geographically-dispersed fleet. Additionally, Navy has over 5,000 Unit SAPR VAs serving their shipmates in a volunteer, collateral duty capacity. Navy will also have 18 DRCs assigned to large ships by mid-FY15. In addition to helping Sailors across the spectrum of resiliency, DRCs can provide specific help to prevent and respond to sexual assault. The goal for this metric is to meet the mandated requirements, exceeding the requirement as necessary to best support the unique needs of Sailors deployed on ships and around the globe. Metric 7: Victim Experience – SARC/VA Support; Special Victim Support Counsel The victim services metric demonstrates the level of satisfaction of sexual assault victims with the services provided by SARCs, VLCs, and Special Victim Capability. Preliminary Survivor Experience Survey results for Navy show that victims were satisfied with their SARCs and victim counsel. This survey provides invaluable insights from the perspective of the victim which can be used to identify opportunities to further improve services to victims. The goal for this metric is complete victim satisfaction of support provided from SARCs and victim counsel. The support team available to victims is effective, and additional data will better refine this assessment. Metric 8: Victims Declining to Participate in the Military Justice Process The victim participation metric shows the percentage of alleged offenders whose cases were provided to the commander for action, but could not be prosecuted due to victims declining to participate in the military justice system. The trend was fairly stable around 16% for the last several years. Navy will closely monitor this trend for improvement in consideration of the VLC program reaching full operational capability in July 2014. The goal for this metric is to maximize victim participation in the military justice system to have appropriate accountability for all offenders. Recent initiatives, such as the VLC and pending changes to Article 32 testifying requirements are expected to improve progress. Metric 9: Victim Retaliation – Victim Perspective; Command Climate Perspective The victim retaliation metric measures both the Sailors’ perceptions of victim retaliation and the prevalence of social and professional retaliation. This metric is derived from three sources: the DEOCS, WGRS, and Survivor Experience Survey. Based on command climate survey data, Sailors have a strongly positive perception that retaliation is less likely to occur at their commands, with males and senior ranks having

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

48

a more favorable perception than females and junior Sailors. Average scores across all demographic groups fell between ‘moderately’ to ‘very likely’ in response to how well their chain of command prevents a hostile environment for victims making reports of sexual assault. Based on 22 initial Survivor Experience Survey results, the majority of Navy victims reported experiencing some form of retaliation. The survey results indicate a need to further understand and address this issue. The goal for this metric is eliminating all forms of retaliation to allow survivors to return to work, and also encourage other victims to come forward without the fear of retaliation for reporting. Although commanders are establishing command climates intolerant of retaliation, the limited data from the Survivor Experience Survey do not correlate to this finding. Metric 10: Victim Experience – Victim Kept Informed Regularly in the Military Justice Process This victim communication metric shows the overall victim satisfaction with being kept informed of their case progression throughout the military justice process. Based on 22 initial Survivor Experience Survey results as of September 2014, most victims who responded reported being provided accurate up-to-date information on their case status. The standard for being adequately informed is defined by each individual victim, and highlights the need for tailored care and communications. With the VLC program in full operation as part of the victim advocacy team, Navy will continue to monitor this metric. The goal for this metric is victim satisfaction of being informed of case progression. Victims are generally satisfied with the information they receive, which is attributable to the use of VLC. Additional survey responses will better refine this assessment. Metric 11: Service Members’ Perceptions of Leadership Support for SAPR The Service member’s perception metric shows Sailors’ perceptions of leadership support for the SAPR program, victim reporting, and victim support. Based on the data gathered from command climate surveys, Sailors have a strongly positive perception of leadership support, with males and senior ranks having a more favorable impression than females and junior enlisted. Average scores across all demographic groups fell between ‘moderately’ to ‘very likely’ in response to how well their chain of command would take appropriate actions after receiving a report of sexual assault. Leadership support up and down the chain of command is critical to encourage reporting and setting the right tone for acceptable behavior and accountability in the command. The goal is command leadership that supports sexual assault prevention and response. These results show the efficacy of efforts to educate, train, and hold individuals appropriately accountable for sexual assault prevention and response at all levels of command. Metric 12: Reports of Sexual Assault Over Time This reports metric shows the year-to-year trend of Navy Restricted and Unrestricted

