    [House Hearing, 115 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                             [H.A.S.C. No. 115-41]

                        OVERVIEW OF THE ANNUAL REPORT ON

                         SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND VIOLENCE

                       AT THE MILITARY SERVICE ACADEMIES

                                   __________

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                       SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

                                     OF THE

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                         ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                  HEARING HELD

                                  MAY 2, 2017

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                  __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    25-834 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2018

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
    http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
    U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
    E-mail, gpo@custhelp.com.

                      SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

                        MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado, Chairman

    WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina      JACKIE SPEIER, California
    BRAD R. WENSTRUP, Ohio, Vice Chair   ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania
    STEVE RUSSELL, Oklahoma              NIKI TSONGAS, Massachusetts
    DON BACON, Nebraska                  RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona
    MARTHA McSALLY, Arizona              CAROL SHEA-PORTER, New Hampshire
    RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana         JACKY ROSEN, Nevada
    TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
                     Dan Sennott, Professional Staff Member
                    Craig Greene, Professional Staff Member
                             Danielle Steitz, Clerk

                               C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

                  STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

    Coffman, Hon. Mike, a Representative from Colorado, Chairman,
      Subcommittee on Military Personnel.............................     1
    Speier, Hon. Jackie, a Representative from California, Ranking
      Member, Subcommittee on Military Personnel.....................     2

                                   WITNESSES

    Panel 1:

      Bullard, Ariana................................................     4
      Craine, Midshipman Second Class Sheila, United States Naval
        Academy......................................................     4
      Gross, Stephanie...............................................     7
      Kendzior, Annie................................................     9

    Panel 2:

      Carter, VADM Walter E., Jr., USN, Superintendent, United States
        Naval Academy................................................    33
      Caslen, LTG Robert L., Jr., USA, Superintendent, United States
        Military Academy.............................................    32
      Johnson, Lt Gen Michelle D., Superintendent, United States Air
        Force Academy................................................    34
      Van Winkle, Dr. Elizabeth P., Performing the Duties of
        Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness.................    30

                                    APPENDIX

    Prepared Statements:

        Carter, VADM Walter E., Jr...................................    85
        Caslen, LTG Robert L., Jr....................................    72
        Coffman, Hon. Mike...........................................    61
        Johnson, Lt Gen Michelle D...................................    96
        Kendzior, Annie..............................................    62
        Van Winkle, Dr. Elizabeth P..................................    65

    Documents Submitted for the Record:

        Document from LTC Elizabeth A. Walker, Army Office of the
          Chief Legislative Liaison..................................   115

    Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:

        Mr. Coffman..................................................   119
        Ms. Speier...................................................   119

    Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:

        Ms. Rosen....................................................   123

    OVERVIEW OF THE ANNUAL REPORT ON SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND VIOLENCE AT THE
                           MILITARY SERVICE ACADEMIES

                                  ----------

                      House of Representatives,
                           Committee on Armed Services,
                            Subcommittee on Military Personnel,
                                  Washington, DC, Tuesday, May 2, 2017.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 3:34 p.m., in
    room 2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Mike Coffman
    (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

     OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE COFFMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
         COLORADO, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

        Mr. Coffman. This hearing is called to order. I want to
    welcome everyone to this afternoon's Military Personnel
    Subcommittee hearing. The purpose of today's hearing is to
    receive an overview of the annual report on sexual assessment.
    I am sorry, Annual Report on Sexual Harassment and Violence at
    the Military Service Academies, and to understand the ongoing
    efforts the academies have undertaken to prevent sexual
    assault.
        We will also have the privilege of hearing from survivors
    of sexual assault who were assaulted while attending a service
    academy, and we thank them for being here today.
        The Nation and the military continue to battle the scourge
    of sexual assault. These despicable crimes cause deep and
    enduring suffering to the victims and their families and
    violate our fundamental values. When these crimes occur in the
    military, the effects can be even more damaging. Service
    members must have absolute trust and confidence in their fellow
    service members in order to accomplish their difficult mission.
        Cadets and midshipmen at the military service academies are
    told from the beginning of their tenure that the only way to
    succeed at the Academy is to work as a team, and place their
    trust in each other. But when a cadet takes advantage of that
    trust in order to assault another, the sense of betrayal is
    profound, and the impact is often felt by the victim and the
    entire unit. These crimes have no place in our society, much
    less in our preeminent military service academies.
        Over the last several years, the military service academies
    have dedicated numerous resources and time to improving sexual
    assault prevention and response. The service academies have
    integrated sexual assault prevention and values-based training
    into nearly every aspect of their curriculum, ensuring that the
    military's future officers internalize the military's values
    before being commissioned.
        In addition, the service academies have worked hard to
    ensure that all allegations are thoroughly investigated and
    perpetrators are held accountable, while also ensuring
    survivors of sexual assault have access to vital resources.
        Despite all these efforts, there remains much work to be
    done. This year's report shows that prevalence rates have
    increased at all service academies, while reports of sexual
    assaults have decreased at one of the service academies. In
    addition, the significant prevalence of sexual harassment, a
    data point that is new to the survey, shows that additional
    work is needed.
        We will hear from two panels this afternoon. In panel one,
    we are honored to have with us survivors of sexual assault. I
    want to thank the witnesses for their bravery in testifying
    today, and I appreciate how difficult it is to talk about this
    subject. Your testimony will give all of us important insights
    into how the service academies in the military can improve
    sexual assault prevention and response.
        In our second panel, we will hear from the Department of
    Defense and the superintendents of the military service
    academies. I look forward to hearing their views on the results
    of the sexual assault report, and I also look forward to
    hearing about the new and existing programs at the service
    academies designed to prevent sexual assault.
        Before I introduce our first panel, let me offer the
    ranking member, Ms. Speier, an opportunity to make her opening
    remarks.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Coffman can be found in the
    Appendix on page 61.]

        STATEMENT OF HON. JACKIE SPEIER, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
     CALIFORNIA, RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

        Ms. Speier. Mr. Chairman, thank you, and thank all of you
    who will be participating in this hearing. I would like to ask
    unanimous consent that a document from Lieutenant Colonel
    Elizabeth Walker, legislative counsel for the investigations
    and legislative division of the Army Office of Chief
    Legislative Liaison be admitted into the record.
        Mr. Coffman. Any objection? So ordered.
        [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
    on page 115.]
        Ms. Speier. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I thank you for
    holding this hearing. This is an issue that I care deeply
    about. Sexual assault in our military and military service
    academies is a scourge on our Nation.
        We depend on our academies to attract and develop our
    Nation's future leaders. Even one sexual assault against these
    patriotic young individuals is too many, and we all know that
    the numbers of assault are far more than that.
        But women and men are victimized by sexual assault--both
    women and men are victimized by sexual assault and harassment
    at the service academies, creating a toxic culture that follows
    these students straight into military leadership. Survivors of
    sexual assault often leave the academies under their own
    volition, or are forced out, depriving our military of future
    leaders. Perpetrators of these heinous acts often go
    unpunished, graduate, reinforcing this criminal and abhorrent
    behavior. This also emboldens them to continue to assault their
    fellow service members as they ascend up the ranks.
        In order to break the cycle, we need strong reforms to make
    clear that this behavior is not tolerated. In fact, the only
    result in cases like this should be dismissal.
        Military leadership for literally decades has testified
    that they are of one mind, that they have zero tolerance for
    sexual assault. The tens of thousands of survivors of these
    heinous acts, subsequent retaliation, at times, ineptitude of
    their chain of command, makes a mockery of this stated policy.
        Words alone are just words. If we have any hope of stamping
    out the systemic issue of sexual assault in our ranks, the tone
    must be set at the academies. This isn't just about right and
    wrong, but being able to attract the very best to serve, and
    the readiness and unit cohesion within our fighting force.
    Nothing short of the future of our military depends on us
    getting this right.
        The Department of Defense Annual Report on Sexual Assault
    and Harassment in the Service Academies for Academic Years
    2015-2016 show a complete failure in addressing this epidemic.
    Twelve percent of women in the academies experience sexual
    assault; 12 percent. And nearly one-half, one-half, face
    persistent sexual harassment. Simply put, this is disgusting.
        Since the last report in 2014, fewer students at the
    service academies have reported sexual assault and harassment,
    but the estimated rates of unwanted sexual conduct have
    increased. Both of these are trending in the wrong direction.
        One reason could be the ostracism of sexual assault
    victims. Forty-seven percent of those who reported the unwanted
    sexual contact experienced social isolation and maltreatment.
    We must foster an environment at the service academies in which
    students who have been sexually assaulted or harassed feel like
    they can come forward without fear of retaliation.
        I would like to hear from our second panel of witnesses
    today on steps they are taking to reverse these disturbing
    trends to ensure that young cadets and midshipmen enter the
    military ranks as leaders who bring a culture of respect and
    dignity to their service.
        But before we hear from the service academies and the
    Department of Defense, I want to welcome the courageous
    survivors who are testifying on our first panel. Annie Kendzior
    attended the United States Naval Academy from 2009 to 2011;
    Midshipman Second Class Sheila Craine currently attends the
    U.S. Naval Academy; and Stephanie Gross and Ariana Bullard are
    former cadets at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.
        Some of the stories you will hear today are heartbreaking
    and revolting. These cadets and midshipmen did nothing wrong by
    reporting their assaults, and yet, their chain of command
    failed them, and the chain of command that was supposed to
    actually protect them, failed.
        We cannot tolerate this lack of accountability in our
    country's most prestigious military institutions. I look
    forward to hearing from our witnesses today, and I yield back,
    Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Ms. Speier. I ask unanimous consent
    that nonsubcommittee members be allowed to participate in
    today's hearing after all subcommittee members have had an
    opportunity to ask questions.
        Is there objection?
        Without objection, nonsubcommittee members will be
    recognized at the appropriate time for 5 minutes.
        We will give each witness the opportunity to present his or
    her testimony, and each member an opportunity to question the
    witnesses for 5 minutes. We would also respectfully remind the
    witnesses to summarize, to the greatest extent possible, the
    high points of your written testimony in 5 minutes or less.
        Your written comments and statements will be made part of
    the hearing record. Let me welcome our first panel, Midshipman
    Second Class Sheila Craine, United States Naval Academy; Ms.
    Ariana Bullard--did I say it right?
        Ms. Bullard. Bullard.
        Mr. Coffman. Bullard, former cadet at the United States
    Military Academy; Ms. Stephanie Gross, former cadet at the
    United States Military Academy; Ms. Annie Kendzior, former
    midshipman at the United States Naval Academy.
        With that, Midshipman Second Class Craine, you may now make
    your opening remarks.

      STATEMENT OF MIDSHIPMAN SECOND CLASS SHEILA CRAINE, UNITED
                          STATES NAVAL ACADEMY

        Ms. Craine. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for
    allowing me this opportunity to speak of my experiences through
    this process.
        I am here as an individual and do not represent the views
    or opinions of the United States Naval Academy. In the spring
    semester of my freshman year, I had experienced unwanted sexual
    contact. In the fall semester of my sophomore year, I filed an
    unrestricted report about the incident through the SAPR [Sexual
    Assault Prevention and Response] office, of course.
        I was overwhelmed by the support I received by the faculty
    and staff at the Naval Academy. The case concluded in the fall
    of 2016. The individual was dismissed and is no longer a
    midshipman at the United States Naval Academy.
        Though the whole process was difficult, I am confident in
    saying that the resources that were, and still are provided to
    me, helped me through the healing process to this day. Thank
    you.
        Mr. Coffman. Ms. Bullard, you are now recognized for 5
    minutes.

                      STATEMENT OF ARIANA BULLARD

        Ms. Bullard. Hello. My name is Ariana Bullard. I am a
    former cadet of the United States Military Academy. I attended
    West Point from July 2013 until I was honorably discharged in
    2015, when I went on to attend The Ohio State University.
        First off, I would like to thank Congresswoman Speier and
    her staff for having me here. I left West Point the day I was
    discharged from the hospital suffering from stress-induced high
    blood pressure. I found that all my belongings had been packed
    without my knowledge. In the cold of January, I was only left
    with a pair of shorts, a jacket, and sandals for my return home
    to Indiana. I was only then escorted onto the plane by two MPs
    [military police] because my ID was shipped off with my
    belongings.
        As soon as I boarded the plane, I was escorted off by those
    MPs and was told that the captain who had been retaliating
    against me wanted to speak to me. He asked me if I wanted to
    return to the Thayer Hotel. I replied that I wanted to stay,
    but was confused at what he meant, as I had no money to pay for
    it or clothing. He hung up and took my answer as a no.
        After I landed, I received a call from Sue Fulton on the
    Board of Visitors from West Point asking why I said no to
    General Caslen asking me if I wanted to stay a cadet at the
    Academy. I realized only then why I received a convoluted call
    from the captain. If I had known, my answer would have been
    yes.
        Despite all that had happened to me, I would rather have
    stayed than been forced out of West Point. I was recruited to
    West Point to be on the swim team, where I consistently
    experienced racial and sexual harassment.
        My ex-boyfriend, who was Caucasian, was called Django,
    referring to the movie, ``Django Unchained,'' solely because he
    was in a relationship with me. I was told later by a captain on
    the men's team and a colonel that nicknames were a tradition on
    the men's team.
        In December, the team went to Puerto Rico, where members of
    the swim team made lewd remarks about my body, how my bathing
    suit fit, and talked openly about having sex with me. I
    protested this treatment to my coaches and faced escalating
    reprisal as a result. A team was supposed to be a group of
    individuals with a set of skills required to complete a task.
    If we are not simply able to swim together, how are we able to
    fight together to defend this country?
        The head coach further went on to punish me by forcing me
    to practice alone for 2 weeks before our biggest championship
    meet, the Patriot League.
        The assistant coach, as a result, decided to take it upon
    himself to make sure I was properly trained. Every day I
    practiced an hour before the rest of the team, only to have
    them ostracize me more because a few thought I was given
    special treatment.
        At the Patriot League, I broke multiple League and Army
    records, resulting in winning the Rookie of the Meet. That day,
    the Navy vice admiral shook my hand in congratulations and said
    to me: ``Tell Caslen, Army won this time.'' However, I no
    longer felt a part of the Army team, so I swam with anger just
    to prove a point that no one could bring me down, and that day
    they didn't.
        We were taught in basic, and in the Army in general, to
    always protect your battle buddy, never leave them behind. Then
    how come I was left behind?
        In March 2014, the Equal Opportunity Office substantiated
    my case of racial discrimination. I also filed a complaint with
    the SHARP [Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention]
    office, where in November 2014 the complaint was substantiated
    as harassment but not sexual harassment.
        I then became friends with Cadet Gross. During her second
    assault case, I was present when a drunk cadet burst into her
    room. As curfew rolled around, I had to return to my room
    expecting the cadet, taking accountability, would remove him.
        A short while later, Cadet Gross called me and was
    hysterical. I immediately went to her room and saw the
    distraught and battered state that she was in. With new bruises
    forming on her neck and chest, she told me repeatedly she would
    never report again, as no one would believe her, that she had
    no faith she would be taken care of.
        Still having trust in the system, I urged her to report. I
    told her that we needed to do this for others after us. Even
    though I was left behind, I refused to do the same to her. We
    needed to set an example.
        However, the system failed once again as my friend and I
    was retaliated against repeatedly. I was forbidden to accompany
    her to the hospital, and was prohibited from socializing with
    her and forced to sign a confidentiality form stating I would
    not discuss her case with anyone. I was subjected to arbitrary
    discipline and filed a whistleblower reprisal complaint. Excuse
    me. Eventually, in January 2015, I felt I had no option but to
    resign.
        Although the processing of resignation normally takes a
    month or so, mine was expedited to 1 day, and to my detriment.
    I collapsed in the barracks and was admitted to the hospital
    suffering from that high blood pressure by stress.
        When Stephanie tried to visit me in the hospital, she was
    confronted by her command and told that the only way she could
    remain in the hospital with me was if she admitted herself for
    a psychiatric evaluation. The command made clear that I was to
    be punished by being isolated during a time of great fear and
    uncertainty.
        I wrote a resignation letter in January 2015. This is the
    letter I submitted to General Caslen, which all levels of
    leadership must read and sign. In that letter, I write, ``I
    don't want to be in a place that allows perpetrators to remain
    in their ranks. I don't believe in double standards. West
    Point's honor code is abided by the cadets. However, a few
    officers themselves aren't held to the same standard of the
    honor code or aren't held at all. I resign because that is all
    I can do because that is what I am forced to do to protect my
    own well-being and goals considering all these issues.''
        General Caslen, I spoke with you before leaving West Point.
    In that 3-hour discussion, you told me you believed I would be
    a great leader and asset to the Army. Though you told me you
    did not want to sign my resignation, you handed me a
    resignation, and I asked you if there would be any change if I
    stayed. You remained silent.
        Instead, the numbers of reports have doubled since I have
    last been at West Point. Two years ago, Congress asked why we
    were here, and the answer was to help the Academy and to
    prevent what happened to us from other cadets. After 2 years,
    we are back here again, and our answer to that question hasn't
    changed. I hope we can come up with a solution that will mend
    the system that desperately needs fixed for the sake of our
    future cadets and officers.
        With the support of Congresswoman Speier, I would like to
    return to the Academy to complete what I started. I believe I
    can be an asset to other female cadets, and I take General
    Caslen at his word when he said to me that I could be a great
    leader and officer in the United States military. Thank you.
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Ms. Bullard.
        Ms. Gross, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.

