MSU reported to the OCR that from 2011-2014, approximately 150 sexual assault and harassment complaints were filed with the university. Upon review, investigators found “significant concerns” in 30 cases. The OCR discovered that survivors had to wait months and at times close to a year for a resolution to their complaint and for the possibility of disciplinary action against their assailant.

OCR’s analysis also found that many case files “were incomplete, documentation was missing or nonexistent” and in other instances, despite evidence supporting the survivor’s claims, the university failed to find in their favor or take appropriate disciplinary action.

Particularly troubling is that in several instances, university administrators and campus police appear to have misled OCR investigators about the extent to which policies were being implemented and enforced.

For example, after interviewing campus police about how they respond to reports of rape and sexual assault, investigators reviewed student case files and found that they “did not indicate that the University police consistently operate as described by the police department witness.”

During OCR’s on campus interviews with students and community members, the OCR reported that many people reported having “challenging experiences” with campus police, including instances where “local police mistreat[ed] individuals who reported sexual assaults by making a scene, being rude or unprofessional, being dismissive, blaming the accuser, or not following up on a complaint.”

Furthermore, investigators found that similar claims by the university were not always borne out in their investigation.

For example, despite claims to the contrary, the OCR found that the university provided inadequate sexual assault and harassment related training and education to students, including athletes and resident hall staff, and that the university’s Anti-Discrimination Policy and other materials addressing sexual assault and harassment were similarly inadequate (and difficult for students to find).

Additionally, despite the university’s claims regarding support services for survivors, OCR investigators found that student seeking therapy from the MSU Counseling Center after an assault were sometimes made to wait up to four weeks before seeing a therapist. What’s worse, during the course of their investigation, the OCR found that the university inadequately responded to a complaint by a survivor that they were being sexually harassed by their university counselor.

During their investigation, OCR discovered that “a number of students stated that the University’s athletes have a reputation for engaging in sexual harassment and sexual assault and not being punished for it, because athletes are held in such high regard at the University.” During an interview with Tom Izzo, OCR investigators found that he was unfamiliar with proper reporting requirements under Title IX and when interviewing male athletes, OCR reported that they expressed concern that “making a report about sexual assault might tarnish the Spartan brand” and that at least “one male athlete stated that athletes may not report an incident involving a fellow athlete.”

These interviews are even more troubling when coupled with comments Izzo made, apparently about the investigation, to the State News in March (a few weeks after being questioned by the OCR) remarking the situation was “ridiculous” and continuing “I’m sick of it.”

Despite the excoriating findings in the OCR’s report, the university appears to be deflecting potential criticism, claiming that the report is backwards looking and does not reflect recent improvements. It would appear that the university has also attempted to mislead the public on the actual findings in the report.

For example, the University’s statement released on Tuesday claims that OCR’s investigation found that MSU’s response to sexual assault complaints “might have contributed to a hostile environment for some students and employees” (emphasis added). MSU’s statement links to two further university statements but not the OCR’s report (which can be found here: http://www.ed.gov/news/).

The OCR’s report offers a sobering look inside the innermost workings of the university’s response to complaints of sexual violence and harassment. Rather than seeking to deflect or minimize the OCR’s findings, the university should respond with humility; apologizing for past mistakes and demonstrate their commitment to improvement by transparently adhering to their consent agreement with the OCR.

Mitch Goldsmith is an MSU alumnus. You can reach him at goldsmith.mitch@gmail.com.