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

49

Reports. Based on the data, sexual assault reports continue to increase with total reports in FY14 increasing 10% over FY13. FY13 finished 53% higher than FY12, and FY12 finished 31% higher than FY11. With the efforts to educate Sailors about sexual assault, and the improvement in response to reported assaults, it was expected that sexual assault reporting would increase. Restricted Reports provide a valuable option to maximize sexual assault reporting for victims who may not otherwise come forward. Restricted Reports constitute about 25% of all reports, and Navy continues efforts to encourage victims to come forward in an unrestricted manner. Maximum reporting is desired to enable care for victims and to hold offenders appropriately accountable. The objective for this metric is tied to the prevalence of sexual assault, addressed in metrics 1 and 2. 5.8 CONCLUSION Assessment is a continuous process of collecting and analyzing data to measure and report program effectiveness. Evaluating the SAPR program allows Navy to identify areas of success and areas of needed improvement. Navy uses measurement tools to determine the impact of SAPR programs and eventual success of eliminating sexual assault. The results from assessments drive further adjustments to prevention and response efforts. SAPR assessments support Navy’s ability to continually improve overall command culture, and set conditions to deter and prevent destructive behaviors.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

50

Acronym List A School Advanced Skill Training School ASAP Adult Sexual Assault Program BUMED Bureau of Medicine and Surgery (US Navy) CNO Chief of Naval Operations CO Commanding Officer CSADD Coalition of Sailors Against Destructive Decisions DEOCS DEOMI Organizational Climate Survey DEOMI Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute DoD Department of Defense DON Department of the Navy DRC Deployed Resiliency Counselor DSAID Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database FY Fiscal Year JAG Judge Advocate General LOE Line of Effort MA Master-at-Arms NCIS Naval Criminal Investigative Service OJAG Office of the Judge Advocate General ROTC Reserve Officer Training Corps SAAM Sexual Assault Awareness Month SAFE Sexual Assault Forensic Exam SAPR Sexual Assault Prevention and Response SAPR-F Sexual Assault Prevention and Response-Fleet SAPR-L Sexual Assault Prevention and Response-Leadership SAPRO Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office SAPR VA Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Victim Advocate SARC Sexual Assault Response Coordinator SES Senior Executive Service TCAP Trial Counsel Assistance Program UCMJ Uniformed Code of Military Justice USNA United States Naval Academy VLC Victims’ Legal Counsel WGRS Workplace and Gender Relations Survey XO Executive Officer

Department of Defense (DoD) Statistical Report Data Call: Reported Sexual Assaults in the Military

for the Period 1 October 2013 through 30 September 2014

The Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database (DSAID) is the source of the data collected for this report. The statistical data, calculated as of 15 October 2014 and illustrated below, includes sexual assaults incidents reported during the period of 1 October 2013 through 30 September 2014. 1. Analytic Discussion

1.1. Provide an analytic discussion of your Service’s Statistical Report. This section should include such information as:

• Notable changes in the data since FY13 (in percentages) and other time periods (at least FY12, FY13, and FY14), as appropriate

• Insight or suspected reasons for noted changes, or lack of change, in data • Implications the data may have for programmatic planning, oversight, and/or

research • How reports of sexual assault compliment your Service’s scientifically

conducted surveys during FY13 or FY14 (if any) • Prevalence vs. reporting (the percentage of Service member incidents captured

in reports of sexual assault (Restricted Reports and Unrestricted Reports) (Metric #2)

• Total number of Sexual Assaults (Restricted Reports and Unrestricted Reports) over time (since 2004) (Metric #12)

• Other

Total Number of Sexual Assault Reports In Fiscal Year 2014 (FY14), reports of sexual assault in the U.S. Navy continued to increase over previous years. For a crime that is universally underreported, Navy views this trend as a positive endorsement of efforts to improve command climate. When a Sailor trusts the command to respond appropriately, he or she is more likely to make a report. The results of the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute Organizational Climate Survey (DEOCS) reiterated an increase in trust and confidence through a consistent positive perception of command climate and leadership support of the SAPR program. Navy actively encouraged reporting of sexual assaults through training and education, as indicated by the 10% increase in reports of sexual assault between FY13 and FY14. This follows a 53% increase in reports between FY12 and FY13, and a 31% increase between FY11 and FY12. A three-fold increase in reports of sexual assault between