                      STATEMENT OF STEPHANIE GROSS

        Ms. Gross. Thank you, sir. Hello. My name is Stephanie
    Gross. I am a former cadet of the United States Military
    Academy as well. I would like to first thank Congresswoman
    Speier's office and her staff for extending an invitation to
    testify before you today regarding my time as a cadet at West
    Point.
        In truth, I still have a great love for West Point, and I
    respect and admire the training program for our Nation's future
    leaders. I entered West Point at 18 years old with the class of
    2016 on July 2, 2012. I was honorably discharged on February
    13, 2015.
        Over the 2 years, 8 months of being at West Point, I was
    switched between companies a total of four times, compared to
    once for most cadets. Because of this, I had little stability
    and leadership during my time there, and this contributed
    greatly to my difficulties at West Point.
        My first sexual assault at West Point was reported by
    medical personnel in the spring of my freshman year at the
    Academy. I was in the hospital recovering from an emergency
    pelvic surgery that was found to be related to the assault. My
    surgeon advised me, when he walked in, that he was unsure, due
    to the inflammation and potential for scarring, if I would ever
    be able to bear children. I later broke down to a nurse, and
    thus, my restricted report was initiated.
        I felt reporting would only cause further damage
    emotionally, and I requested my report remain restricted
    without investigation. My case was later reported by my
    commander as he became aware of the incident, and legally had
    to report via the unrestricted route.
        The next day, the SARC [Sexual Assault Response
    Coordinator] office pressured me for a name, telling me that if
    I was a strong woman, with duty and honor, I would comply. I,
    again, resisted.
        At this time, in 2013, USMA [United States Military
    Academy] had not yet embraced special victims' attorneys, and I
    was without legal counsel. If legal counsel had been present, I
    feel my case would have stayed restricted as I desired and my
    difficulties in reporting, such as 13-hour CID [Army Criminal
    Investigation Command] interrogations, would have been minimal.
    My report was determined to be unfounded.
        My second case was founded on the basis of assault, but the
    report concluded that there was insufficient evidence to find
    the higher charge of aggravated sexual contact. The
    investigators refused to take my clothing for testing and
    refused to take a blood alcohol level test of my assailant on
    the night of the incident, contributing to the decision of the
    case.
        The addition of the newly implemented special victims'
    attorney was increasingly helpful in this case, though. In the
    months prior to my resignation, I was subjected to many
    negative personnel actions with a pattern that indicated
    reprisal. Every time I would initiate a report, a few days
    later I would receive a new punishment. From drug testing that
    was negative, mental health evaluations that cleared me for
    duty, room inspections, and misconduct related to
    insubordination, were among the actions against me.
        As these actions increased, I became desperate, and this,
    not surprisingly, was very damaging to me academically after
    missing many courses for the investigation, and I began to feel
    as if I had no other option but to leave the Academy.
        I decided to begin asking for open-door policy meetings
    with my leaders, hoping that I could speak to them in smaller,
    lower-tension settings, to ask for their mentorship and
    determine why my situation became so distorted. My entire chain
    of command denied me.
        I then asked Lieutenant General Caslen. Lieutenant General
    Caslen, I emailed you in desperation to let me speak with you
    privately before you made decisions on the misconduct reported
    against me. You, too, denied my request. I desired the chance
    to add context to those grim black and white words that you
    chose to judge me by, prepared by somebody else like those
    papers you have today, that I found that one JAG [Judge
    Advocate General] captain had influence over almost every
    factor of my case. I wanted to tell you that I was sorry for
    the mistakes I did make and that I looked up to you as a
    leader.
        Even with those mistakes, I did not deserve to be treated
    the way that I was. I later found from a DOD [Department of
    Defense] agent that you stated you cared greatly for me as a
    cadet, and you instructed my chain of command to protect me and
    aid my success in any way they could. Unfortunately, I never
    heard these things. From my perspective, each time I reported
    an action, I received punishment, and in denying my open-door
    policy request, you confirmed my suspicions that I was not
    wanted at your institution.
        If I had felt my chain of command truly cared for me and
    wanted me to succeed, I would have felt differently about my
    situation. It was the idea that the chain of command had given
    up on me that ultimately sealed my actions to leave the
    institution, despite my desires to serve my country.
        I do not blame West Point as an institution for my
    situation. I blame the systematic failure of leadership who
    relied on blind loyalty to make judgments about an individual
    they had never spoken to. I believe that if the open-door
    policy had been a reality, and I had been allowed to tell my
    side of the story to the leadership, I may have been able to
    stay.
        A system of investigating and prosecuting complaints of
    assault that leaves great power in the hand of one individual,
    or single individuals, motivated by career and institutional
    goals, is not an effective mechanism for victims. After signing
    my oath, the first thing given to me was a small business card
    with the cadet honor code. Next written on the board was the
    Soldier's Creed, ``I am an American soldier. I am a warrior and
    member of a team. I serve the people of the United States and I
    live the Army values. I will always place the mission first. I
    will never accept defeat. I will never quit. I will never leave
    a fallen comrade.'' And later, ``I am disciplined. I am a
    professional.''
        These are the words that inspired me to continue, even when
    I had nothing to gain and everything to lose, when I decided to
    report to help better the Academy instead of following advice
    to keep my head down and not say anything.
        These are the reasons that I would also like to return to
    the Academy and complete my time there, as I believe actions
    speak louder than words, and simply coming here and stating a
    problem does nothing to guarantee a solution with no action.
        With the support of Congresswoman Speier's office, I have
    decided to reapply for admission to the United States Military
    Academy to finish the education and training I began in 2012. I
    truly believe that the military and West Point has made
    positive strides to fix this problem and understands that
    assaults occur on many college campuses, but the service
    academies specifically should be role models for the Nation and
    the world.
        Former Cadet Bullard and I were part of a group of four
    individuals who were friends who reported sexual assault and
    harassment at the Academy. Out of the four of us, none remain.
    West Point and all of the service academies are the functional
    units of change for the future of our Armed Forces. There is
    much more work to be done. Thank you for your time.
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Ms. Gross.
        Ms. Kendzior, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.

