Federal data show that more than 45,000 people reported rape or sexual assault to colleges from 2019 through 2024, but experts say the total misses many incidents. The Clery Act collects reports made to designated campus security authorities, while schools have discretion over who qualifies and the law requires no formal training for those authorities. Surveys find much higher levels of sexual violence than reporting totals capture, and a 2015 study found reports rose during compliance audits. Experts point to confidential advocates and better student awareness as ways to support reporting. The material describes no new rule, deadline, cost estimate or proposed change, leaving closer review of existing reporting practices as a necessary next step.
TLDR: Federal campus crime totals are based on reports made to designated university authorities and do not capture many incidents, experts say. Audits, clearer reporting practices and confidential advocates are identified as important areas for attention, but the material names no new rule, deadline or cost.
More than 45,000 people reported rape or sexual assault to colleges and universities from 2019 through 2024, according to federal data. Experts say the total misses much of the sexual violence on campuses. The figures offer a record of reports, but not a complete count of incidents.
The Jeane Clery Act requires colleges to report certain campus crime data to the federal government. The stated purpose of this reporting system is to make campus crime information available, and its practical logic is straightforward: consistent records can help show what is happening. But the data depends on incidents being reported to people the school counts as campus security authorities, and that leaves important gaps.
The federal figures include reports made to campus security authorities, such as campus police and Title IX officials. They cover incidents on campus and some off-campus locations. More than 80% of the largest four-year colleges reported rape or fondling at least twice a year on average between 2019 and 2024, according to CBS News’ analysis. At more than a third of large schools, reports averaged more than once a month.
The reported figures are not a measure of every assault. Surveys indicate that about one in five undergraduate students say they experienced at least one incident of sexual violence, while most incidents are never reported. Studies also find that some reports made to universities do not appear in the federal totals.
The law gives colleges discretion to decide who qualifies as a campus security authority and which people face reporting requirements. It does not require formal training for those authorities. Corey Rayburn Yung, a University of Kansas law professor who studies criminal law and sexual violence, said some schools may exclude reports they consider unfounded or that a victim does not pursue. The excerpt does not establish how often that occurs.
Past enforcement findings show why oversight matters. Schools have been fined for underreporting, though the excerpt does not provide fine amounts or identify a new enforcement action. Yung’s 2015 study found that reports of rape and fondling rose by 44% overall during compliance audits, then declined after audits ended. Other tracked crimes, including aggravated assault, robbery and burglary, did not show the same pattern.
The trend raises questions about whether reported totals reflect campus conditions or reporting practices. Yung said the figures did not match survey data and criminal reporting data in similar jurisdictions. The Clery Act numbers still show substantial reported violence, but they cannot resolve the gap between records and broader survey findings.
Reporting also depends on whether students know where to go and believe that a report will be taken seriously. Sara Wilf, a George Mason University social work professor who researches campus sexual violence, said a lack of confidential resources and limited knowledge of available services can discourage reporting. In her research, about half of California students surveyed did not know what the Title IX office did. About a third said sexual assault and harassment training was ineffective or could not remember it.
Some victims question whether an experience qualifies as sexual violence, or worry that their account will not be taken seriously. Wilf said that uncertainty can take years to resolve. Survey respondents most often said they wanted a confidential advocate who could explain options and help them navigate investigations or reports. The University of California system has installed such advocates on its campuses.
The reporting system has practical limits as well as value. The data collection places reporting duties on people designated by universities, but the law does not require their formal training. The excerpt gives no new form, compliance deadline, proposed rule, or estimated cost for colleges, and it describes no government proposal to replace the current process. There is no specified timetable for a policy change in the material available here.
The Cornell case illustrates how reporting, investigation and discipline are separate stages. Jane Doe alleges that she was drugged and raped in October 2024 and later filed a civil lawsuit against seven former fraternity brothers, the university and others. Prosecutors did not charge anyone, but have reopened the criminal investigation. Cornell said it conducted an investigation over several months; the university reported two expulsions, two suspensions of at least two semesters, one accused person who had graduated before punishment could be imposed, and two findings of no responsibility. Lawyers for two men denied the allegations against their clients.
New York state data show that Cornell investigated 171 sexual misconduct cases from 2019 through 2024 and expelled five people, including two connected to Jane Doe’s case. Statewide, 246 people were expelled or dismissed and 464 were suspended during that period. Those state figures include domestic violence and stalking as well as sexual assault, so they do not isolate sexual assault outcomes.
The next steps described in the reporting are continued scrutiny of what schools count, how reports are recorded and whether compliance audits reveal omissions. No new deadlines or forms are identified, and no specific oversight schedule is provided. Audits and accurate reporting remain necessary steps for checking compliance; the available data show why that work cannot be treated as finished.
Lisa Grant serves as a Staff Writer for Just Right News, where she spearheads the publication’s coverage of Technology, Data Capitalism, and Surveillance. With a focus on the encroaching influence of Big Tech on the American way of life, Grant brings a critical, liberty-minded perspective to the most complex digital issues of the modern era. Her reporting is defined by a deep-seated skepticism of centralized power and a commitment to protecting the privacy and autonomy of the individual against the rising tide of what she calls the “Algorithmic State.”
Grant’s unique insight into the tech industry is rooted in her upbringing in Palo Alto, California. Growing up in the epicenter of Silicon Valley, she witnessed firsthand the transformation of the technology sector from a hub of scrappy, freedom-loving innovators into a landscape dominated by monolithic corporations. This proximity to the birth of the digital revolution provided her with an insider’s understanding of the culture and motivations driving the industry. For Grant, the shift toward data capitalism—where personal information is harvested as a primary commodity—is not just a market evolution, but a fundamental challenge to traditional American values of property rights and personal privacy. She saw the “garage startup” ethos replaced by a culture of data-mining and social engineering, a transition that informs her vigilant reporting today.
Now based in Seattle, Washington, Grant operates from another of the nation’s primary technological frontiers. Her location in the Pacific Northwest allows her to observe the real-world consequences of the tech industry’s expansion, from the implementation of invasive surveillance technologies in urban centers to the growing partnership between corporate entities and municipal governance. By reporting from the ground in Seattle, she bridges the gap between the abstract world of coding and the tangible impact it has on citizens’ daily lives, often highlighting how local policies serve as a testing ground for broader national surveillance initiatives.
At the heart of her work for Just Right News is her acclaimed feature series, “The Algorithmic State.” Through this series, Grant explores the ways in which automated systems and artificial intelligence are increasingly used to bypass traditional legislative processes and social norms. She argues that the reliance on opaque algorithms to manage society threatens to erode the transparency and accountability essential to a free republic. Her work meticulously documents how data-driven governance can lead to a “soft” surveillance state that penalizes traditional viewpoints and rewards digital conformity.
Grant’s reporting is a vital resource for readers who are wary of the “nanny state” and the unchecked power of digital gatekeepers. She views the defense of the digital frontier as the next great battle for constitutional conservatives. By exposing the mechanisms of data capitalism and the quiet expansion of surveillance networks, she empowers her audience to reclaim their digital sovereignty. In an era where information is often weaponized by those in power, Lisa Grant remains a steadfast advocate for the truth, ensuring that the principles of liberty and individual agency are not lost in the transition to an increasingly digital world.