Total Reports

FY07 408 FY08 500 FY09 604 FY10 620 FY11 578 FY12 755 FY13 1,158 FY14 1,274

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

2

FY07 (408) and FY14 (1,274) is strong evidence of trust and confidence in the Navy response system, and indicates progress toward closing the gap between actual incidents and reports. Restricted Reports Restricted Reports enable a victim to receive support services without command notification or initiating an investigation. In FY14, 401 initial Restricted Reports indicated an increase of 31% over FY13 (305). This follows a 24% increase between FY12 (246) and FY13, and a 41% increase between FY11 (174) and FY12. In FY14, 97 (24%) initial Restricted Reports were converted to Unrestricted Reports, compared to 49 (16%) in FY13, 47 (19%) in FY12, and 32 (18%) in FY11. This increase in conversion rates is another indicator of growing trust in the response system. Unrestricted Reports Unrestricted Reporting initiates a law enforcement investigation and provides an opportunity to hold alleged offenders appropriately accountable, in addition to giving victims access to support services. In FY14, there were 970 Unrestricted Reports, an increase of 8% from FY13. In FY13, there were 902 Unrestricted Reports of sexual assault, a 62% increase from the 556 reports in FY12. In FY12, there was a 28% increase in Unrestricted Reports from the 436 reports in FY11. With the rise in Unrestricted Reports, NCIS initiated and completed more investigations during this timeframe. In FY14, NCIS initiated 867 investigations and completed 1,019, including investigations begun in previous years. In FY13, 801 investigations were initiated and 839 were completed. In FY12, 527 investigations were initiated and 621 were completed. In FY11, 408 investigations were initiated and 436 were completed. Enhanced training, refocused investigative practices, and resources dedicated to sexual assault investigations were effective in keeping pace with the rise in sexual assault investigations. Prevalence vs. Reporting Confidential surveys are currently the best tool available to estimate the number of sexual assault incidents in the Navy. The Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of Active Duty Personnel (WGRA) was conducted by the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) through 2012, and the RAND Military Workplace Study (RMWS) was used in 2014, utilizing newly designed assessment criteria and methods. RAND assigned a small number of service members a version of the prior 2012 WGRA questionnaire, and analyzed the comparable results to provide historical trends. The FY14 prevalence estimates in the table were calculated using the WGRA data. Estimates of sexual assault prevalence in the Navy are based on the percentage of surveyed Sailors who had at least one experience of unwanted

Prevalence Estimate CY06 10,400 FY10 5,100 FY12 10,600 FY14 (WGRA) 5,600

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

3

sexual contact (this includes contact, attempted penetration, and penetration offenses) in the 12 months before responding to the survey, and represent both male and female victims of various offense types. By extrapolating the survey results to the Navy population, there were estimated to be roughly 5,600 sexual assault incidents in FY14. This represents a decrease over the FY12 estimate. In FY14, 1,135 Service members made restricted or unrestricted reports, representing 20% of the estimated incidents. In FY12, 659 Service members made restricted or unrestricted reports, representing 6% of the estimated incidents that year. From preliminary estimates of FY14, about half of the 5,600 extrapolated incidents represent male victims and half represent female victims. These estimates indicate roughly 32% of female victims and 8% of male victims made reports in FY14. In FY12, about two-thirds of the 10,600 extrapolated incidents represented male victims and one-third represented female victims. These estimates indicate roughly 17% of female victims and 1.2% of male victims made reports in FY12. This data demonstrates the underreporting of this crime, especially among male victims who comprised the majority of the prevalence estimate, but only a small percentage of the Service member reports received. Navy continues efforts to increase reporting among all victims, recognizing that gender-specific strategies are necessary to encourage male and female victim reporting. The surveys also break out unwanted sexual contact behaviors by type. Across DoD in FY14, behaviors experienced by female victims were 30% for unwanted sexual touching, 29% for penetration offenses, 31% for attempted offenses, and 10% were not specified. Across DoD in FY14, behaviors experienced by male victims were 49% for unwanted sexual touching, 11.5% for penetration offenses, 11.5% for attempted offenses, and 28% were not specified. FY14 Service specific type of behavior analysis is not yet available. For Navy in FY12, behaviors experienced by female victims were 29% for unwanted sexual touching, 34% for penetration offenses, 24% for attempted offenses, and 13% were not specified. In FY12 behaviors experienced by male victims could not be broken out due to the low number of survey responses. Navy will continue to use the results of this survey to assess progress in closing the reporting gap, both from the perspective of reducing incidents and increasing reporting. While the ultimate goal is to eradicate sexual assault, Navy wants to ensure maximum reporting of incidents to facilitate victim care and ensure appropriate accountability for offenders. Notable Changes in Data Type of Offenses Unrestricted Reports are categorized as either contact (e.g., abusive sexual contact or aggravated sexual contact) or penetration (e.g., rape or sexual assault) offenses,

