By admin 
The California State University and University of California have strengthened their practices in preventing and addressing sexual harassment over the last few years, according to a report released by the California State Auditor earlier this summer.
Read more Is the California State Fair affordable? What to expect to pay for food, rides
Still, the audit identified significant issues that persist: inadequate outreach to those affected, problematic language in case reports, and inconsistencies in disciplinary measures imposed on perpetrators.
The report follows scathing audits in 2017 and 2023 that revealed the failure of both systems to adequately address sexual harassment complaints. In 2024, California passed a law mandating that the state auditor monitor the CSU and UC’s progress in this domain every three years. The new report is the first in the series that will continue to evaluate if systemwide policies and practices are consistent with federal law, state law and best practices.
“I truly appreciate the commitment that has gone into strengthening the CSU’s civil rights programs and services,” said CSU Trustee Wenda Fong at a board meeting Wednesday. “At the same time, our responsibility as trustees is to ensure these improvements are sustainable and consistent across all 22 universities and to continue to strengthen our confidence in our civil rights processes.”
In 2022, an investigation by USA Today found that then-CSU Chancellor Joseph Castro had mishandled sexual harassment complaints against a former administrator when he was president of Fresno State. Prompted by this, the California State Auditor conducted an evaluation that found severe deficiencies in the CSU’s systemwide sexual harassment policies and their implementation.
The system had no clear guidelines on when to initiate formal investigations, often misjudged that sexual harassment had not occurred, and failed in some cases to take corrective action, it said. The audit provided the CSU system with a long list of recommendations in 2023, including stronger oversight from the Chancellor’s Office. In 2024, California passed a law requiring CSU to implement those recommendations. Since then, the system has spent more than $15 million on staffing, oversight, and training to improve its practices.
Earlier, in 2017, the spotlight was on the UC system after the San Francisco Chronicle exposed severe inconsistencies in how it handled sexual assault complaints against employees. This led to a state audit in 2018 that concluded the system took much longer to address complaints against faculty than staff, imposed inconsistent disciplinary action on repeat offenders, and often exceeded investigation timeframes. At that time, legislators held multiple hearings throughout the state to elicit recommendations on how the CSU and UC systems could be held accountable to ensure better protection of students.
According to the state auditor, the UC and CSU systems have now implemented nearly all its previous recommendations. The latest report suggests that years of advocacy, monitoring and reform have paid off, but both higher education systems still have a long way to go.
Major findings
For the new report, the state auditor randomly selected two campuses from each system: UC Irvine, UC Riverside, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo and Sacramento State. The study reviewed 97 sexual harassment complaints against students and employees across the four campuses and flagged six with major issues.
In the 2023 report on CSU, the auditor had identified deficiencies in more than half the cases it reviewed; now, that number has dropped to 9%.
Read more Driver convicted in DUI crash that killed five passengers along Sacramento Delta
However, the issues that persist are serious. In one CSU case, the audit said that Title IX office staff appeared to pressure a complainant to use the alternative resolution process despite their stated preference that the campus conduct an investigation. Later, that complainant wrote in an impact statement that she felt little had been done to hold the accused accountable.
The audit also found three cases with unexplained inconsistencies in disciplinary outcomes. At a CSU campus, decision-makers suspended two students for sexual assault violations, but expelled others who committed similar acts. In one UC case, the campus did not dismiss a faculty member for conduct that was more egregious than conduct in other cases we reviewed that resulted in dismissal, the report said.
In some investigations, the audit found problematic or dismissive language in official reports. For example, in one report, an official said the complainant “overreacted to … clumsy flirtation.” These instances, it said, did not lead to wrong decisions, but could result in diminishing the stakeholders’ trust in the process.
The audit noted that nearly half the cases that it studied were closed without formal action. Some of these were closed after officials did not receive a response from the complainant. According to the audit, campuses usually only contacted them via email. If they did not respond, the campuses often failed to make an adequate effort to reach them through other means like phone calls — a move that could increase participation. In one sexual assault case at a UC campus, a complainant reached out to schedule a follow-up meeting, but there was no documentation showing that meeting happened and the case was eventually closed without any action.
What next?
In official responses, both the CSU and UC systems said they were committed to implementing the recommendations laid out in the report. This includes expanding the method of contact with complainants beyond just email, reinforcing their agency in choosing which resolution option they would like to pursue, and considering educational conversations with the accused when no formal action is taken.
For the UC system specifically, the audit recommended standardizing its approach to determining disciplinary action when employees are found to have violated the sexual harassment policy. This will reduce inconsistencies, the report said. The CSU, meanwhile, has been asked to set minimum sanctions for students who committed sexual assault to improve consistency in how disciplinary action is meted out to them.
Frey Monday, a Sacramento State student, said policy improvements will only reach the students when accompanied by a parallel shift in the culture on campus. As an office-holding member of the Women’s and Gender Studies Club, that is exactly what he is working towards.
“Providing information and empowering whoever is reporting their experience of being harmed is one of the most important ways to make administrative change more effective,” Monday said. “I am seeing a large grassroots effort to do that. Supporting organizations like the Women’s Resource Center, PRIDE Center and Planned Parenthood on campus would be a huge step in creating supports for students who are at high risk and disproportionately affected by gender-based violence.”
Read more Sacramento County pays $1.6 million after man died following high speed chase, crash