                      STATEMENT OF ANNIE KENDZIOR

        Ms. Kendzior. Good afternoon. In 2008, I was a recruited
    athlete who was inducted into the United States Naval Academy.
    Prior to acceptance, my parents were concerned for my safety,
    given the then sexual assault scandal which was unfolding at
    the Air Force Academy, and during a campus visit, my parents
    and I were told by the Naval Academy representatives, including
    my coaches and the athletic director, that the Naval Academy
    did not have a sexual assault problem and that I would be safe.
        Shortly after the academic year began, I experienced two
    horrible and traumatic events. I was raped not only once, but
    twice, both times by fellow classmates in my company who I had
    to face every single day. My emotional state began to
    deteriorate, and I went to the Naval Academy medical facility.
        During my intake evaluation, I told the treating physician
    that I had been raped, who did not ask when, did not ask where
    it had occurred, but simply checked a box on my intake form and
    prescribed me an antidepressant. These events set the tone for
    my remaining 2 years at the Naval Academy.
        The culture at the Academy is that of a ``boys only'' club,
    where men are considered superior to women, where women are
    frequently referred to as DUBs, which stands for ``dumb ugly
    bitch,'' or other derogatory terms which most women want to be
    accepted, say nothing, and quickly adapt to the culture.
        After 2\1/2\ years of sheer emotional hell, I broke down
    mentally, and was sent by my chain of command to the
    psychiatric ward at Bethesda Hospital. I spent 3 days there and
    was diagnosed with borderline personality disorder by a nurse
    practitioner, not a licensed medical doctor.
        I thought that if I could get a transfer out of my company
    that I would be okay, and I made a request every semester to my
    company command, who refused to transfer me every semester.
        I felt my life slipping away, and as a final effort,
    requested Mast with the then-Commandant of Midshipmen, Captain
    Robert Clarke. Upon discussing my situation with the
    commandant, he told me to grow up, and within days, began the
    separation process.
        In July of 2011, an academic review board was called, which
    I thought was unusual, given my overall good academic record.
    During my hearing, members of the board openly discussed my
    sensitive personal medical records, all of which without my
    consent, and in the end, used my past medical treatments as a
    basis for my separation.
        The Academy found it easier to label me as having a
    personality disorder than to treat me for the trauma of being
    raped. It seems the motto of the U.S. Marine Corps ``leave no
    man behind'' does not apply to the men and women who are raped.
    Instead, they are frequently and intentionally left behind to
    deal with the pain, anguish, and long-term emotional stress,
    while the rapist's career continues without any consequence.
        The Navy continues to defend the ever-growing claims of
    military sexual assaults at the Naval Academy as small, and
    that those women who reported being raped were just mentally
    ill. How shameful. Military leaders then and now defend the
    growth rate as being good, claiming that they are glad to hear
    that women are coming forward to report their rapes. What they
    don't seem to get is that more rapes are bad and that they
    continue due to their failure by military leaders to address
    the root cause, that there is a small but active group of
    rapists whose crimes are rarely investigated, let alone
    prosecuted, and the military finds it easier to destroy the
    life of the victims.
        The word is out. If you are a rapist, go into the military
    where you will be protected after you rape somebody. I was
    processed out of the Academy while my rapists are now serving
    as officers, potentially victimizing more people. Victims who
    see the treatment of those before them, such as myself, are not
    likely to come forward like I did, for they know what will be
    the consequences.
        Upon leaving the Naval Academy, all forms of medical
    treatment and counseling ended. I was on my own to fend for
    myself. Thanks to the support of my family, I was able to get
    the treatment I needed, which began with weaning me off the
    drugs prescribed to me by the military doctors, drugs that
    created the very personality disorders I was exhibiting.
        After more than 5 years of detox, I am now off of all
    prescribed medications, and I am in PTSD [post-traumatic stress
    disorder] treatment that was developed, in fact, by a former
    military Green Beret. I was denied the opportunity of
    completing my education at the Naval Academy, given I only had
    1 year remaining. I will never forget the day that I had to
    return my class ring, which represented the 3 years of hell
    that I had to endure.
        All I wanted and asked for was to complete my education
    while getting proper treatment and serve my country as a naval
    officer, all of which was denied to me by my Naval Academy
    leadership. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Kendzior can be found in the
    Appendix on page 62.]
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Ms. Kendzior.
        I would like to ask each one of you--I am going to ask you
    the same question. What is the policy or procedure that you
    would most like to see changed in sexual assault cases?
        Midshipman Craine, let me start with you and then I will
    move to the right.
        Ms. Craine. As for a policy change that I would like to
    see, the policy and the way I reported was so easy for me. It
    was so effortless. I just had to walk down to the SAPR office
    and tell them my story, that I didn't want to--I didn't feel
    the need that there was anything that I would have wanted to
    change about it, about that process, about the reporting, about
    the whole, you know, the case itself.
        For me, it just worked out very well. It was a very
    positive experience in that manner, so I wouldn't be able to
    provide an answer in that.
        Mr. Coffman. Ms. Bullard.
        Ms. Bullard. Sir, I have experienced sexual harassment, so
    if you don't mind if I speak on a policy change that I would
    like to change on that.
        In the recent report about sexual harassment, sexual
    assault, I see the only change they have done for at least
    sports team, is what they call a ``teal team,'' where cadets
    will wear T-shirts, and when they go to this game, they get
    free concessions, and this is their awareness for sports for
    sexual harassment, sexual assault. And I don't believe that an
    ``It's on Us'' shirt is going to fix a problem for cadets.
        I think there is a deeper understanding that is missing
    there. So if there is a policy that I think needs to change, I
    think it has to start from the cadets, and I think that there
    needs to be some sort of understanding, again.
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you. Ms. Gross, what is the policy or
    procedure that you would most like to see changed in sexual
    assault cases?
        Ms. Gross. Yes, sir. So one of the reasons cited that
    General Caslen was unable to meet with me for the open-door
    policy is that----
        Mr. Coffman. Please move your microphone a little closer.
        Ms. Gross. Oh, I am sorry, sir.
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you.
        Ms. Gross. Is that better?
        Mr. Coffman. Yes.
        Ms. Gross. Okay. Thank you. One of the reasons cited that
    General Caslen was unable to meet with me through the open-door
    policy was that he was conflicted as I was under investigation
    for misconduct. And I understand that his position requires him
    to have that oversight and not be in conflict, but if the open-
    door policy is specifically for retaliation under sexual
    assault or harassment, maybe there is some provision that can
    be made so that these victims can go to the superintendent if
    they need to, if that is the only person left that will talk to
    them.
        Mr. Coffman. Ms. Kendzior, what is the policy or procedure
    that you would most like to see changed in sexual assault
    cases?
        Ms. Kendzior. So for me, my first person to report to was a
    fellow midshipman. I believe he was a senior at the time, I was
    a junior, and that, in my opinion, was wrong. I don't think I
    need to be telling what happened to me to a fellow classmate,
    or even a person who is a year older than me.
        If you guys don't know, the Academy, at least the Naval
    Academy, is a huge rumor mill, rumors spread fast, and telling
    a peer just opens that door up to more rumors.
        As for another policy, I believe that, you know, they
    should not be just educating the midshipmen about these things.
    They should also educate the leadership and the staff of these
    academies to be able to help identify signs of those who are
    raped, maybe go to them and ask and talk to them about it.
        For right now, midshipmen are just trained by their peers,
    and that is what I went through, a training of, you know,
    midshipmen teaching midshipmen, and to be honest, nobody took
    it seriously, at least the classes I attended.
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you. Midshipman Craine, I don't know if
    you mentioned this, but some of the panelists have mentioned
    retaliation. If you experienced retaliation, was it through
    social media or in person? And also, if you experienced
    retaliation, did you report that?
        Ms. Craine. So in my case, the person who assaulted me was
    in the same company as me, which provides a very unique
    situation in which I have to see that person every single day.
    We have mutual friends. We were in the same class, the same
    company.
        In terms of retaliation, people found out very quickly that
    something was going on, and he was more liked than me, so what
    ended up happening is more people didn't--people didn't know
    which side to choose, became almost like a choose-a-side
    situation in which I was presented the opportunity to leave the
    company as to not experience retaliation.
        So I chose--it was either him or me, but I decided to leave
    the company because I felt more comfortable in leaving the
    company than having to experience, in case I would have
    experienced retaliation if he had left and then I had stayed.
    So in terms of that, that is how I--dealt with that.
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you. My own time is expiring, so if you
    could all go very quickly.
        Ms. Bullard, I think you mentioned experiencing
    retaliation. Was it through social media or in person, and did
    you report the retaliation in and of itself?
        Ms. Bullard. Yes, sir, I did report the retaliation, which
    caused me to receive more misconduct on my part and--not on my
    part, but you know, people retaliating against me and I am
    having misconduct taken against me.
        And again, to your first question, I think there is too
    many hands in the pot for investigations. The investigating
    officers, most times, are not--have some sort of relations
    either to someone who is in charge of me or someone in charge
    of someone--of my victim. It is--sorry. Sorry I am being really
    emotional right now.
        But I think there needs to be a third party checking on
    this is what I am trying to say.
        Mr. Coffman. Ms. Gross.
        Ms. Gross. Sir, briefly, with my case, an app called Yik
    Yak was very prominent at the Academy during this time, and so,
    unfortunately, a lot of my retaliation on my peers occurred on
    the Yik Yak app. I walked around campus with very visible
    bruises on my neck that couldn't be hidden by uniform, and so
    it was very public who I was given the name on the left side of
    my chest. And so--or the right side.
        And so from there, I couldn't report it, because there was
    no way to determine who it was. It was just liked by 300
    people. You know, secondarily to that, I was moved four times,
    and I was asked the first time to move, second time, I was not,
    and that is usually considered a problem at the Academy.
        Mr. Coffman. Ms. Kendzior, can you give me your view very
    quick. I am sorry, I am over time.
        Ms. Kendzior. Yes. For me, it was a lot of rumors. They
    were rampant, like I said earlier. I was labeled a slut who got
    around, but really, my process of separation happened really
    quickly. So most of the retaliation came after I was already
    separated, from peers contacting me and saying negative things
    towards me about what I did.
        Mr. Coffman. Ms. Speier.
        Ms. Speier. Mr. Chairman, I am going to hold my questions
    till the end and allow my colleagues to my left to ask theirs.
        Mr. Coffman. Ms. Tsongas.
        Ms. Tsongas. Well, I thank you all for being here. This is
    certainly an issue that this committee has spent a good time
    looking at, and you are providing additional insight that is
    much needed. It is so hard to tell your story, but I appreciate
    the determination and tenacity all of you are bringing to your
    presence here, and to your continued desire to serve your
    Nation. I thank you for that, despite all of this.
        We focused a bit on the assaults, but I am curious about
    the cultural issues, and I think much of the sexual harassment
    that you all experienced is rooted in a culture that has yet to
    fully embrace the diversity of the corps, the different corps
    that you are a part of.
        And what I would like to hear from each one of you is let's
    just say from the day--day one, as you made your way into your
    particular academy, if you experienced things that you would
    like the academies to take note of as they begin to think more
    broadly, not just about the particular crimes, but how they
    create an inclusive culture. So we will start with you.
        Ms. Craine. Thank you. From day one, I would definitely say
    that it is important to note that the upper class play a huge
    role in setting the command climate of each company. I was a
    plebe when this happened, and I came into this and I thought
    this was okay, and that, to me, was scary. And I knew deep down
    inside it wasn't okay, so I reported, but I had the support of
    my roommates at the time and my very close friends, and it was
    good that they had supported me in reporting.
        But at the same time, I didn't feel confident in relying in
    that chain of command of midshipmen at the time, so the culture
    does have an impact, especially the training and the awareness
    that the upper class have, especially on plebes, on underclass,
    in regards to sexual assault and harassment.
        Ms. Bullard. Regarding mine, I would say kind of similar to
    what Ms. Kendzior said. There is a loyalty there. My time,
    especially on, like, the sports team, I know very well. I had
    to swim with a guy that I dealt with sexual harassment. Every
    single day I saw him, and I'd have to swim with him in that
    pool, and there was no overlay. He was a swimmer. I mean, there
    is--we were both swimming in the same place. There is no way
    that I could get away from him, especially in that atmosphere
    if I wanted to keep up with my sport.
        So I would say that that along with the fact that as soon
    as I opened up my case for sexual harassment, the whole team
    battled against me because you don't tell on the team, you
    don't get the team in trouble, you don't give negative feedback
    about the team because you are drawing attention, and you are
    getting people in trouble. And so, eventually, that is what led
    to me swimming by myself for 2 weeks before my big championship
    meet.
        And I have to tell you, that was probably the hardest thing
    I had to do was see every single one of my teammates, no one
    said a thing. No one said a thing about me swimming by myself,
    and then they assume I had special treatment. So--and that is
    all I have to say.
        Ms. Tsongas. Thank you. Go ahead.
        Ms. Gross. I think this problem begins with the fact that
    we have different standards than men do, and that is really--it
    is needed in a lot of different ways because we are
    physiologically different than men, but because we have lower
    standards physically, the men do initially think that we are
    lesser than them because we can't perform at the same level
    that they do.
        And so that starts in basic training from day one. And then
    in basic training, as we go out to the field and we are doing
    these operations and all these different things, now the women
    are segregated and we are sleeping by ourselves out to the
    side. So the men are participating in the shooting exercises at
    night, but the women are off to the side because they don't
    want us sleeping next to the men at the Academy. So now we are
    further segregated, and that starts the issue there from day
    one that we are at the Academy when they take the women out to
    a different place. That segregation causes the issue.
        And like Midshipman Craine said, it starts at the lowest
    level. When the sophomore cadet teaches the freshman cadet
    about leadership and when the graduates of the Academy go out
    to, you know, their posts across the world from their first
    platoon, and you know, show leadership skills for the first
    time so----
        Ms. Tsongas. Thank you. We don't have much time, but I
    would love to hear from you, too.
        Ms. Kendzior. So I also second Midshipman Craine about how
    the upper class sets the tone. One of my first sexual
    harassment prevention classes as a plebe, we were told a story
    about how a female had said that a star football player had
    raped her. He was separated, accordingly, and that in the end,
    she had actually lied about it, and they finished that story
    with ``don't be that girl.'' That is what they tell us, told my
    class, at least, in that sexual assault prevention class.
        Ms. Tsongas. Thank you all. I appreciate your being here
    today.
        Mr. Coffman. Mr. Russell, you are now recognized for 5
    minutes.
        Mr. Russell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank each of you
    ladies for testifying today.
        Midshipman Craine, are you familiar with the Sexual Assault
    Prevention and Response [SAPR] program?
        Ms. Craine. I am.
        Mr. Russell. How effective would you say that it is in an
    effort to deal with these issues that you experienced?
        Ms. Craine. So I would say, in terms of training
    midshipmen, I kind have seen it evolve since I was a plebe. It
    has definitely come a long way. I definitely saw how there was
    a bit of cynicism as a plebe when I was going through these
    classes and how now, as I am becoming an upper class, I am
    getting closer to the fleet, the midshipmen are really taking a
    hold of it and making it more of a positive thing.
        People are really participating. Mainly, the guys in the
    class are the ones that participate. In terms of people getting
    the summer training that--so that they can become SHAPE [Sexual
    Harassment and Assault Prevention and Education]
    representatives, like that is also really huge. I am seeing
    really positive people taking those positions, and I am really
    impressed as to how it has changed.
        Mr. Russell. Do you, as a future leader in our Armed
    Forces, do you feel that this equips you with the tools to deal
    with cases like this as you counsel and work with your future
    sailors or marines, depending upon where you are going to be
    branched?
        Ms. Craine. I do think so, to some extent. I definitely
    have, like, some lessons where I am just like it is a little
    off topic or not--doesn't really apply. I do see that if there
    were a way to incorporate actual midshipmen, actual victims,
    actual midshipmen victims into these classes, it would make a
    bigger impact. People would see them, be like that is my peer,
    that is my friend, and people would listen to those classes
    especially more.
        Mr. Russell. Well, and I thank you for that, and, you know,
    I think all of us on the panel agree, or in the committee, that
    even one incident is unacceptable, certainly in our military.
    But as we see the responses and how to deal and improve this
    situation, it is important to get that kind of feedback from
    each of you.
        And now I would like to switch a little bit to the Army.
    Ms. Bullard, do you think that the SHARP training--are you
    familiar with the SHARP training?
        Ms. Bullard. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Russell. Do you think that is a useful tool and its
    content is helpful or not helpful for cadets?
        Ms. Bullard. I believe it is helpful to an extent. Just
    like Midshipman Craine said, it has to come from the cadets.
    Just simply having an upperclassman present a media file about
    sexual assault and sexual harassment isn't good enough anymore.
    It has to come deeper from within. And so relating, and having
    a peer come up to another person saying, ``hey, this is what
    happened to me. You guys have to understand that, you know,
    this happens.''
        And the funny thing is the culture, most cadets believe
    that almost every single report is a lie when actually almost
    90 percent of it is true, and that is just the culture. Most
    cadets don't believe in any woman that reports. I mean, most of
    them. That is--everyone jokes around about that, especially on
    Yik Yak that Ms. Gross explained.
        Mr. Russell. And along the lines to address some of this,
    Ms. Gross, if I may, and I am not sure if it was in place when
    you were a cadet, but there is the Respect Program which
    targets those who demonstrate a lack of maturity or engage in
    acts inconsistent with the Army values. You mentioned the Army
    values, such as sexual behaviors or sexist behaviors. Was the
    Respect Program implemented while you were a cadet there? Do
    you remember that?
        Ms. Gross. Yes, sir, the Respect Program was very active.
    Actually, Cadet Bullard had more experience with that. After
    her harassment complaint, the cadets were subjected to going
    through that program, so I am not completely familiar on that
    topic specifically.
        Mr. Russell. Sure.
        Ms. Gross. I would like to say, though, that the Air Force
    Academy--Cadet Bullard talked about having peers, and the Air
    Force Academy has a program called PEERS [Personal Ethics
    Education Representative] that acts within the companies and
    supports those ideas of respect mentorship.
        Mr. Russell. Do you feel, based upon the three of you
    having, you know, the most recent experience--and Ms. Kendzior,
    I, very much, you know, was moved by your testimony, and thank
    you for that. But do you see these programs getting at the
    criticality of the issue--it is just a matter of massaging the
    implementation, including more feedback from the cadets or the
    midshipmen? Do you feel that the programs are viable, but it is
    a matter of execution?
        Ms. Gross. Absolutely, sir, and it is very important. I
    know I am running out of time here. Cadet Craine's point is
    great, and she said that when she got there, the programs were
    evolving. Two years ago is when she started at the Academy, and
    we were there 2 years ago, and that is when we were leaving. So
    if that evolved now over the last 2 years and it seems like it
    is making good progress, it just----
        Mr. Russell. So I guess--and I really appreciate this
    feedback. It gives us a unique opportunity to query, but it
    appears that the leaders, in trying to address this very real
    concern, because we all believe, and being a former military
    leader with decades of service, one incident is unacceptable.
    But it becomes critically important to know are the programs
    being implemented, do they have value, and so I really thank
    you for those responses.
        And thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Mr. Russell. Mr. Gallego, you are
    now recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Gallego. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, first of all,
    for being so brave in coming forward and informing, educating
    us and the public. This is not ever an easy--easy for anybody
    but especially in the limelight.
        I am concerned, from hearing your individual testimonies,
    that--and please correct me--that there wasn't any education in
    the entry program, whether you are a plebe or a cadet. I am not
    too far removed from college, but I do remember my freshman
    orientation, we were specifically told what consent meant, what
    were the consequences of not having consent, and that there was
    a very defined--and I did not go to an academy, but there was a
    very defined process if you were accused of sexual assault and
    that you would be removed from the school, and also, if
    possible, turned over to the local prosecutor for prosecution.
        When you all were going--entering your school or your
    academies, is there a portion within that first week where
    cadets or plebes, or whatever, are explained to them that this
    is what is considered consent, what is not considered as
    consent, and do, you know, your classmates understand that?
    Let's--we can start with Midshipman Craine.
        Ms. Craine. Most people agree that during that first month,
    when you get to the Academy, it is all quite a blur, but I do
    recall there being a brief about SAPR and SHAPE program, what
    is consent. There was a CMEO [Command Managed Equal Opportunity
    officer] there. But at the same time, like, you are also not
    focused on those things. You are so busy with other tasks at
    hand, but yes, there is that brief, that initial brief.
        Mr. Gallego. And that brief only occurs one time in the
    career of a cadet?
        Ms. Craine. No. No, that brief happens quite often.
        Mr. Gallego. Okay.
        Ms. Craine. It updates the midshipmen with the brief.
        Mr. Gallego. Ms. Bullard.
        Ms. Bullard. I concur with Midshipman Craine. We do learn
    about that during our base training, and it is just about, I
    guess, implementation, just like Mr. Russell said. I mean, it
    is just--cadets, I don't think, are necessarily understanding
    the severe rationality about what is actually occurring. And I
    mean, most cadets just don't think it is real, and that is why
    I think we all mentioned that hearing from your peers and
    hearing, you know, real stories would be a lot of help.
        Ms. Gross. I actually have a different experience, and my
    basic was in 2012--Ms. Bullard's in 2013--but I don't remember
    anything from my basic training about sexual assault training.
    I remember ruck marching for 12 miles. I remember sticking
    people with needles. I remember running. I remember a very
    impactful honor code speech that, you know, spoke with me. I
    remember respect, but I don't actually remember a briefing on
    sexual assault, so obviously, it wasn't impactful enough to
    carry with me through that period.
        Ms. Kendzior. And I pretty much concur with that as well. I
    am the oldest of the bunch. I entered in 2008. If there was a
    briefing, I don't remember, and/or I just wasn't really focused
    on it at the time. I had so many other things to deal with.
        Mr. Gallego. Follow-up question, again, for the panel. Do
    cadets actually understand the consequences of their actions?
    Do they understand that they can be prosecuted under the UCMJ
    [Uniform Code of Military Justice] and that obviously they
    would be kicked out?
        I know that sounds like a very silly question, but you are
    dealing with young men that may not understand because their
    command has not told them that this is not--this is not
    acceptable, or for some reason they somehow think that they are
    not going to be prosecuted. Do you believe that the academies,
    your respective academies you attended, did not properly
    communicate to your fellow cadets and midshipmen the
    consequences of such heinous actions?
        We will start with Midshipman Craine.
        Ms. Craine. They were definitely told the consequences
    briefly, but like anyone, you can be told the consequences but
    not understand what it is to go through the consequences of
    committing an act as that.
        I do think there might need to be a little more focus on
    what would happen to you if you were to do that to someone, but
    yes.
        Mr. Gallego. Ms. Bullard.
        Ms. Bullard. If you don't mind if I am just being blunt.
        Mr. Gallego. Yeah.
        Ms. Bullard. I mean, if it is prosecuted. I mean----
        Mr. Gallego. Right.
        Ms. Bullard. They understand, I guess, the consequences,
    and it is just words, but most times they are not. I mean, if
    it is prosecuted, if it is searched right, I mean, most--I
    mean, you hear all our stories, and it just--it wasn't
    investigated right, and this seems to be a trend.
        So I mean, and most people, I mean, if you look at our
    investigations and some of the stuff that some of the men have
    gotten away with, I mean, it just lets alone, it causes a
    trend, and it shows people that that is okay; and that is not
    right.
        Mr. Gallego. Thank you. Ms. Gross.
        Ms. Gross. I concur with what Ms. Bullard said, and
    specifically for our academic year, where our assaults were
    reported for 2014/2015 report. There was 14 reports made that
    year. Only eight were finished by the end of the report. There
    was only one cadet that was discharged for a sexual assault-
    related offense. My cadet, who was founded on assault, was
    discharged administratively for a nonrelated offense. I am not
    sure why. But at that point, you know, maybe they do know what
    the punishment is, but they see that the statistics of them
    actually getting discharged for that are very low.
        Ms. Kendzior. And I will end with, yeah, they did
    communicate the consequences, but obviously the consequences
    aren't upheld.
        Mr. Gallego. Right.
        Ms. Kendzior. So they don't feel threatened by it, in my
    opinion.
        Mr. Gallego. Thank you. Yield back the time.
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Mr. Gallego. Ms. McSally, you are
    now recognized for 5 minutes.
        Ms. McSally. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks, ladies, for
    your courage to speak to us today and speak publicly. I went to
    the Air Force Academy. I was in the 9th class with women there,
    graduated in 1988. These dynamics were going on when I was
    there, and they are still going on now. And I think there is,
    at least, has been a greater emphasis, or desire, by the
    leadership to truly address these issues. But from your
    stories, obviously, there is still a whole lot more and they
    are still falling short.
        I have spent--you talked a little bit about culture. I've
    spent a lot of time thinking about the ``Lord of the Flies''
    sort of culture that we all experienced at the academies where
    you have--and I never thought I would be saying this on the
    Congressional Record, but I am just going to go for it. But you
    have got 19-year-olds in total control of 18-year-olds, you
    know, 20-year-olds, 21-year-olds.
        I thought about it later on when I was an officer, like we
    would never have airmen first class in total control 24/7 of an
    airman basic in the Air Force. I mean, you don't do that. We
    bring them up. We--they get, you know, focused on their skill,
    and then we teach them how to supervise, and then ultimately,
    after several years, we then allow them to supervise
    individuals, and that is really in all the services.
        And the only difference between, you know, those 20-year-
    olds being responsible for directing 18-year-olds around is,
    you know, quite frankly, your SAT scores were higher, right. So
    you know, you are at the Academy, but where this dynamic of
    having 20- and 21-year-olds responsible for 18- and 19-year-
    olds, and, you know, this leadership laboratory, I mean, we
    shouldn't be experimenting with human beings.
        So my question is, how much when you--talking about the
    chain of command, the midshipman chain of command, how much of
    what you are dealing with is the upperclassmen making
    decisions, and how much are the real--the officers and the
    senior enlisted that are the ones that are in the Air Force
    that are actually the chain of command, who are ultimately
    responsible for this, right?
        So I just want to be clear to make sure I understand. Do
    you have 20- and 21-year-old midshipmen now deciding what to do
    here? Or, you know, do you have a commanding officer that is an
    actual officer? So just talk to me about the balance of
    decision making in this environment these days, Midshipman
    Craine.
        Ms. Craine. So it, once again, depends on the company. I
    find that I was in a very, like, very open company. The open-
    door policy with the company officer, it was great.
        Ms. McSally. You are talking to the actual officer, right?
        Ms. Craine. Yes.
        Ms. McSally. So you are not reporting to like a two degree
    or whatever you guys call them there.
