with RCCs. There are excellent examples of RCCs and universities working very
effectively together, including arrangements such as the delivery of training by RCC
staff to university staff. However, there is also evidence that many institutions have
no engagement with their local RCC and do not refer students to their services. Rape
Crisis believes there is little data available on disclosures and responses at an
institutional level, making it difficult to assess the consistency of university
responses.
Lack of funding – Most RCCs receive no funding from universities, even when
providing training and support to university staff. Rape Crisis have called for
institutions to contract with local RCCs and provide funding for the delivery of
services and training.
Evidence of the inconsistency of approaches across the sector is also highlighted in the
response of the GFEDV. It argues for a ‘youth-led’ dialogue in creating a framework for
universities to prevent and address domestic violence where it affects students. The
Eliminate Domestic Violence Youth Council – which aims to raise awareness and tackle
domestic violence affecting 16–24-year-olds in the UK – has led several workshops at
universities and has created a toolkit on domestic violence in partnership with the NUS. The
focus of this is on educating students about the signs of domestic violence and how they can
help to tackle the problem, rather than on the role of the institution.86
Staff to student sexual harassment and sexual violence
The UUK Taskforce has been made aware that staff to student sexual harassment is also a
problem which needs to be acknowledged and tackled. The Taskforce takes this very
seriously and has identified this as a potential area of further work for UUK.
The submission made by CFR focused on staff to student sexual harassment and sexual
violence within the higher education sector, particularly academic staff and postgraduate
students. Data from 2013–14 shows that 22% of professors in the UK are female and women
make up a third of academic staff (excluding professors). They suggest that this gender
imbalance may contribute towards unacceptable staff behaviour remaining hidden and refer
to the difficulties that staff members may face in attempting to speak out against a colleague.
CFR believe that there is a lack of research in this area and this problem has remained fairly
insulated; cases are dealt with internally and confidentiality agreements often signed.
CFR believe consistency is lacking in institutional policy and procedures, and have particular
concerns with complaints procedures. Internal complaints procedures can create a conflict of
interest where complaints are forwarded to the head of the same department in which the
alleged harasser is a staff member. CFR’s submission also reflects the wider concern with
university procedures for recording incidents, and the extent to which this is dealt with
informally rather than on the basis of an institution-wide policy promoting a systematic
approach. They recommend that best practice guidelines are developed for complaints
procedures, recording, disciplinary procedures, investigative procedures and how to provide
support to students. Although specific to the issue of staff to student harassment, these areas
86
http://beta.nusconnect.org.uk/resources/edv-youth-council-and-nus-eliminate-domestic-violence-toolkit
73