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

4

depending on the nature of the act. In FY13, 44% of Unrestricted Reports were contact offenses, compared to 35% in FY12. Conversely, 56% of Unrestricted Reports were penetration offenses in FY13, compared to 63% in FY12. FY14 data in this category is still provisional, precluding trending analysis. However, based on the 737 unrestricted reports that have been categorized, 399 are penetration crimes, 309 contact crimes, and 29 are attempts to commit a crime. Navy continues to reconcile FY14 data in this category. The rise in reports of contact offenses reflects the broadened definition of what constitutes sexual assault, efforts to increase trust that commands will hold offenders accountable, eradicate pre-conceived notions about what constitutes sexual assault, and ensure an increased willingness to report all unacceptable behavior. Report Latency Latency refers to the delay between the date the incident of sexual assault occurred and the filing of a report. In the case of Unrestricted Reports, a shorter latency provides the best opportunity for a successful investigation. However, recent education and awareness campaigns triggered more victims, who may not have previously had confidence in the response system, to come forward and report. In FY14, reports received less than 31 days from the incident accounted for 57% of Unrestricted Reports, 52% in FY13, and 56% in FY12. Conversely, reports received greater than or equal to 31 days from the date of the incident accounted for 37% of Unrestricted Reports in FY14, 42% in FY13, and 35% in FY12. Unknown latency comprises the remaining reports in each year. Navy continues to educate and encourage Sailors to come forward and receive support services, regardless of when the incident occurred. Male Victim Reporting Male victims in the Navy, as in the general population, represent an underreported segment of an underreported crime. Male victims comprised 15% of Unrestricted Reports in FY13 (117) and 11% in FY12 (56). FY14 data in this category is still provisional, precluding trending analysis. However, based on the 799 Unrestricted Reports that have been categorized, 162 are male victims. Navy continues to reconcile FY14 data in this category. Navy continues efforts to encourage reporting among men and women. Other Trends Service member on Service member crimes accounted for 67% of Unrestricted Reports in FY13 and 69% in FY12. Additionally, the majority of victims who file Unrestricted Reports continue to be female, 85% in FY13 and 89% in FY12, and junior enlisted between pay grades E-1 and E-4, 67% in FY13 and 78% in FY12. FY14 data in these categories is still provisional, precluding trending analysis.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

5

Explanation and Implications of the Data It is important to note that an increase in sexual assault reports is the result of various factors and may not necessarily represent increased incidents of sexual assault. Many factors contributed to changes in reporting and demographics, including additional training, education, awareness campaigns, changes to Article 120 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and expanded efforts to reduce sexual assaults in the military. Additionally, beginning in January 2013, MCIOs were required to investigate all reports of sexual assault, including contact offenses, regardless of the type of sexual assault offense. During the last several fiscal years, there was a strong Navy-wide education campaign to educate Sailors and civilians about sexual assault reporting options (restricted and unrestricted), services available to victims of sexual assault, and crime prevention initiatives. In FY13, the Secretary of Defense directed a SAPR stand-down requiring 100% participation by all active duty, reserve, and civilian employees of DoD. The goal of this training campaign was threefold: convey a top-down message of intolerance of sexual assault in any aspect of DoD; eradicate pre-conceived notions about what constituted a sexual assault; and educate on reporting options and victim services. The impact and effectiveness of this training is one of many factors contributing to the increased reporting of incidents of sexual assault. Changes to Article 120 of the UCMJ and the new requirement for NCIS to investigate all contact offenses, contributed to the increase in investigations. In June 2012, UCMJ Article 120 broadened the legal definition of sexual contact to include touching any part of the body for sexual gratification. Prior to this change, the definition of sexual contact only included sexual-related areas of the body (e.g., the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks). The new definition includes non-sexual areas such as the neck or shoulder. Awareness campaigns on these changes were disseminated Navy- wide. Unrestricted Reports increased 62% between FY12 and FY13, during which the number of contact offenses investigated (i.e., wrongful sexual contact, abusive sexual contact, and aggravated sexual contact) increased 88%. Navy also attributes the increase in high latency Unrestricted Reports from 35% of in FY12 to 42% in FY13 to the awareness and education campaigns. 2. Unrestricted Reporting 2.1. Victim Data Discussion and Analysis. This section should include an overview of such information as:

• Type of offenses • Demographic trends • Service referrals • Experiences in Combat Areas of Interest Military Protective Orders Issued as a

Result of an Unrestricted Report (e.g., number issued, number violated)

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

6

• Approved expedited transfers and reasons why transfers were not approved • The number of victims declining to participate in the military justice process

(Metric #8) • Others

Type of Offenses In FY14, abusive sexual contact was the most frequently reported offense, followed by sexual assault and rape. Aggravated sexual contact, forcible sodomy, aggravated sexual assault, indecent assault, and attempts to commit an offense accounted for the remaining reports. A significant portion of FY14 offense data has not yet been categorized, precluding trend analysis. However, abusive sexual contact, sexual assault, and rape are estimated to remain the most frequent offenses reported. As previously noted the general shift in reporting from penetration offenses to contact offenses began to occur during FY13 and has continued into FY14. Demographic Trends Victims were predominantly female Service members between the ages of 20 and 24 and pay grades E-1 to E-4. Nearly all of the Service member victims were active duty and affiliated with the U.S. Navy. The remaining Service member victims were Navy reservists or affiliated with other services. These trends have remained steady from FY11 to present. Service Referrals During FY14, DSAID captured over 3,300 resource referrals for Service member victims in both Unrestricted and Restricted Reports. Referrals for SAPR Victim Advocates were the most frequently offered resource, accounting for 28% of total referrals. Other referrals were made for mental health resources, legal services, medical services, chaplain/spiritual support, and DoD Safe Helpline. Additionally, over 200 resource referrals were offered to non-Service member victims. These include referrals to Rape Crisis Centers, SAPR Victim Advocates, mental health resources, legal services, medical services, and chaplain/spiritual support. Combat Areas of Interest In FY14, 15 victims made Unrestricted Reports of sexual assault which occurred in a combat location. The general trends for these reports match the overall Navy demographics in regards to offense type reported, time of delayed report, and demographic information of the victims. All of these victims were Service members. As in previous FY reporting, with a relatively small number of Unrestricted Reports in the combat areas of interest, the trends within these reports remained consistent.

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

7

Military Protective Orders In FY14, 232 Military Protective Orders were issued in 970 Unrestricted Report cases, with 1 violation by a subject. FY14 data in this category is still provisional, precluding trending analysis. Navy continues work to reconcile FY14 data in this category. In FY13, 244 Military Protective Orders were issued, with 11 violations by subject. Expedited Transfers In FY14, there were 17 unit/duty and 174 installation expedited transfer requests by Service member victims. One of the unit expedited transfer requests was denied on the basis the report of sexual assault was determined not to be credible. In FY13, there were 20 unit/duty and 128 installation expedited transfer requests by Service members. Two unit expedited transfer requests were denied. In one instance, the victim and offender were not collocated, and in the other, the report of sexual assault was determined not to be credible. Victims Declining to Participate in the Military Justice Process Subjects could not be prosecuted in 118 (17%) cases where victims declined to participate in the military justice process. This is not, however, reflective of all cases in which the victim declined to participate in the investigative/military justice process. In some cases, command action was pursued, resulting in administrative or disciplinary action against a subject, despite non-participation of the victim. However, these cases are not categorized as a victim declination within DSAID. Navy’s Victims’ Legal Counsel (VLC) program reached full manning in July 2014 with 29 VLCs. VLCs are geographically dispersed around the globe, and provide advocacy and legal advice to victims, whether or not a victim chooses to make a report. The addition of VLCs to the victim support team is expected to positively impact reporting propensity and victims remaining in the adjudication process through completion. 2.2. Subject Data Discussion and Analysis. This section should include an overview of such information as:

• Demographic trends • Disposition trends • Experiences in Combat Areas of Interest • Command action for Military Subjects under DoD Legal Authority (to be

captured using the most serious crime charged) (Non-Metric #1) • Sexual Assault Court-Martial Outcomes (to be captured using the most serious

crime charged) (Non-Metric #2) • Other

Demographic Trends In FY14, subjects were predominantly male, active duty, U.S. Navy, enlisted Service

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

8

members, between 20 and 34 years of age. Less than 5% of the Service members were activated reservists at the time of the sexual assault. Disposition Trends Disposition data was examined for cases closed during the fiscal year vice open and closed in the same fiscal year. Thorough investigations and case dispositions require time, particularly in complex cases. Examining cases opened and closed in the same fiscal year would have excluded analysis of the more egregious reports received in previous fiscal years, and as a practical matter, all cases reported in the last quarter of the fiscal year, because it takes time to investigate and take disposition actions. In FY14, there were 920 final dispositions for subjects accused of sexual assault. Fifty- seven percent (522) of the subjects were not prosecuted for the following reasons: lack of jurisdiction (i.e., civilian subjects not subject to UCMJ) (64); civilian or foreign authority exercised jurisdiction over Service member subject (6); subject was unknown (159); allegation was unfounded (e.g., it was false/baseless or did not meet the elements of a sexual assault offense) (27); statute of limitations expired (5); subject died or deserted (1); evidence was insufficient (142); or victim declined or refused to cooperate with the investigation or prosecution (118). Experiences in Combat Areas of Interest In FY14, 50% of the subjects were Service members. Unknown and foreign national subjects accounted for a majority of the remaining subjects. The U.S. Navy Service member subjects were primarily male, active duty, and enlisted. The ages of the subjects were widely dispersed between 20 and 49 years of age, with 44% of the ages not available. Due to the relatively small sample size (15) for Unrestricted Reports in the combat areas of interest and varying missions within them, there also is a wide variability of subject demographics from year-to-year. Command Action for Military Subjects Under DoD Legal Authority In FY14, command action was taken against 398 Service members for both sexual assault and non-sexual assault (e.g., failure to obey order or regulation) offenses. Types of command action included court-martial, non-judicial punishment, administrative separation, or other adverse administrative actions (including Midshipmen Disciplinary System Action at the U.S. Naval Academy). Court-martial charges were preferred in approximately 49% of cases, a 5% rate increase over FY13. Sexual Assault Court-Martial Outcomes In FY14, there were 181 cases where court-martial charges were preferred for a sexual assault offense, a 64% increase over the 110 cases in FY13. Of those 181 cases, 134 proceeded to trial on at least one sexual assault offense. Of

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

9

those 134, 93 cases resulted in a conviction (69%), and 41 in an acquittal (31%). Of those 181 cases, 10 resulted in a resignation or separation in lieu of trial and 36 resulted in dismissal of charges. However, of the 36 that resulted in dismissal of charges, 11 subjects received non-judicial punishment. 2.3. Reporting Data Discussion and Analysis. This section should include an overview of such information as:

• Trends in descriptive information about Unrestricted Reports (e.g., Did more reported incidents occur on/off installation?)