        Ms. Craine. You can. So they have SHAPE representatives in
    the company that have stickers on their door that say you can
    come tell me anything about this case. They are trained to
    assist and give that person the resources, but at the end of
    the day, you have to report either through your company
    officer, through the SAPR office, through an actual figure.
        In my case, I reported to--I didn't report, but I had
    discussed it with my academic advisor, an adult not in my chain
    of command, and she directed me to the right resources.
        Ms. McSally. Okay.
        Ms. Craine. So that is how I----
        Ms. McSally. Just let me be clear. Nobody is reporting to
    another midshipman or cadet who is then deciding not to do
    something with this. I just want to be clear as to who the
    decision makers are here.
        Ms. Craine. No. The midshipmen, at least from what I have
    experienced, they do not make the report. They do not report
    for you. You report. They give you the resources.
        Ms. McSally. Okay.
        Ms. Craine. They do not decide it.
        Ms. McSally. Do any of the rest of you want to pipe in
    based on your experiences?
        Ms. Gross. You mean, on sexual assault harassment
    specifically?
        Ms. McSally. Yes.
        Ms. Gross. Regarding the assault itself, at least at West
    Point, there is no peer reporting, but the peers have a lot of
    control over the conduct investigations that happen for you. So
    honor boards are reported by your peers and investigated
    completely by your peers. And then we also have command--my
    command directed mental health evaluation was initiated by a
    peer, by his report. My room inspections were by peers. My
    reprisal initially was by peers. My misconduct investigation
    was by peers. They do have a lot of control with your life.
        Ms. McSally. So you are basically--the sexual assault
    process and all that is in the hands of the officers and
    others, but when you are dealing with all this other--the other
    dynamics, the culture, the potential retaliation, there is a
    whole lot of peer. I think that is really something that we
    need to be paying a little bit more attention to.
        And Ms. Gross, I want to follow up on this culture thing.
    And I spent a lot of time thinking about this. We show up as
    18-year-olds having a full respect for men and women, and
    somehow there is this inculcation that happens where resentment
    builds. And I do want to follow up with you on your
    perspectives, and I know I am not going to have a lot of time
    here.
        Ms. Gross. I understand.
        Ms. McSally. Any double standards----
        Ms. Gross. Absolutely.
        Ms. McSally. People make fun of me, but I talk about, hey,
    you need to have your hair cut, too, not just the guys having
    their head shaved. Like right away we shouldn't have resentment
    building in the men towards the women. We need more
    integration, not more segregation, because that builds
    resentment.
        And this is all the cultural stuff that feeds into the
    ``you are not my real teammate,'' and that is, I think,
    ultimately what we have got to get to the bottom of here at all
    the academies and in the military. Would you guys agree?
        Ms. Gross. Yes, ma'am.
        Ms. Bullard. Yes.
        Ms. McSally. Thanks. I am out of time. Thank you, ladies.
        Mr. Coffman. Ms. Rosen, you are now recognized for 5
    minutes.
        Ms. Rosen. Thank you. And I want to thank you for your
    bravery in coming forward and speaking so candidly about
    something so painful, and so very wrong. You went to the
    service to serve our country with honor and respect, and you
    certainly weren't treated that way, and I am very sorry for
    that.
        What I want to ask is, there is a lot of other women in the
    military, so in your experience at your school, were there
    women leaders? Were there focus groups? Were there support
    groups? What were the women officers able to do for you, and
    how can they help change this culture as we go forward?
        I mean, maybe they are the strongest advocates because they
    have been through this, like Representative McSally, and can
    focus on that.
        Ms. Craine. So from my experience at the Naval Academy,
    there are many, many good women role models. They are officers,
    senior enlisted, even midshipmen. Right now, our brigade
    commander is a woman. And it is fantastic. Like, I do not
    really--I have actually never experienced ever backlash for
    being a woman, never any double standards. There is always
    women breaking the barriers and improving themselves, and it is
    really fantastic.
        Ms. Rosen. How can the older women support you younger
    women, I guess is my question, what can they do or we all do?
        Ms. Craine. Just by being great role models, really just
    interacting with the midshipmen from a day-to-day basis. Like,
    for female midshipmen, seeking out those roles, seeking out
    leadership roles, seeking out roles in which they interact with
    midshipmen on a larger scale. Like, those really make an
    impact. You get more face time with someone who is in a
    position of authority and then you respect them.
        Ms. Rosen. Ms. Bullard.
        Ms. Bullard. I actually had a mentor. She was a SARC and
    she was also a former IG [Inspector General]. And it got to a
    point where she supported us, supported us, and it got to a
    point where we had so much retaliation that she feared for her
    job. And she had us sneaking around, to sneak into her office,
    in order to see us.
        So I would say there is a support, but there is also
    retaliation against them as well.
        Ms. Rosen. So throughout the ranks?
        Ms. Bullard. Yes, ma'am.
        Ms. Rosen. Ms. Gross.
        Ms. Gross. I think it is important to note that that SARC
    was also a USMA grad and was a colonel previously in the Army.
    So she was very confident in her acts with us initially, and
    then was told--told us that she was reprimanded by the chain of
    command for being too close to us in counseling us. And that
    was when she told us to sneak into her office so that upper
    leadership wouldn't see her talking to us. And she later was
    transferred out of the Academy to a different position.
        In addition to that, we have many leaders like this that
    were women, and towards the end of our time at the Academy when
    the retaliation increased and Congress had begun to get
    involved in our cases we started to lose those successively
    where they were told not to speak with us.
        We also, Ariana and I, were very active in trying to start
    a support group at West Point, which is something that happens
    at the Air Force Academy, and West Point does not allow support
    groups. We were very active with this, pushing as high up the
    chain of command as we could, to the SARCs. They told us that
    it wasn't allowed and that we weren't able to do it.
        We ended up forming our own informal support group, through
    the four cadets that I mentioned previously. And as I
    mentioned, all four of us have since left the Academy, either
    being pushed out or self-discharged after mental issues.
        Ms. Kendzior. So from my experience, I didn't really have
    many female officer mentors. I was always surrounded by male
    officers, at least in my companies. But to note, a lot of the
    officers that are company officers went there themselves, so
    they kind of fell into the same culture that we are a part of
    in terms of, you know, trying to fit in with--I call it a frat,
    a big frat you are joining. In my year, 22 percent female. So
    you are joined into this boys club or fraternity and you try to
    fit in and be one of the guys.
        And on another note, the only female officer that I
    actually did sort of know, who was the company officer of a
    company nearby mine, was actually accused of inappropriate
    sexual conduct with a male midshipman.
        Ms. Rosen. It looks like we have a long way to go to bring
    this out of the shadows, because that is where it has been
    hiding, and that is what allows perpetrators to victimize women
    like you and others like you, and we need to bring them out of
    the shadows. They should be here talking about why they did the
    things that they did and letting the world see them on
    television.
        Thank you for your time. I yield back.
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Ms. Rosen.
        Mr. Kelly, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, for
    having this very important meeting.
        I want to, first of all, tell each of you I am sorry for
    what you had to endure. And I thank you for your bravery in
    being here today. And so I want to make sure that is the first
    and foremost.
        Secondly, I want to talk a little bit. To me, they are
    separate things, and we shouldn't be having a hearing on
    separate things. Harassment and assault are two different
    things. Harassment is a cultural thing. It is bad, really bad.
    But assault, that is criminal, and people need to go to jail.
    And that, more than anything else, as a former district
    attorney, there is nothing I can stand than a criminal act
    which someone gets away with.
        And to put them in the same category--because what happens
    with leaders is they retract to the easy-to-defend position. So
    when you start talking about assaults and you start talking
    about harassment in the same voice, they always want to talk
    about harassment and not about the assault. And, again,
    assaults are a criminal act and nothing less. They are always a
    criminal act.
        Are you all aware of anything that tracks when an
    individual either has a sexual harassment, but more
    specifically, a sexual assault, when the perpetrator, not the
    victim, but when the perpetrator is put into the system, do we
    have an unmasked--I understand innocent until proven guilty,
    but you can mask DUIs [driving under the influence], and when
    someone is not adjudicated, so you have a public-private record
    and all those things. Are you all aware of anything that tracks
    these people who are accused?
        Because if a guy has been accused three times or two times
    or five times, they are a predator. And so we need to know that
    even if it is not drawn to the conclusion that once that
    accusation is made it is not in his permanent 201 file, so to
    speak, but it is in an unmasked. Are any of you four aware of
    anything that privately masks that?
        Yes, ma'am.
        Ms. Gross. So that was one of the main reasons that I was
    pressured to report my first case from unrestricted to--I am
    sorry--restricted to unrestricted, was that when I sat down
    with the SARC's office, they told me that even if my case was
    unfounded, that that was my main concern. There wasn't a lot of
    evidence to my case, it happened previously, that even if I
    report it, then at least it would be in his file so that if it
    happened again, that he would have a pattern. And that was what
    I was told, which what I am hearing from you, sir, is that it
    is not that case, that it is removed from the file later or
    that they can't track that?
        Mr. Kelly. No. Mine is a question. I think that when it is
    reported that it ought to be private, in a private file, that
    every other commander for the rest of that person's career
    sees. If that is the only one that ever happens, then I don't
    think there should be any derogatory towards that soldier,
    sailor, airman, marine. But if there are three of them over a
    5-year period from three different victims, then regardless of
    whether he is found guilty, I think the chain of command has a
    duty to know, because you probably have a predator, and I am
    not aware of anything that does that. Are you all?
        Ms. Gross. There does seem to be a tracking system, at
    least on the reports that were just released and the previous
    reports, if you look at the case synopses, they have a section
    that asks if there had been a previous offense committed or
    reported against the cadet.
        Mr. Kelly. And I know that it is working better now than it
    has in the past. I was at the Air Force Academy last year for a
    graduate of two cadets from my district, and one from somewhere
    else--we are talking about the day of graduation, within the
    last 2 days--was not allowed to graduate within 2 days of
    graduating because of a SARC's complaint. That to me is
    progress. That is effects. That is where you can see that the
    person who perpetrated this on you is not graduating and not
    being that.
        That being said, just very briefly, and I will start with
    you, Ms. Kendzior, if you will say, if you could do any one
    thing to make this better, what would it be?
        Ms. Kendzior. As in had I been there in the past--when I
    was there in the past or now?
        Mr. Kelly. If you can fix anything, if you can do, if you
    are the person in charge of the entire DOD, you are Secretary
    of Defense, and you could do one thing that might impact that,
    then what would that be?
        Ms. Kendzior. I think creating an open environment, a safe
    environment to talk about this, to have a place to go and
    discuss it that you won't be judged and it won't get out to the
    rumor mill. To me, that is why I held it in for so long before
    I came forward. I did not feel like I had a safe place to talk
    about it.
        Mr. Kelly. Ms. Gross.
        Ms. Gross. I really that think we need to institute a
    standard of support groups across the Academy, something that
    the regular Army does but the academies don't uphold. And I had
    the belief while I was there that it is because they didn't
    want us to group together. But if they did group together and
    students were be able to talk about these problems and the
    leadership can then see systemically what is going on, I
    wouldn't feel like I was the only one.
        Mr. Kelly. And very quickly, Ms. Bullard. And I am going to
    skip you, Ms. Craine.
        Ms. Bullard. Interestingly enough, in 2014, almost all
    investigation findings were downgraded to find no sexual basis
    of charge. My point is, is that the leadership is not dinged by
    the assaults, because it is not recorded as sexual.
        Mr. Kelly. And that would go back to my point. I don't
    think that it is being tracked unmasked so that the same
    perpetrator, because I guarantee you--and I am sorry, but, Mr.
    Chairman, if I can indulge Midshipman Craine.
        Ms. Craine. About any changes that I would make? It would
    be to make sure that the squad leaders and the people that--the
    underclass and the people you see the most are trained. Because
    when I went through my case, I didn't really think of the SHAPE
    advisers in my company first. I thought of the people that were
    closest to me that were in charge of me.
        Mr. Kelly. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Mr. Kelly.
        Mr. Bacon, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Bacon. Thank you very much.
        I want to thank each of you for sharing what happened in
    your life. And I just want to make it clear, actions described
    were disgraceful and unacceptable. I say that as a five-time
    commander, served nearly 30 years in the Air Force, but also as
    a husband, father of a daughter, granddaughter of three little
    girls. Actually want better. So we owed you better.
        My thought as an institution with the service but also with
    the academies, in any unit, we have got to do three things in
    leadership. One, make the policies clearer, what the standards
    are, and how to respond when an incident does occur. Two, I
    think we owe a way to support victims when these things occur,
    so we have to have a very clear support network there and a
    process. And three, we have got to hold people accountable. And
    so I had to look at all three of those things as a commander.
        So I have a question for you. As a commander, we have a
    little bit of leeway how do we prosecute when things occur. And
    some folks want a bar set a little higher, some set a little
    lower. When I had this situation in my commands and I felt like
    we needed to take more quick action, I decided to court-martial
    folks who the evidence was not as clear. Sometimes it was one
    person's word against another person's word. But I wanted the
    victim to have the opportunity to speak in front of a jury,
    make their case, and also then the person who is accused. And
    our convictions went way up when this happened.
        I would love to have your feedback. Would you have felt
    comfortable to go to a court-martial or is this a process that
    would have worked for you if you had a commander that was a
    little more aggressive and said ``let's put this person in
    front of a jury''?
        Let's start with Ms. Kendzior.
        Ms. Kendzior. I guess I don't understand your question
    fully. Can you please----
        Mr. Bacon. I think the commanders have some leeway who to
    court-martial. Sometimes they want very clear evidence of
    guilt, other times it is a little less clear. I took the tack
    as a commander that I would court-martial people more quickly
    and let the juries decide. What do you think of that principle?
    Should we be more aggressive in court-martialing and let the
    juries decide?
        Ms. Kendzior. I personally believe it should be taken out
    of the hands of the military to do this in general. Rape is not
    and sexual harassment is not exclusive to the military, so why
    should the military be handling this when it is an epidemic
    throughout our country in all colleges? So in my opinion, I
    don't think it should have to go to a court-martial. I think it
    should have to go to civilian court to handle these cases
    appropriately.
        Mr. Bacon. I will just say, though, for the record, in our
    case, we had a high conviction rate through the court-martial.
    We put people in Leavenworth. So accountability does occur. You
    just need commanders that lean forward and be aggressive at it.
        Ms. Gross, do you have a thought on this?
        Ms. Gross. I do, sir. It is actually kind of an opposite
    thought. But I think that right now there is actually too much
    leeway within the institutions. The Academy, at least West
    Point, has many different sanctions that they can impose. As
    you saw with my case, they gave an administrative sanction
    instead of regular court action sanction. They have different
    misconduct hearings, Article 32s. They can do just regular
    judicial punishment at the Academy in the form of walking
    hours. And for that reason, they are able to lower their
    numbers of assaults.
        And so it is very interesting, if you look at the year that
    I left, 2014 and 2015, there was only one case of substantiated
    sexual assault and no substantiated cases of sexual harassment.
    All they were substantiated on was harassment. My case was
    classified as sexual assault. I was only substantiated on
    assault. So maybe that leeway is actually a little too much.
        Mr. Bacon. Okay. Thank you. And Ms. Bullard?
        Ms. Bullard. This is a hard question. I say that because I
    think--I would agree with Ms. Kendzior. I think it needs to go
    outside the military. And the reason why is I think it means--
    in Mrs. Gross' case, at any point the head of the command could
    have done something. So that is all I have to say.
        Mr. Bacon. One comment, too, Ms. Bullard. I found in my
    experience, you are absolutely right, 90 percent of allegations
    are true. That has been my experience as a five-time commander.
    And I found out when you start court-martialing people, people
    are pleading guilty. And so I just wanted to substantiate, to
    back up your point.
        Ms. Bullard. Thank you, sir.
        Mr. Bacon. Finally, I just would like to make one point for
    Ms. Kendzior, and I would love to have your feedback.
        The fact that you were calling a DUB, quote, and in plural
    DUBs to the ladies is a sign of a bad cultural problem. Did you
    see any efforts from the higher level command or anywhere in
    the middle to try to correct that?
        Ms. Kendzior. No.
        Mr. Bacon. Okay. Thank you very much. I yield back.
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Mr. Bacon.
        Ms. Speier, you are now recognized.
        Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Let me just tell you how extraordinary you all are and how
    grateful we are that you are here to testify.
        I am troubled by a number of things that happened. With
    you, Ms. Kendzior, you were raped twice at the Academy and then
    labeled as having a borderline personality disorder and taken
    out of the military. Is that correct?
        Ms. Kendzior. Correct. The rapes did not occur at the
    Academy or on the Academy grounds, but it occurred at a team
    house off campus on one occurrence, in a hotel on another
    occurrence, but both of them were by midshipmen.
        Ms. Speier. And both those midshipmen continued through
    their education and became ensigns?
        Ms. Kendzior. Correct. And actually there was an NCIS
    [Naval Criminal Investigative Service] investigation on the
    one, the first rape that happened, and he was still there when
    I reported, and he was allowed to graduate.
        Ms. Speier. Ms. Gross, you indicated that you were
    interrogated after the rape or after----
        Ms. Gross. The first assault, yes. The first rape.
        Ms. Speier. The first rape. And you were interrogated for
    13 hours?
        Ms. Gross. Yes, ma'am, that is correct.
        Ms. Speier. And then what happened?
        Ms. Gross. During that time, I think CID--CID had gotten
    better by my second assault, I will say that. There had been
    improvement. I am unique in the fact that I did not have a
    special victims' attorney for the first, and then I did for the
    second, so I was able to see the change between the two. Having
    that special victims' attorney played an integral role to
    making sure that didn't happen the second time. He was very
    strict on making sure that I wasn't overexerted.
        But the first time I had 13-hour interviews, I think twice,
    before my commander came in after 11:30 at night and said that
    I needed to go, because I had class in the morning, and I had
    missed class all day.
        Ms. Speier. So you had two 13-hour interrogations?
        Ms. Gross. Yes, ma'am.
        Ms. Speier. And we wonder why victims don't want to report.
        If I remember correctly, Ms. Gross, you had, in the second
    rape or assault, you had bruises on your neck and in your upper
    torso area. Is that correct?
        Ms. Gross. Yes, ma'am.
        Ms. Speier. And there were photographs taken, correct?
        Ms. Gross. Yes, ma'am.
        Ms. Speier. And then were these photographs lost?
        Ms. Gross. I was told that there were certain photographs
    that were not documented properly or lost within the
    investigation, yes, ma'am, and also that they had refused to
    take my clothing and the blood alcohol level indication that
    was requested.
        Ms. Speier. So he was drunk.
        Ms. Gross. Yes, ma'am.
        Ms. Speier. And he sexually assaulted you. They were made
    aware of this, and then they chose not to get his blood alcohol
    or to take your clothing as evidence.
        Ms. Gross. Yes, ma'am, at the directive of the trial
    counsel at West Point, a captain.
        Ms. Speier. And what was the rationale for not doing that?
        Ms. Gross. I am not sure, ma'am. The military police
    officers told me that they received the call. As Ariana Bullard
    was with me and told them to take a blood alcohol level,
    because he was obviously drunk, and they said that the trial
    counsel captain told them not to take it, and I never found out
    why. My special victims' attorney said that he wasn't sure that
    the Academy had the right intentions with the second case and
    felt that because I had an unfounded case that I was no longer
    credible, and so he felt that that was going to be used against
    me.
        Ms. Speier. Now, both you and Ms. Bullard, even though you
    have gone through this injustice, frankly, you want to return
    to the Academy and complete your education there. Can you
    explain to us why?
        Ms. Bullard. Ma'am, I think, first off, I think it should
    be noted that I didn't want to leave in the first place. I
    wanted to stay if there was a change. And the fact that I
    received silence from General Caslen showed me just that there
    wasn't anything to be done at that time. And so immediately I
    had to go.
        And, yeah, I would say that I would love to go back. And I
    think that Stephanie and I are probably the best people to help
    create and help support this cause.
        Ms. Gross. I think that Ariana and I can agree, and we have
    talked extensively about this decision, that we admire General
    Caslen greatly. We both admired him as a cadet. We saw great
    leadership from him during our time there and in his briefings
    and believe that his intentions are true and the Academy's
    intentions are true. They want to fix this problem. We do
    recognize that he made mistakes as well, and so did the
    institutions, just like we all do.
        And because of this, I feel like I can't come to Congress
    and talk to you and tell you these problems and not take any
    action to fix them if I was truly passionate about the issue,
    that I can't sit here and say that these things are wrong
    without trying to fix them myself or trying to do something
    that would do that where I can come back as a leader and make a
    change.
        Ms. Speier. Thank you. I yield back.
        Mr. Coffman. Dr. Wenstrup, you are now recognized for 5
    minutes.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I want to thank all of you for your leadership and being
    willing to come here and educate us on problems that clearly
    exist and help us try and be part of the solution as best that
    we can. And I admire your bravery through all this.
        Truthfully, the questions I would have asked have already
    been asked, so I won't put you through it again. But thank you
    for stepping forward and being the true leaders that you are
    and brave souls. I appreciate it. Thank you.
        Mr. Coffman. Mrs. Davis, you are now recognized for 5
    minutes.
        Mrs. Davis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And, Mr. Chairman, I
    certainly did have a lot of questions.
        Thank you so much to all of you for being here. I think if
    there is anything I take from this is that I am glad that you
    can point to a few areas in which there has been some change,
    but clearly not enough. And I think that we all have to be very
    cognizant of that.
        I am really more inclined to want to just go ahead and move
    on with the next panel, because I hope that you all can stay at
    least for a few minutes, because I am certainly interested in
    some of the reaction.
        But there are a few things that I was glad to hear. The
    special victims' counsel, that I think, generally, I sense that
    that is a good thing. And we know that that is also a model
    that has been picked up at the universities, in some
    universities. We are pushing for more. But I am glad to hear
    that that is positive. I would be very interested in knowing
    how we can progress it even more to speed up any of the best
    parts and get rid of some of the problems that might have
    occurred.
        The unit climate is also very important, and we talk about
    retaliation. I think I would love to know more about how we
    have a zero-retaliation environment. And my sense has always
    been that it is on whoever is in leadership within that that
    sets that tone, and we have got to change that.
        The fact that you could be in a sports environment, Ms.
    Bullard, and not have anybody getting your back, you know,
    that, in addition to the service mentality, and that, you know,
    it is a family, the fact that you would not have your co-sports
    men and women helping you out, that they weren't sensitive
    enough to that, tells me that leadership in that environment
    was such that that is where the changes have to be made.
        So then the question is, how do we make that happen? Is it
    the training that is going on, not among the people involved,
    but the leadership? So how should that change? So I will let
    you answer that.
        And also the whole idea that anybody who has been leading a
    group of people, recruits and cadets, and had a case under
    their leadership that was not handled well, the fact that they
    would advance in leadership has always been something that I
    just don't understand. We have got to get at that. You know,
    people should have a fair hearing, but we also don't want
    people to advance, number one, who have been a perpetrator,
    but, number two, who have been in leadership when that kind of
    crime has taken place.
        So I think that is sort of where I would hope that perhaps
    we can discuss a little bit more in the next panel. But,
    please, I have a minute and a half, could you respond?
        Ms. Craine. In regards to the command climate, I have never
    been called a DUB. I have never experienced anything like that
    at my time at the Academy. And when I took hold of my case and
    had confidence and didn't fear anything about it, I received
    the most support from the midshipmen at the brigade.
        Ms. Bullard. I would have to agree with you that it comes
    from leadership. And in my resignation to General Caslen, I
    told him that there needed to be new leadership and a new
    culture and that was the problem. The head coach is a civilian,
    and he doesn't necessarily--he understands the gist but doesn't
    necessarily understand the military very much. And bringing
    that into an NCAA [National Collegiate Athletic Association]
    sport is hard. I mean, how do you establish a military
    environment but also have an NCAA sport?
        So I think it is a double-edged sword. And as Ms. Kendzior
    said, you know, it is kind of like the guys are better than the
    girls. And that is the thought on the team, that they are
    better than the girls and they are two separate teams, and I
    don't understand how that is for an Army team.
        Ms. Gross. I actually have an improvement for my piece,
    that with my special victims' attorney, I think I might have
    been the only one, maybe Cadet Craine here, who brings very
    valuable to the current system. It may have changed since I
    have been there, but they had very limited power because they
    were subjected--at the time, my attorney was only 2 months new
    to the Academy, and he was subjected to my chain of command
    leadership. And so he was telling me that he was feeling very
    restricted because he can only do so much because he had to
    report that to his own leadership who was being investigated
    for my case. So that may be something to look into. I am not
    sure if that has changed.
        Ms. Kendzior. And I would just go back to what I said
    earlier, that I think it is important to train the leadership,
    the faculty, the coaches. I never received any conversation
    from my coaches reaching out to me about what had happened. So
    that would be a good start, in my opinion.
        Mrs. Davis. Thank you all for your testimony today. It is
    very important. Thank you.
        Mr. Coffman. Ms. Speier.
        Ms. Speier. Just one question. Simply, were you retaliated
    against?
        Midshipman Craine.
        Ms. Craine. No.
        Ms. Bullard. Yes.
        Ms. Gross. Yes.
        Ms. Kendzior. Yes.
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Ms. Speier.
        I want to thank the panel, the members of the panel, for
    having the courage to step forward today. I think for some of
    you it is a question of bringing justice to your particular
    case. And I think by virtue of you being here, you will help
    countless others. And I think everybody in this committee--
    subcommittee--is committed to making sure that we do our utmost
    to make sure that the climate and the culture of our service
    academies changes to where we don't experience a panel like
    this in the future.
        So, again, I want to thank you so much for your testimony
    today. And you are now dismissed.
        We are going to recess until after the vote to hear the
    panelists, the superintendents for the various service
    academies.
        [Recess.]
        Mr. Coffman. This hearing is now called back to order.
        I wish to now welcome our second panel. We would like to
    respectfully remind the second panel to summarize to the
    greatest extent possible the high points of your written
    testimony in 5 minutes or less. Your written comments and
    statements will be made part of the hearing record.
        Our second panelists consists of Dr. Elizabeth P. Van
    Winkle, Performing the Duties of Assistant Secretary of Defense
    for Readiness; Lieutenant General Robert L. Caslen, Jr.,
    Superintendent, United States Military Academy; Vice Admiral
    Walter E, Carter, Jr., Superintendent, United States Naval
    Academy; Lieutenant General Michelle D. Johnson,
    Superintendent, United States Air Force Academy.
        With that, Dr. Van Winkle, you are now recognized for 5
    minutes.

    STATEMENT OF DR. ELIZABETH P. VAN WINKLE, PERFORMING THE DUTIES
            OF ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR READINESS

        Dr. Van Winkle. Thank you. Chairman Coffman, Ranking Member
    Speier, and subcommittee members, thank you for having me here
    today to discuss the results of the DOD Annual Report on Sexual
    Harassment and Violence at the Military Service Academies.
        The Department is committed to promoting an environment
    where all service members, cadets, and midshipmen are treated
    with dignity and respect. Sexual assault and sexual harassment
    have no place in our Armed Forces and military academies. These
    problematic behaviors affect our people's well-being and
    undermine the overall readiness of our military. Just one
    instance of sexual assault, harassment, or sexualized
    misconduct can impact the trust between military members,
    degrade unit cohesion, and takes focus off of the mission at
    hand.
        The strength of our force relies on the resiliency and
    discipline of our military members. These behaviors and
    tolerance of these behaviors weakens our force. Preventing
    criminal behavior and misconduct, providing care for service
    members, and holding offenders appropriately accountable
    continues to be a top priority. We also understand that each
    service and academy have unique environments, and we work to
    ensure they have the flexibility to implement change based on
    their composition and challenges.
        We are a learning institution, and we are continually
    striving to do better. In the force at large, we have seen
    advancement over the past several years at our key indicators
    of progress. Our report released yesterday indicates that
    sexual assault rates in the Active Duty are at their lowest and
    rates of reporting are at their highest.
        However, one of the things we have learned since creating
    the Sexual Assault Prevent and Response program in 2005 is that
    context and environment matters. Our approach must be tailored
    to take into account unique combinations of mission, people,
    and environments. There is no one-size-fits-all solution to the
    problem of sexual assault.
        Unfortunately, the rates of unwanted sexual contact
    increased at all three academies during this academic program
    year, returning to levels commensurate with what we observed in
    2010 and 2012. In addition, while the trend line in the Active
    Duty Force shows increases in the number of members making the
    difficult decision to report a sexual assault, rates of
    reporting at the academies have not followed the same trend.
        Finally, the experience of sexual harassment and
    retaliation is far too common at the academies.
        Going forward, we will continue to work with the academies
    to reinvigorate their approach to prevention. This means
    addressing how contributing factors, such as alcohol misuse,
    sexual harassment, hazing, bullying, and other disruptive
    behaviors, impact their unique environments.
        However, the absence of these kinds of negative behaviors
    is only part of the solution. There also needs to be the
    presence of strong leadership traits among the students in this
    space. Each student must be empowered to be role models in how
    they behave, how they treat each other, and how they expect
    other cadets and midshipmen to be treated. We owe them guidance
    on what right looks like.
        But this is not something that can be immediately achieved
    with a policy. It can only be achieved through a unified effort
    to help our cadets and midshipmen understand the duty they have
    to each other in all aspects of their behavior and at all
    times. The academies are already working to move the needle,
    and they can each talk to some of the initiatives they have
    begun to empower students to take on this charge.
        The environment at the academies is unique. As such, it is
    taking us longer to fine-tune our approach, and our efforts to
    improve prevention and reporting have not made the gains that
    we would all like to see.
        This is not for a lack of effort and attention. Our surveys
    indicate that the majority of cadets and midshipmen trust the
    academies to protect privacy, ensure safety, and treat all with
    dignity and respect. We are confident that we can do more to
    prevent sexual assault and sexual harassment at the academies
    through an approach that considers the full spectrum of
    readiness-impacting behaviors.
        In closing, we will not stop until we get this right. We
    appreciate your concern and support as we work to protect the
    people who volunteer to keep our Nation safe.
        Thank you for the opportunity to come and speak with you
    today. I look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Van Winkle can be found in
    the Appendix on page 65.]
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Dr. Van Winkle.
        Lieutenant General Caslen, you are now recognized for your
    opening statement.

     STATEMENT OF LTG ROBERT L. CASLEN, JR., USA, SUPERINTENDENT,
                     UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY

        General Caslen. Thank you very much, Chairman Coffman,
    Ranking Member Speier, and distinguished members of the
    subcommittee. It is an honor to be here today representing the
    United States Military Academy community.
        I know that today we are here to address the recent sexual
    assault and gender relations survey results and to provide the
    committee with details about the work we continue to do to
    improve the support we provide to victims of sexual violence,
    but also the very crucial aspect of creating a climate that
    does not allow these events to happen in the first place.
        As a start point, I want to say that the experiences that
    Ms. Bullard and Ms. Gross shared with you are things that we
    never want to happen to anyone at West Point. I admire both Ms.
    Bullard and Ms. Gross for their moral courage and their candor
    to come forward today to be able to talk about these
    situations.
        I share Ms. Gross' concern about the open-door policy, and
    as much as she agonized not talking to me, I shared the same
    feelings that I was unable to talk to her because of pending
    action that I had to preside over, to include a DOD IG
    investigation for reprisal.
        But we learned a lot from both of them and from their
    experience. We learned about special victim counsel and the
    work that a special victim counsel does in these
    investigations. We learned a lot about interview techniques. We
    learned a lot about advocacy and advocacy methods that build
    trust as compared to what you heard from Ms. Gross and Ms.
    Bullard.
        We also learned a lot about the cycle that a victim feels
    as they go through isolation and ostracism and then misconduct
    and then further isolation until the point where they finally
    bottom out and are ejected. We learned about the commander's
    responsibility to be able to identify where that cycle occurs
    and then to prevent that ejection from happening.
        Our strategy to build and maintain a solid response to
    sexual harassment and sexual assault addresses prevention,
    victim advocacy, investigation, assessment, and accountability.
    We believe we have made great strides in advocacy,
    investigation, accountability. This past year, our reporting
    has nearly doubled, a very positive sign that our work to
    improve the climate is beginning to take root.
        However, we must focus more on primary prevention, efforts
    that stop the crime from happening in the first place. As part
    of that effort, we hired an external organization to assess our
    programs and offer recommendations in how we can improve.
        We acknowledge that the only cause of sexual assault is the
    criminal committing a crime, and we accept that we must create
    a command climate where everybody is treated with dignity and
    respect, everybody feels that they are a valued member of the
    team, and everybody feels secure both physically and
    emotionally.
        Prevention education must integrate purposeful discussions
    about building and maintaining healthy relations and tough
    conversations about consent and sexual encounters. These issues
    are part of what makes collegiate environments so challenging
    in terms of sexual violence prevention. However, education and
    skill building, which are two keys to successful prevention
    programs, are also part of the college experience, and we
    therefore continually explore ways to modify our programs to
    respond to these factors.
        For example, over the past few weeks our SHARP and our
    Cadets Against Sexual Harassment and Assault hosted a sexual
    assault awareness and prevention month of activities, which
    included Mr. Tony Porter, a screening of the movie ``Audrey &
    Daisy,'' Denim Day, Take Back the Night, Survivor Speak Out,
    Walk a Mile, and other events and other work with our local
    rape crisis center. These events were well attended by cadets
    and community members and raised awareness about sexual assault
    and reinforced how prevention is everyone's responsibility.
        As a member of the NCAA Board of Governors, I was asked to
    co-chair the Commission to Combat Campus Sexual Violence
    because of the military academies' recognized programs and
    initiatives and experience in dealing with these issues. There
    is much work to be done to shift the tide of sexual violence on
    college campuses, and it is an honor to be a part of the work
    at the national level, both through the NCAA and at West Point.
        Finally, we still have a lot of work to do to eliminate
    sexual assault and sexual harassment. We have not stopped
    working on this issue, and we won't. I hope that as I have the
    opportunity to answer your questions today it will become clear
    that our mission at West Point is to develop leaders of
    character who are committed to the values of duty and honor and
    country and are prepared for a career of professional
    excellence in service to the Nation as an officer in the United
    States Army. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of General Caslen can be found in
    the Appendix on page 72.]
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Lieutenant General Caslen.
        Vice Admiral Carter, you are now recognized for your
    opening statement.