• Investigations • Experiences in Combat Areas of Interest • Other

Location and Time of Incident In FY14, slightly more sexual assault incidents occurred on, rather than off of, military installations. Incidents occurred every day of the week, with the majority occurring Friday through Sunday. When the time of the incident was known, it was more likely to be between midnight and 6 a.m., or 6 p.m. to midnight. In the initial report by the victim, 33% of the reports were made within three days of the sexual assault, and 24% were made four to 30 days after the sexual assault. The remaining reports were delayed longer than 30 days. The time and day of the incidents remained consistent for Unrestricted Reports from FY11 to present. Investigative Authority NCIS was the predominant investigative authority for Navy Service members. A small number of Navy Service members were also investigated by other Service MCIOs and civilian or foreign law enforcement. Additionally, NCIS routinely investigates non- Service member subjects (civilian or foreign national) and cases where the subject is unknown as long as there is a U.S. Navy connection (i.e., Navy victim or alleged incident occurred on board a Navy installation). Combat Areas of Interest Of the 15 Unrestricted Reports occurring in combat areas of interest, incidents occurred both on and off of military installations, with a small percentage of incidents occurring either in unidentified locations or possibly multiple locations. The incidents largely occurred in Bahrain, which remains consistent since FY11. Other countries included Djibouti, Iraq, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates, which has fluctuated over the years. Previous FY reports included Unrestricted Reports occurring in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Jordan, Oman, Qatar, and Uganda. The majority of the incidents took place Friday thru Monday; the time-interval of the incidents varied (e.g., midnight to 6 a.m., 6 a.m. to 6 p.m., or 6 p.m. to midnight).

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

10

3. Restricted Reporting 3.1. Victim Data Discussion. This section should include such information as:

• Demographics trends • Service referrals • Experiences in Combat Areas of Interest • Other (Please explain)

Sexual Assault Response Coordinators Restricted reports are not reported to law enforcement for investigation or to commands for disposition. Sexual Assault Response Coordinators (SARCs) do not report the types of offenses for Restricted Reports. For all Restricted Reports, the role of the SARC is to focus on support services (e.g., crisis intervention and referrals to advocacy, medical, and counseling services) and case management. Total Restricted Reports Between FY13 and FY14, there was a notable increase in initial Restricted Reports. There were 96 more reports in FY14 (401) than in FY13 (305), an increase of 31%. There were also 59 more Restricted Reports in FY13 compared to FY12 (246), a 24% increase. In FY14, 393 Service members, five non-Service member victims (involving a military subject and entitled to a Restricted Report by DoD policy), and three reports with unavailable victim type, made a Restricted Report to a SARC and/or SAPR Victim Advocate (SAPR VA). Increased trust and confidence in the SAPR program and a better understanding of what constitutes sexual assault may have contributed to the increase in reporting. Service Affiliation In FY14, of the 401 Restricted Reports, 304 remained restricted (not converted to an Unrestricted Report). Within Navy, 299 were filed by Service member victims, 95% Navy (283), U.S. Army (5), U.S. Marine Corps (6), and U.S. Air Force (5). The remaining five Restricted Reports were filed by non-Service members against Service member assailants (4), with one report with unavailable victim type. Twenty- four of the Restricted Reports involved incidents that occurred prior to the victims’ military service. Demographic Trends FY14 data in this category is still provisional, precluding trending analysis. Demographically, based on 304 initially Restricted Reports able to be categorized, 261 involved female victims, and 42 involved male victims. The majority, 161 victims, were between the ages of 20-24. The remaining ages of victims at the time of incident were

Navy: SAPR Progress Report to the President

11

as follows: three victims between ages 0-15; 65 victims between ages 16-19; 57 victims between ages 25-34; and four victims between ages 35-49. Based on the available 299 Service member reports being categorized, ranks were reported as follows: 201 were E-1 to E-4, 74 were E-5 to E-9, 20 were O-1 to O-3, and four were Cadet/Midshipman. Combat Area of Interest In FY14, there were 10 Restricted Reports filed by Service members in combat areas of interest compared to one in FY13. Of the 10 reports, 90% (9) were Navy victims and 10% (1) were U.S. Air Force victims. Demographically, 90% (9) involved female victims, and 10% (1) involved a male victim. The ages of victims at the times of incidents were as follows: 10% (1) ages 16-19, 70% (7) ages 20-24, and 20% (2) ages 35-49. Ranks of the victims were as follows: 60% (6) were E-1 to E-4 and 40% (4) were E-5 to E-9. Non-Service Member Victims In FY14, there were 13 non-Service member victims who made an initial Restricted Report. The non-Service member Restricted Reports were made as follows: nine non- Service member on non-Service member entitled to Restricted Report by DOD policy, one unidentified subject on non-Service Member, and three unavailable victim types. Of the 13 non-Service member Restricted Reports in FY14, two (15%) converted to Unrestricted