    STATEMENT OF VADM WALTER E. CARTER, JR., SUPERINTENDENT, UNITED
                          STATES NAVAL ACADEMY

        Admiral Carter. Chairman Coffman, Ranking Member Speier,
    and distinguished members of this committee, thank you for
    inviting me to discuss the Naval Academy's sexual assault
    prevention and response efforts. At the Academy, we have a
    responsibility to ensure that every single member of the
    Brigade of Midshipmen is afforded an opportunity to develop
    professionally in an environment which fosters dignity and
    respect.
        Additionally, we produce one-third of our service's
    unrestricted line officers every year. If we get it right, and
    we have every intention to do this every year, we can be the
    custodians of the core values of the Navy. We can set the
    standard for professionalism, for honor, for integrity. We can
    graduate and commission young junior officers that will
    inevitably influence the overall culture of the Navy and the
    Marine Corps.
        Despite dedicated efforts by the Naval Academy leadership
    and the Brigade of Midshipmen, we continue to experience
    incidents of unwanted sexual contact within our ranks. While
    the recently released Annual Report on Sexual Harassment and
    Violence at the Military Service Academies shows the Naval
    Academy's prevalence of unwanted sexual contact in 2016 was
    below of that 2010 and 2012, there was a significant increase
    in prevalence from the progress reported in 2014. We can and
    must do better.
        We have an extensive sexual assault prevention program at
    the Naval Academy. Each midshipman actively participates in
    over 30 hours of education and training during their 4 years at
    the Academy, starting on the first day of Plebe Summer and
    culminating with the completion of a character capstone event
    during their senior year.
        The heart of our prevention effort is the Sexual Harassment
    and Assault Prevention Education, or SHAPE, S-H-A-P-E, program,
    a peer-led small group mentorship program. Our SHAPE program
    has evolved over the last several years, and based on evidence-
    based research in the field, data from these annual reports,
    student and facilitator feedback, and best practices of other
    institutions. Additionally, we have incorporated sexual
    harassment and sexual assault prevention into our formal
    education curricula.
        We recently evaluated our prevention program against the
    recommendations set forth by the Centers for Disease Control's
    guidelines and found that our efforts incorporate all major
    facets of the CDC's prevention education model with the
    exception of teaching healthy safe dating and intimate relation
    skills.
        Moving forward, we will being placing further emphasis in
    the following three areas: responsible use of alcohol, healthy
    behaviors in relationships, and understanding consent.
        With respect to our sexual assault response program, we
    continue to make steady positive progress. Sexual assault
    continues to be one of the most underreported crimes in our
    Nation. That said, reports of sexual assaults at the Naval
    Academy have more than doubled over the past 4 years.
        Furthermore, just this past year we had 11 previously
    restricted reports converted to unrestricted reports, providing
    not only an opportunity to provide care and support for our
    survivors, but also the chance to hold individuals accountable
    for their actions. I believe this continued positive trend
    reflects increased trust in our system.
        Despite our committed efforts and a very robust program,
    the recent report shows that we still have much work to do to
    further effect and sustain positive change. We are not where I
    want us to be, nor where the Navy needs us to be. There is no
    finish line in our sexual assault prevention and response
    endeavors, but I have full faith and confidence that my team
    will rise to the challenge.
        Thank you for your time today, and I look forward to your
    questions.
        [The prepared statement of Admiral Carter can be found in
    the Appendix on page 85.]
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Vice Admiral Carter.
        Lieutenant General Johnson, you are now recognized for your
    opening statement.

    STATEMENT OF LT GEN MICHELLE D. JOHNSON, SUPERINTENDENT, UNITED
                        STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY

        General Johnson. Thank you, Chairman Coffman and Ranking
    Member Speier and other distinguished members of the committee.
    Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today on
    behalf of the future leaders of our Air Force, the cadets of
    the United States Air Force Academy, as well as the faculty and
    staff that support our mission to educate, train, and inspire
    these young men and women to become leaders of character in
    service to our Nation.
        Thank you also for allowing us to attend the first panel
    today in the hearing. And thank you for your steadfast
    attention to the critically important issues of sexual
    harassment and assault, issues that are corrosive to our
    ability to successfully carry out our mission and, by
    extension, are impediments to military readiness.
        I would like to briefly discuss some of our work in sexual
    assault prevention and our efforts in positive culture change
    at the Air Force Academy.
        As has been said before today, one sexual assault is too
    many. We expect more of ourselves, and rightfully so, because
    more is expected of our graduates when they leave our campus
    and operate in increasingly complex, interconnected, and
    unpredictable battle spaces. We must hold ourselves to a higher
    standard. Our bottom line is that we cannot tolerate any
    incidents of sexual harassment or sexual assault.
        The results of the 2016 Service Academy Gender Relations
    Survey and Sexual Harassment and Violence reports indicate that
    as an academy we are not yet where we want to be. We want
    reporting to go up, prevalence to go down, and ultimately for
    these incidents to go to zero. We have work to do, but based on
    the initiatives we have begun, we believe we are moving in the
    right direction.
        The 2016 Service Academy Gender Relations Survey estimates
    indicate the number of USAFA [United States Air Force Academy]
    cadets experiencing unwanted sexual contact in the past year
    actually increased from 126 in 2014 to 150 in 2016. Both of
    these estimates are less than the 162 cadets estimated for
    2012.
        We are working toward greater clarity in these numbers to
    understand them better and to provide additional context, and
    so we also utilize the Military Service Academy Defense Equal
    Opportunity Climate Survey to help us better understand cadets'
    attitudes about reporting, prevention, and leadership's
    approach to addressing these crimes.
        We have seen some positive trends in these areas. The 2016
    Military Service Academy Equal Opportunity Climate Survey
    showed that significantly more cadets are willing to seek help
    from their chain of command compared to 2014 and showed an
    increase in trust at all levels of leadership at the Academy,
    an average increase of 3 percent across enlisted and officer
    leadership, academic faculty and staff, and the athletic
    department.
        The Air Force Academy's sexual assault prevention strategy
    is dedicated to fostering a climate of dignity and respect with
    a holistic approach. To keep pace with swift changes in culture
    and the development of new dimensions of victimization in
    anonymous environments and on social media, our current and
    future initiatives reflect a paradigm shift in training,
    focusing more on peer-to-peer approaches, grassroots efforts,
    and implementing evidence-based programs that use meaningful
    metrics to measure impact over time. And this focus is
    transitioning from quantity to quality and from response to
    prevention.
        Among our prevention initiatives is the Cadet Healthy
    Personal Skills program for fourth class or freshmen cadets, an
    evidence-based program that focuses on prevention of multiple
    problem behaviors, including substance abuse, risky sexual
    behavior, and aggressive behavior.
        In addition, Green Dot Bystander Intervention training has
    been implemented with our permanent party as part of the first
    phase of a 5-year Air Force-wide violence prevention strategy.
    Cadets will receive this highly interactive, discussion-based,
    and realistic training starting this summer.
        And we have made significant strides in the athletic
    department, where each of our intercollegiate athletic teams
    participate in small group healthy relationships training, a
    judgment-free environment in which everyone is allowed to speak
    freely and the focus is positive.
        Victim care is a fundamental priority for our SAPR program,
    and we have built a robust safety net for victims to ensure
    their emotional and physical well-being regardless of when or
    where sexual misconduct took place, even if it was before they
    came to the Air Force Academy. Thirty-eight percent of reports
    in 2016 were of incidents that occurred prior to military
    service.
        Our approach to victim care includes medical care,
    counselors, chaplains, peer support, law enforcement
    investigation, and a special victims' counsel. When a victim
    chooses to ask for help, a victims' advocate is there to offer
    support and ensure all resources are available for their
    recovery.
        We want all victims to get the help and care that they need
    so that they are able to continue on the selfless, ambitious
    path that brought them to our Academy and reach their fullest
    potential as leaders of character in our Air Force.
        Thank you for your time, and I look forward to answering
    your questions.
        [The prepared statement of General Johnson can be found in
    the Appendix on page 96.]
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Lieutenant General Johnson.
        Dr. Van Winkle, I understand that the overall Department of
    Defense Sexual Assault Prevention and Response report was
    released yesterday. How do the results of the DOD-wide survey
    compare to the service academy report?
        Dr. Van Winkle. Thank you for the question.
        As mentioned in my opening statement, within the Active
    Duty we are seeing indications of progress. We saw the
    prevalence rates--so that is the occurrences of the crime--the
    estimates of prevalence decreased in the Active Duty
    significantly between 2014 and 2016. So we are seeing a trend
    line down, 2014, 2016, and also 2012 is a trend line down
    across all of those years.
        In addition, we have proportionately more people reporting
    than ever before within the Active Duty.
        Mr. Coffman. Are you speaking to the----
        Dr. Van Winkle. The Active Duty.
        Mr. Coffman [continuing]. DOD-wide?
        Dr. Van Winkle. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Coffman. And DOD-wide includes the academies?
        Dr. Van Winkle. No. The Active Duty report that was
    released yesterday is only the Active Duty.
        Mr. Coffman. Okay.
        Dr. Van Winkle. So the reports we saw, about 32 percent of
    Active Duty members are reporting when they are experiencing a
    sexual assault, that is what we estimate.
        As opposed to those trends that we are seeing in the Active
    Duty, in the academies we did not see the same progress, where
    we saw sexual assault or unwanted sexual contact rates go up
    between 2014 and 2016. We didn't see the same progress in
    reporting either. So it is a different picture.
        Mr. Coffman. Do you have a breakdown, though, in that
    survey in the same, I guess, age cohort or the same--so if you
    compare on the Active Duty side those between, say, 18 and 22
    years old with the academies, is there a breakdown in the
    report that reflects the difference in age, apples to apples in
    terms of ages?
        Dr. Van Winkle. We can provide that breakdown. I can take
    that for the record.
        [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
    on page 119.]
        Dr. Van Winkle. To your point, the 18- to 24-year-old age
    group tends to be the highest risk group for these behaviors,
    and we can provide you that.
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you very much.
        We have just heard the compelling stories of survivors of
    sexual assault. Many mentioned that they were hesitant to
    report their assailants and that when they did they experienced
    retaliation. Could each of you discuss the programs in place to
    address these problems?
        Lieutenant General Caslen, start with you, please.
        General Caslen. Yes. Thank you very much. Let me first talk
    about--address the reprisal and retaliation, because I think
    that is a significant issue.
        Based on the report that we just had, our reprisal facts
    were that 13 percent of those that had unwanted sexual contact
    reported professional reprisal, which means it was unfavorable
    personnel action or some type of personnel action was
    threatened to be withheld. Here is the key part: 47 percent
    felt ostracism and isolation.
        So we are really trying to understand the depth of the
    issue. It is one way to understand it from the professional
    standpoint, but it is also important that we understand the
    isolation and the ostracism that occurs, because whether you
    see it or somebody else sees it, the victim and the survivor
    will see it and they will feel it. And then how do you protect
    them, how do you create a command climate that does not allow
    that to happen?
        Social media and the anonymity of social media also allows
    reprisal to occur. We talk to our cadets all the time about
    having a private life that you would display on social media
    that is consistent with the values that you would have in
    public. If you have a private life that is not consistent with
    your public life, that is not the type of values that America
    expects of leaders who will lead their sons and daughters. So
    that comes into effect as well.
        We put into place a policy that really denies and does not
    allow reprisal to occur, and we are taking action against that
    as well. And then we continue to support the Army regulation.
        Mr. Coffman. I beginning to run out of time.
        Vice Admiral Carter, could you respond, please?
        Admiral Carter. Yes, sir.
        First of all, I want to respond to the members that were up
    here earlier. For former Midshipman Kendzior, who was at the
    Naval Academy many, many years ago, the resources that are at
    the Naval Academy and the situation that we have at the Naval
    Academy is, unfortunately, in a much, much different place and
    a more positive place. And as you heard from Midshipman Craine,
    she did not talk about reprisal and she felt compelled and
    comfortable reporting.
        One of the things that we have done is we have moved, first
    of all, where you can report to our Sexual Assault Response
    Coordinators so that it is not collocated where they live. It
    is slightly outside of their living spaces but close enough
    that they feel comfortable going there.
        The second thing I would tell you is our Midshipmen
    Development Center is a mental health facility that midshipmen
    feel very comfortable, with no stigma going to. We have sexual
    assault trauma counselors there, so they feel very comfortable
    going to them.
        We also talk to the midshipmen about the responsible use of
    using social media and how they need to look out and protect
    each other. And we have seen good behavior actually occur on,
    you know, social sites like Yik Yak, which are now starting to
    close down.
        So although this is still a challenge with reprisals, we
    feel that is--we have seen with our unrestricted reports going
    up, 11 have transitioned this year, as I mentioned. There are
    good indicators. And even in our survey, midshipmen showed a
    propensity to want to report more than they have in the past.
        Mr. Coffman. Okay. Lieutenant General Johnson, briefly,
    please, I am over my own time limit, please.
        General Johnson. Sir, just very briefly. We try not,
    likewise, try not to let the anonymous environment, let the
    negative stand and talk about people of character, to shut it
    down online. They have gone from Yik Yak to Yodel, so there is
    always another site for them to find, but we don't let that
    stand.
        We do check on them every month and case management groups
    for our victims to cross-check across entities at the Academy
    to make sure there is not an action of reprisal taking place.
        The special victims' counsels help very, very much, and we
    think as a result, we are benefiting from more unrestricted
    reports. If people are willing to make an unrestricted report,
    that means they have confidence that they won't be retaliated
    against. We hope that is the case. And over the last 3 years
    our restricted and unrestricted reports have been within five,
    so we think we are making progress in confidence.
        Thank you, sir.
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you.
        Ms. Speier.
        Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you to all of you for your leadership. I know that
    you want to do the right thing. I truly believe that. The
    numbers, as Dr. Van Winkle has pointed out, just don't support
    the kind of growth we would like to see.
        General Johnson, I truly enjoyed being at the Academy with
    you last month. And I see Dr. Dickman is here, who I observed
    for close to an hour as she presented before all of the coaches
    from around the country, and it was a very compelling
    presentation.
        Let me start by asking this, just yes or no. Do you believe
    that 90 percent of the reports of sexual assault are true?
        Dr. Van Winkle.
        Dr. Van Winkle. According to the data, in terms of what
    falls under an unfounded case, that would align, where we
    typically see about 2 percent in the Active Duty being
    unfounded, meaning that there was evidence that didn't support
    that the crime occurred.
        Ms. Speier. General Caslen.
        General Caslen. I think it is true that the victim had
    experienced something, and it was significant and it was
    emotional to that person, and it created a crisis of
    confidence, a crisis of security, emotional and physical
    security.
        When you do the investigation and to determine whether
    there is sufficient evidence to continue for further
    prosecution, the facts, at least for us, is just under 50
    percent will be founded, that there was enough evidence to
    continue.
        Ms. Speier. That doesn't mean it didn't happen. It just
    means there wasn't sufficient evidence.
        General Caslen. Yes, ma'am.
        Ms. Speier. So I think that is really important.
        Okay, Admiral Carter?
        Admiral Carter. Yes.
        General Johnson. Yes.
        Ms. Speier. All right. So one of the statements that was
    made earlier by the first group of witnesses was a
    recommendation by someone who was counseling them that,
    basically, don't be that girl. And it was about the reference
    to a football player who was administratively removed, and it
    was found out that the victim was not telling the truth.
        So that message has to change. I mean, I think part of what
    we need to train everyone is that most of those who file
    reports are telling the truth. So I just wanted to make that
    point.
        Admiral Carter mentioned that sexual assault survivors at
    the Naval Academy now can take sabbaticals, which I think is
    really healthy. Do each of you offer that opportunity?
        General Caslen.
        General Caslen. Yes, we do. We do it under the consultation
    of all the mental health support and the chain of command.
        Ms. Speier. General Johnson.
        General Johnson. Yes, ma'am. Administrative turnbacks, and
    they may go for one or two semesters to make sure that they are
    ready to come back upon consultation with the experts, as
    General Caslen said.
        Ms. Speier. So it is not necessarily just at their request,
    it has to be in consultation with medical personnel? We may
    want to look at that.
        Ms. Gross mentioned that she was interrogated for 13 hours
    one day and then 13 hours another day.
        General Caslen, is that still going on at the Military
    Academy?
        General Caslen. No. Ma'am, if you remember from my opening
    statement, we learned a lot from what Ms. Gross and Ms. Bullard
    had experienced. And one of the things we did learn was about
    the interrogation and interrogation techniques. And God forbid
    if we ever do something like that again.
        Ms. Speier. So this report, Dr. Van Winkle made note of it,
    shows that 47 percent of those who were polled said that they
    were sexually harassed at the military academies. It is an
    astonishing number. And we all know, I think, that oftentimes
    sexual harassment can lead to sexual assault.
        What are we going to do about the fact that almost half of
    the cadets feel they are sexually harassed?
        Dr. Van Winkle. I think whether we are talking about the
    academies or the Active Duty, the number of cadets, midshipmen,
    Active Duty service members that are experiencing sexual
    harassment is too high.
        What we know from the data is there is--we learn from it,
    and there is a range of behaviors that fall under sexual
    harassment, ranging from sexual quid pro quo to those
    behaviors, inappropriate comments, gestures, jokes. We know
    from our data that that latter point, which is persistent and
    severe, is what most of our members, cadets, and midshipmen are
    experiencing.
        And I think the Department is really focusing on beginning
    to mobilize and empower the cadets and midshipmen themselves.
    And as I mentioned in my opening statement is to really empower
    them to start to be more invested in this area and to start to
    step in if they see something and to be more engaged in this so
    we can--we can start to address some of these issues.
        Ms. Speier. Any other comments? General Caslen.
        General Caslen. Yes, ma'am. We do recognize and acknowledge
    that people talk to each other disrespectfully, and we upgraded
    training programs so that you can talk about the values of our
    institution--duty, honor, country--and the values of our Army,
    which include respect. And then we have also organized so that
    we now have grassroot Respect officers within the companies
    that when incidences like this occur, they will take action.
        I think you heard Mr. Russell ask the question about the
    Respect mentorship program that some cadets go through, that if
    a cadet is found to have disrespectful in one capacity or
    another, whether it is sexual harassment or another category,
    it would go through a mentorship program, and they must
    successfully complete it. It is a 6-month-or-so program.
        Ms. Speier. General, excuse me, but my time is expired, and
    I just want to get the last two answers, if I could. Thank you.
        General Caslen. Sorry.
        Admiral Carter. Yes, ma'am. The number is too high, it is
    unacceptable. We have more work to do there. I will say there
    are some glimmers of hope, and some of that is based on us
    improving the education that goes with this. Our midshipmen
    indicated, even in the survey, that 73 percent of the men would
    intervene and correct somebody that makes an inappropriate
    joke. And our women said 78 percent of them would also
    intervene.
        We've held midshipmen accountable for sexual harassment.
    We've separated some of them, even though the reports don't
    match the number that indicate that's out there. I mean, we
    have held four midshipmen accountable through either
    remediation or separation, but we have to do better.
        General Johnson. And ma'am, if I could add. I think the
    culture and climate are very much a part of this, so that is
    why we are really encouraged about what is happening in the
    athletic department with the healthy relationships sessions
    they have had to really talk through some of these things.
        And it goes beyond sexual harassment and just
    relationships. We pick it up from the culture and from my
    minority cadets of what they--what they worry about back home.
    They are from some place. They are from Ferguson. They are from
    Jewish communities. They are from other communities where there
    is concern that they need to come in and make sure they all
    feel safe with us, and we are focused on that.
        We just hired a chief diversity officer with college
    experience to help build bridges across our programs at the
    Academy as well, so that if we can have this culture of respect
    and dignity, we can touch all these things.
        Ms. Speier. Thank you.
        Mr. Russell [presiding]. And the chairman will return. He
    had to take an important call, but I will now recognize myself,
    who was next in the order, for 5 minutes.
        Thank you, Dr. Van Winkle. It is good to see you again, and
    thank all of you for the important work you do building future
    leaders. While it is a sensitive topic, and it is one that is
    unacceptable, and we would all be in agreement of that, we
    can't lose sight of the fact that our Nation relies upon the
    product that you produce for its very defense, and that is
    still very, very sound, in my estimation.
        One incident is too many, but the trend is down over the
    last 7 years, and we can take a snapshot at 2014. However, what
    we do see is a bit of decline since these new programs and
    incidents have been implemented.
        Lieutenant General Johnson, you made mention that a third
    of the victim support is from incidents prior to military
    service, so would the statistics include that reporting, or is
    that something altogether separate?
        General Johnson. Sir, there are various documents, but the
    one when we say have 32 reports less 30, it included----
        Mr. Russell. So that----
        General Johnson [continuing]. It included everything that
    was happening that they reported, because the reports are
    registered when they are reported, not when the incident
    happened.
        Mr. Russell. I see.
        General Johnson. So in these case management groups we have
    every month, we may have victims without subjects because the
    subject was someplace in a hometown or in another base.
        Mr. Russell. So based on that comment, it is possible that
    the actual incidents in the academies would be lower than the
    statistical reporting. Is that correct?
        General Johnson. They could be sometimes.
        Mr. Russell. Thank you.
        General Johnson. But we are glad the victims come to us for
    care.
        Mr. Russell. Sure. No, I understand. And that was an
    important insight that I didn't realize before.
        What we have heard in the previous panel, and even in some
    of your comments, is that the programs are sound, but the
    implementation still needs a lot of attention, and I think we
    see that attention being done.
        But I also want to point out, as I look at the dates that
    these programs have been implemented and I look at your tenures
    at the academies, they seem to coincide with the implementation
    of these programs, and I think it is important that we get that
    on the record.
        University statistics are far worse by comparison. It
    doesn't make any of the behaviors acceptable, but it is worth
    noting, and I think it speaks not to the failure of the
    military in addressing this problem, but actually that it has a
    36 percent better performance rate over our universities and
    colleges nationwide.
        And while every incident is unacceptable, I think that our
    colleges and institutions can learn from our service academies,
    particularly in the NCAA field with--and you spoke to that,
    General Johnson, about the teams as they are out competing, and
    yet their performance and behavior is almost without flaw when
    compared to other NCAA teams, and I think that that is also
    worth noting.
        And so while the military has a culture of identifying
    problems, and it has a culture of bringing these to light
    because that is the culture, we can't lose sight of the fact
    that we see at our colleges and universities a much greater
    degree of a problem.
        Effectiveness of academies is unique and steeped in
    tradition, 151 Medal of Honor recipients from the service
    academies. All the iconic leaders that we have seen in our
    Nation's history come from the Academy. That is why it
    important that we get this right.
        But I am satisfied, as I look at some of this, that we need
    to learn from those that have experienced this, we need to take
    this, but I am not ready, as some of my colleagues may be, to
    say that the military is completely broken and that those that
    are in uniform as leaders have no compassion, no understanding,
    have no clue about what harassment is or that it is some
    culture that is going to innocently target civilians, it is
    going to have absurd rules of engagement or it is going to have
    an environment where our men and women in uniform are not
    respected. That is not the values that I experienced in
    uniform, and I think that it is important that we bring these
    facts to bear.
        And with that, I will now recognize the lady from Arizona.
    Oh, I am sorry. I got out of sequence because of the sitting in
    the chair, and I apologize to Ms. Tsongas. Please, 5 minutes.
        Ms. Tsongas. Thank you. And thank you to all of you here
    today and for all the very challenging work you have to do in
    preparing leaders for the future. I think what makes what you
    do so unique is you are preparing people for a particular
    profession, which is why we bring, I think, such increased
    scrutiny to some of these issues, and I do believe it is only
    appropriate
        And I, like Ranking Member Speier and others on this
    committee, do remain concerned about the high number of female
    cadets and midshipmen who reported experiencing sexual
    harassment. It is a broader issue, but it was 48 percent of
    female cadets who reported that and 29 percent of those females
    who reported experiencing gender discrimination. And for male
    cadets and midshipmen, the percentages were 12 percent for
    sexual assault and 5 percent for gender discrimination. And of
    all those who reported, 89 percent indicated that the sexual
    harassment, or just gender discrimination, was committed by
    another Academy student.
        So given that we had these remarkable women here today who
    were willing to tell their stories, and I felt it was important
    to ask them what they experienced in the culture that they felt
    made these numbers possible, and I thought it was really
    interesting what we heard from them.
        So one referenced a code of silence, that you inculcate a
    sense of loyalty among these young people. It is part of what
    they have to be in order to do their job well, but it comes
    with a downside, and that is the code of silence, so that you
    are seen to be disloyal if you come forward to report a crime
    or to report a harassment.
        Another one mentioned that there was a sense from the
    outset that women were unequal, that the physical standards for
    women were different, that women were segregated. So rather
    than--so much of what you are talking about is dealing with the
    one-on-one issues and how to stop some of the worse behavior
    and give cadets, or midshipmen, the tools to deal with it. I
    would like to ask how you are digging down deeper so that you
    think about the upside and downside at the same time, and you
    deal with it at that level rather than as it permeates the
    culture and makes it so much harder to deal with.
        I know this is not simple. These are institutions that have
    been primarily home to men for generations. We all are part of
    institutions in which change does not come easy. But I would
    really like to hear how each of you are thinking. As ever more
    women are coming into your academies, how you are thinking
    about getting it right from the outset so some of these numbers
    just don't rise to the level.
        I know the survey covered a lot of different behaviors,
    none of which are appropriate in a professional environment.
    That is the bottom line, none of which are appropriate. And how
    to think about making sure that you don't have to deal with
    them as they happen. They just don't happen.
        So I will start with you, General Caslen. And I haven't
    left you with very much time, so you each get a brief little
    opportunity to comment.
        General Caslen. I will go quick, ma'am. There is a lot
    there. First of all, I will just say thank you very much for
    your question. I think we are making progress on the code of
    silence because our reporting this year nearly doubled, and
    that means that there is a command climate where people feel
    that they are trusting the system better as compared to what
    you heard from our victims from previous years.
        If you are going to change a culture, you have to change
    behavior, and if you change behavior, it really is through--the
    way we look at that is through our learning program, our
    educational program, and I think in the entire process that we
    have learned from this particular survey, that is the area that
    needs most of the attention.
        What we fail to do, and I think you have asked what I
    have--we have thought a lot about this, is we failed to address
    the root causes, the root causes of sexual assault in our
    education programs. And this is--and we are now redoing our
    education program to address the root causes of sexual assault
    and to have better conversations about them.
        Ms. Tsongas. Admiral Carter, I am sorry. You don't have a
    lot of time, but----
        Admiral Carter. I have some similar answers, so I won't go
    over the same things that General Caslen mentioned, but part of
    this is understanding who you are. I mean, the demographics of
    who is at the Naval Academy has changed over even this time
    period where we heard from some of the victims. Almost 26
    percent of the brigade and midshipmen are women today, so they
    are no longer isolated anymore. Three of the last four brigade
    commanders were women. It is a meritocracy, and there is no
    issue with that across the brigade.
        Women are graduating at a much higher percentage than the
    men. Last year's graduation rate for women was 90.5 percent,
    and the men graduated 89 percent. So those speak to the
    actions, not the say, and I think that is part of it.
        Now, of course, the education is important. Getting down to
    the, as General Caslen mentioned, the root causes, we still do
    have some work to do, and that is where we have to get after
    the gender bias that shows up at the beginning of induction
    day.
        Ms. Tsongas. Quickly, General Johnson.
        General Johnson. In light of your time, ma'am, I will be
    very brief. But in two ways, one, gender forms in the
    discussion, sometimes with women to be able to level with each
    other, they also, at the cadet level, have asked that they make
    sure it is not always one gender because it is not just one
    gender's challenge. They want to have the men in the room so we
    can discuss it. So those kinds of things are maturing and
    bearing fruit.
        And just in a practical level, to something Congresswoman
    McSally mentioned early, boxing had always been a requirement
    in physical education in all the academies for the men until
    last year. Well, Navy was ahead of us in the 1990s, but now
    women box. It is the confidence you get that--the equilibrium
    between the programs, between the men and women are invaluable,
    so there is some little things that we can do that is symbolic
    to say we are all equals and can all be warriors.
        Ms. Tsongas. Thank you, and I thank you for your service,
    because I was fortunate to work with you, and I appreciated
    those years that I was able to, thank you.
        Mr. Coffman [presiding]. Ms. McSally, you are now
    recognized 5 minutes.
        Ms. McSally. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you all for
    your leadership and your service. I want to continue on that
    line. I think most of you were at the last panel, and we have
    had long discussions about this issue and a little bit today,
    Admiral, about that culture and the root cause issues.
        And again, I have experienced it. I have lived through it.
    I have witnessed it. And I don't have a Ph.D. in sociology, but
    I still believe, to this day, that somehow we are inculcating a
    culture of gender bias from the very beginning when we are
    training, and we have got to take a hard look at that.
        And it is counterintuitive, because if you try and address
    these issues, you have got a lot of people putting heat on you,
    the last thing you want to do is maybe look at a double
    standard and say, you know what, we need to make it a little
    bit harder on women in order to get to this. I get that. I am
    advocating that you take a hard look and to see where we have
    any double standards, because, again, I have seen this
    throughout my career.
        Anything that was well-intended, but, in fact, then breeds
    resentment, right, anything that makes it look like women are
    getting a break or getting easy then breeds resentment. So then
    you form this resentment, and then you let it cook in this
    environment, and then the adults go home at night and then you
    are wondering what is going on. And all this stuff we are
    talking about today about how we respond and how--and that is
    all great, but it is that underlying culture issue of how is it
    that somehow we are inculcating this potential gender bias,
    this potential resentment that are root causes of these issues?
        I want to really encourage you and I want to partner with
    you because I know those are potentially hard conversations,
    right? But I want to be a part of that. I just want to hear
    your perspectives on anything that you are thinking in that
    area.
        Again, you know, sometimes we are doing knee jerk
    additional training, but then what you do is you have the guys
    rolling their eyes saying what a waste of our time. We should
    be learning how to fight and kill the enemy, and now we are
    having to talk more about how to deal with women, and then it
    pisses them off more, and then that adds to more resentment and
    that creates more environment.
        Again, I have lived through it, so I feel pretty passionate
    about it. What are your thoughts, General Johnson, and go down
    the line.
        General Johnson. Ma'am, I will take a different angle on
    it. I think what we are seeing in these, the effective training
    that we are getting at for culture and climate are these small
    group discussions where people start leveling about how to
    interact with each other, and there is a lot of survey fatigue
    because of all the different measurements.
        That is why I would like to be able to have a step back,
    look at it holistically and see what it is actually telling us
    about it. What is encouraging in some of the measures is that
    the confidence people have that they can go tell someone who is
    an officer, enlisted, or another cadet, even the cadet leaders
    are more confident. And those kinds of things aren't just from
    surveys, but instead of making more surveys, how we are pulling
    those together and then getting in small groups and just
    leveling with them and just being frank.
        And I think that is what we have been afraid to do, because
    you are right, they are hard conversations and they are kind of
    taboo sometimes, but I think that is most effective, especially
    with this generation. They just want us to level with them and
    then they respond.
        Ms. McSally. Admiral Carter.
        Admiral Carter. Sometimes the answer is complicated as we
    have been talking about. You have to find where pockets of
    success exist and be able to know what volume of education,
    what type of program you want to drive to change the behavior.
        Ms. McSally. Yeah, I am not talking about training here. I
    am just asking you to take a fresh look at the culture and what
    we are inculcating from day one?
        Admiral Carter. That is where I was going, ma'am.
        Ms. McSally. Yeah.
        Admiral Carter. We did this across our cadre of athletes
    across the whole spectrum, which is a third of the brigade, and
    we took a measured approach to go after that cadre because we
    knew that was a cohort that we needed to pay close attention
    to.
        We issued them a code of conduct, or behavior, that was no
    different than what was already in midshipmen regulations, but
    made them read that and understand. We also made it happen at
    the coach level. And then we took the team captains, who we
    specifically picked, not the best athletes but the best
    leaders, and we take all of those athletes with the brigade
    senior leadership, men and women together, to Gettysburg for a
    two-days in-depth leadership experience, case studies, and we
    talk about these issues that is what is fair and equal for
    everybody.
        We have seen, in this survey, changing behavior in our
    Division 1 athletes, and we have other schools approaching us
    as to how we are getting after that. So I haven't been able to
    put that across the whole brigade, but we do have a pocket of
    success there.
        Ms. McSally. General Caslen.
        General Caslen. Congresswoman, I think you have a great
    concept, a great thought there, the culture of gender bias. As
    we were talking about root causes, one of the ones I think that
    is related to that is what we call toxic masculinity, and it is
    an issue that our prevention education programs will begin to
    address in greater detail.
        Toxic masculinity is the locker room talk. It is the person
    who talks about his experience, and then it creates an
    expectation that everybody has got to replicate an experience
    like that when it is really not necessarily the case.
        And then coupled with that is force and coercion. So that
    if a couple has set boundaries and force and coercion says,
    keeps pressing for sex, for sex, and no, no, and then when no
    stops and there is no consent, and then a rape occurs. And then
    coupled with this other root cause is pornography, because
    pornography is prevalent in the--at least at West Point among
    the Corps of Cadets. And what pornography does is it creates
    objectivity of the other gender and creates an expectation of
    what the sex act ought to be like, and that is what has to be
    addressed in our root causes and education programs.
        Ms. McSally. Great. Thanks. I am out of time, but I do also
    want to follow up with you a theme from the first panel, which
    is some of this peer-to-peer stuff that is going on when it
    comes to disciplinary potential retaliation. Again, from my
    view, 19-year-olds and 20-year-olds being in charge of 18-year-
    olds, I think we need to take a fresh look at it. Just because
    we have always done it that way, doesn't mean it is the way to
    do it, especially because we continue to have challenges in
    that area.
        Mr. Coffman. Ms. McSally, we will do a second round if you
    have any additional questions.
        Ms. McSally. Okay. Thanks.
        Mr. Coffman. Ms. Shea-Porter, you are now recognized for 5
    minutes.
        Ms. Shea-Porter. Thank you, and thank you all for being
    here and to the first panel as well. It is very enlightening. I
    dated a boy years and years and years ago at the Academy at
    West Point, and I have to say that I am disappointed and
    shocked at where we have gone and where our culture has gone
    for this, that it is just so visible and so prevalent, and that
    there is like witnesses without commenting or coming forward
    and telling their stories.
        And I recognize, I have heard the military say this before,
    that you are reflecting the culture at large, and I have
    sympathy for that, but I also recognize, just from my college
    days, that that is a different culture where you have a lot
    more authority. And I can remember when this boy I was dating
    was so excited about getting out that he took the elevator, and
    I guess in those days you couldn't take the elevator, and we
    lost the day together. And I remember thinking: Wow, that is
    really amazing.
        And so you have that power and authority, and they know
    that. They know that. And so I am wondering how you are using
    that. Is that you don't always want to be in the discipline
    mode, I understand that, but it is a core issue here about
    discipline.
        So I am going to ask you to tell me just two things: First
    of all, when somebody is applying for these schools, what
    conversation do you have about what happens if they sexually
    harass or assault?
        The second question I have is: What happens when there is a
    case at the school? Does everybody get called in? Is this
    something where it is still like a group understanding that
    this guy is out or this woman is out, and you will be out next
    and reinforcing that kind of discipline of what will happen to
    them, because we are still not seeming to be able to scare them
    enough. And sometimes, you know, that fright part--I went to
    Catholic school as a kid. I think there is an element to that
    as well.
        But we are missing something still, and I see you all
    struggling to figure out exactly, you know, when you talk about
    all the corps stuff, but what about that part of it? What are
    you saying to them when they first enter, when they apply, do
    they have a statement they have to sign saying you will be out
    and you will--all that hard work you did will be for nothing,
    and your family and your community will know that you lost
    everything because you did this? And I would like each one of
    you to address that, please.
        General Caslen. Okay. I will go first. First of all, in the
    cadet's--or the candidate's application, there is no question
    in the application that says did you commit a sexual assault or
    were you found for sexual harassment. There is not a question
    in that. Of course, all of our candidates are nominated by
    Congress.
        Ms. Shea-Porter. Right.
        General Caslen. And I know Congress, in their nomination
    process, goes through the same sort of thing to try to assess
    the character of the individual that is going to be nominated
    to the military academies, and we look at that.
        We do require them to write an essay, and the essay is on
    character. And if in the essay we get a sense that there is an
    issue, then we will go back and explore it in detail, and that
    is our best way to gain an assessment on their character.
        On the crimes, when a crime occurs, or if there is an
    allegation of a crime, we then begin an investigation. The
    investigation is with our CID, and they do a very thorough
    investigation, and that is assuming that you have a victim that
    is willing to cooperate. If you have a victim that wants to
    report, and then, as you know, report restricted instead of
    unrestricted, it is a different thing altogether, because there
    is no investigation at that particular point. But we don't
    bring everybody in and talk to them. We do the investigation as
    you would for any other criminal that----
        Ms. Shea-Porter. Well, I understand that. If you didn't
    understand, let me change the way I asked that. If they are
    removed, if it turns out, you know, not--they have the same
    right to privacy until they figure out what exactly happened,
    but if it is determined that this happened and you remove them,
    do you tell the school? Because I know that happens in lots of
    places. As you know, we just lost our CEO, and here is why. We
    just lost a Member of Congress, and here is why. Do you do
    that?
        I just--I think like writing an essay maybe on what they
    consider to be sexual harassment and sexual assault before they
    come in, just so you get a sense of it--and you know, education
    is important. I am not saying education is not important, and
    awareness, and you know, understanding culture. And I
    absolutely agree with my colleague who made the statements
    about, you know, being careful about what we breed in terms of
    resentment. All that matters.
        But ultimately, can't we go to the front of it and say, you
    know, write us something about what you think constitutes
    sexual harassment, and tell us, you know, what you think would
    be crossing the line, and here is what we think so that they
    know when they come in.
        I just think we are not driving it hard enough when they
    show up. And then ultimately, if they are removed, why. So I
    welcome the Vice Admiral.
        Admiral Carter. We do a character assessment before they
    come in. We don't ask for an essay on sexual assault or
    harassment. If we have indication, and we have in the past,
    that somebody has been involved, then that is further
    investigated and that becomes an issue.
        They get education from day one on what the rules are, what
    the penalties are from day one, so they hear that within the
    first day of arrival. In terms of what education they get, we
    do training and present cases to the midshipmen. We call them,
    ``XYZ cases.'' They are historical cases.
        The caveat to that is if there is a victim in which the
    cases involved is still at the Naval Academy, we wait till that
    person has graduated or left before we bring those cases
    forward, but we do review those to include fleet cases, so that
    they can see examples of, you know, what happens to those that
    go through the full legal process.
        Ms. Shea-Porter. Thank you.
        General Johnson. Just very quickly. We also have them write
    character essays, but they may not know. In fact, so we hit it,
    you know, right away in basic training with them and said:
    Look, we don't know how things were where you came from, but
    this is how we expect to treat each other. And that is what
    actually generates a lot of these reports of things that
    happened before they came to the Academy, and then we follow
    up.
        And because we do hit it from day one, and then all the way
    through the--every year, it is a 4-year developmental program
    to try and reinforce the consequences. And then in addition to
    the challenges of privacy, there is just understanding the
    judicial system. Sometimes, with cadets, they don't understand
    that if someone is acquitted, that means there is not a
    preponderance of the evidence. It doesn't mean the victim
    wasn't truthful; it is just that we didn't have the evidence.
    But we do have other tools that we can discipline the people
    with.
        And what our lawyers have helped do is sit down with our
    commanders and try to talk to the squadrons to say here is what
    happened, because they don't always understand it, because of
    privacy things may seem as though it has been not answered,
    but, in fact, it wasn't communicated well enough, and our
    lawyers have helped us find a way to do that to avoid violating
    privacy but explaining to their cohorts what just happened,
    just as you said.
        Ms. Shea-Porter. Well, I know that most of them are
    tremendous men and women ready to serve their country working
    very hard, but I think we need to think a little outside the
    box, and you know, put a little bit more into that mix there.
    And I thank you all for your service and your work trying to
    eradicate this. I yield back
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you. Mr. Bacon, you are now recognized
    for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Bacon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for being
    here. Sorry for being a little late. I was on the House floor
    speaking on this very subject for that. And I know this is a
    bipartisan effort. I know you share in the effort as well. We
    want safe academies. We want the world's best military. We want
    a respectful environment. I know we are working together on
    that.
        I wanted to ask you, is there--and this may have been asked
    already, but I just want to make sure for the record I
    understand. Is there any legislation that we can pass through
    the HASC [House Armed Services Committee] and through Congress
    that would support your efforts to combat this?
        I will just go down the line. Dr. Van Winkle, thank you.
        Dr. Van Winkle. I think we are looking at all of these
    issues carefully, particularly focusing on prevention efforts
    as well as the issues around retaliation, sexual harassment. We
    learned a great deal from this report, including the emphasis
    that leadership has had, and the cadets and midshipmen have
    indicated that they see their leaders as role models. But we
    also see some indications of where we can move the needle a bit
    more within the cadets and midshipmen themselves, as well as
    the cadet and midshipmen leadership chain.
        So we are really working to understand this issue better
    and how to combat it, and I think you are our partners in this,
    and we would like to continue to discuss with you how we can
    move this needle and appreciate your support on it.
        Mr. Bacon. General Caslen.
        General Caslen. I defer to Dr. Van Winkle and support her
    comments. The two areas that I get frustrated with quite often
    is the elements of reprisal, and the elements of sexual
    harassment, and some inconsistency between different various
    regulations and legislation, and I think if we just--we have
    had this conversation. We just collectively need to make sure
    that we define it properly for what is actually occurring and
    that we take the--you know, has the appropriate accountability.
        Mr. Bacon. Admiral Carter.
        Admiral Carter. I actually feel like I am resourced and
    have the right policies and tools to be able to adjudicate
    where necessary, and also drive the culture where it needs to
    be.
        Mr. Bacon. Thank you. General Johnson.
        General Johnson. Sir, likewise. I think we are resourced
    and we have the tools. I think as we look at holistically at
    the data we have, we can do a better job of understanding what
    it is really saying about where we are rather than chasing just
    the numbers, but to look at the trends and understand what is
    really effective in these programs rather than adding to them.
        Mr. Bacon. We want to be your wingmen in this effort, so as
    you see things that we can pass that will support your efforts
    in doing this, let us know. And I thought an example was last
    month we heard there was some ambiguity in the sharing of
    intimate pictures where the pictures were taken in a consensual
    manner, but then shared in a nonconsensual way, so we want to
    take away that ambiguity.
        So I am a cosponsor with the PRIVATE [Protecting the Rights
    of IndiViduals Against Technological Exploitation] Act. And so
    as we see things like that, let us know, and we will try to
    support it because we want to give you the right tools to be
    successful.
        Do you have any metrics of recent metrics to show that we
    are having some positive results? We will just go in the
    reverse order. We will start off with General Johnson.
        General Johnson. Well, sir, I think what we are encouraged
    about are these measures of trust in organizations. So at the
    Air Force Academy, our trust in the athletic department was
    really low when I arrived, and because of this healthy
    relationships program, this holding the athletes to the
    standards, similar to what my colleague pointed out at Navy,
    our athletic department has become really the champions in
    terms of confidence and them doing the right thing. And then
    not just the cadets, but the coaches, that they are leaders of
    character, and the leadership of our athletic director has
    really helped with that along the way.
        So, I think also the measures of culture and climate,
    again, trust in the mid to 90s--mid 90s of percentages. And in
    part, to do the right thing in case of a sexual assault and for
    the other cadets, those kinds of trends of trust are
    encouraging that we are in the right direction. Obviously, we
    have still got to stay after it. Thank you.
        Mr. Bacon. Thank you, General Johnson. Admiral Carter.
        Admiral Carter. The increase in our reporting and the
    significant jump over eleven reports in 2015 and 2016 that were
    restricted, turned in unrestricted reports, and our focus on
    our Division 1 and club sport athletes showed a significant
    change in their propensity to be in the perpetrator's side, and
    that was a distinct effort that we made.
        Mr. Bacon. Thank you. General Caslen.
        General Caslen. Well, like the Naval Academy, our reporting
    has almost doubled. That is really a strong metric, and we are
    very pleased to see that because it shows confidence within the
    programs and the systems and that climate.
        Our substantiation rate of investigations is one of the
    highest in the Army, and we are very proud of that. One metric
    that I am very concerned about is cases that fall in the U.S.
    magistrate. I just can't get them to take a case to save my
    life, you know. I think in 4 years they have taken only one
    case, so I am very glad to be able to have the tools that we
    have as a commander.
        Mr. Bacon. Thank you. Dr. Van Winkle.
        Dr. Van Winkle. Yes, briefly. The infrastructure that we
    have right now within the academies is sound and very good. We
    continue to get good feedback on that in terms of the support
    systems we offer, the special victims' counsel and victims'
    legal counsel, the victim advocates, the training and education
    process, the infrastructure we have is very sound, and the data
    that we get back supports that, as well as trust in the
    leadership and willingness to intervene if they see something.
        Mr. Bacon. Okay. Thank you. I will just close my portion by
    saying I know it takes leadership at every level to make this
    successful. Continue communications, you can't just say it
    once. I have learned that as a five-time commander. It has got
    to be repeated communications, and I know you are doing that,
    and it has to be at every level. But also holding people
    accountable as you found them guilty and let people know, hey,
    this is what happens when you--this guy is going to jail and
    don't let it happen to you. Thank you. I yield back.
        Mr. Coffman. Ms. Speier, you are now recognized for 5
    minutes.
        Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a couple of
    quick questions. I am going to try and get this all in.
        Alcohol is a component of sexual assault in 50 to 60
    percent of the cases. Half the Academy student body is
    underage. There have been lots of examples where there is a
    reluctance to report for fear that you will--reluctance to
    report a sexual assault for fear that you will get hit for
    underage drinking. Have we done anything to address that at the
    three academies? If you could be very brief in your responses.
        General Johnson. I will jump in. Ma'am, just what we try to
    take into account is the egregiousness of the offense and then
    balance that with the trauma that it might cause to the victim
    and just sort it out.
        So, in fact, a case of a cadet you talked to when you
    visited us, I think, had a letter of counseling so that she had
    been underage drinking. We have to uphold standards, but we
    have to take into account their trauma. A letter of counseling
    is different than if we had adjudicated in a different way, so
    that it goes away when they graduate but it still says you need
    to uphold standards, but it is not as severe as it might have
    been on its own.
        We also would consider--there are times you consider
    immunity entirely, but we try to balance it out with, again,
    the welfare of the victim, but also upholding standards in good
    order and discipline, so I think that is what all of us try to
    consider.
        Admiral Carter. We won't adjudicate a lower level conduct
    issue against a victim until their case is completed. We don't
    often look at an immunity unless it makes sense. We will come
    back and look at that afterwards for whatever level we have to
    deal on the victim's side.
        Ms. Speier. Okay.
        General Caslen. We are very sensitive to cases of
    collateral misconduct because we know that is an impediment to
    reporting and an impediment to coming forward for--to support
    the investigation. So we take--like the Air Force and both Navy
    said--it is significant extenuation and mitigation, and we take
    it all in balance. Our education program addresses that in a
    big way, and that is one of the root causes that we also
    address in that way.
        Ms. Speier. Thank you. Dr. Van Winkle, I am not going to
    ask you to speak now, but if you could give me your thoughts at
    some later point in time, I would appreciate it.
        [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
    on page 119.]
        Ms. Speier. Okay. There have been cases where victims of
    sexual assault at the military academy were then given
    antidepressants or other drugs to help them deal with the PTSD,
    and then because they were on drugs, were not commissioned.
    What are we doing about that?
        Admiral Carter. I will answer first. First of all, one of
    the reasons we have a sabbatical program is to allow somebody
    to heal so they can come back and be healthy, so they can go
    through and go forward in a commission. So we have already had
    two midshipmen depart. One has come back, and that is
    proceeding successfully.
        In some cases where somebody has had to go to drugs, we
    have actually had the opportunity to either hold them or waive
    them so they can go through a commission. So we do take that
    into account.
        Ms. Speier. Similar with the other academies?
        General Johnson. Yes, ma'am. There has to be review, and it
    is a medical review before they are discharged. And this also
    helps balance against retaliation to make sure that there is
    another look, unless someone has departed.
        General Caslen. I am not familiar with a case at West
    Point. That doesn't mean it did not occur, but I will take it
    for the record and get back to you.
        [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
    on page 119.]
        Ms. Speier. All right. Thank you. Midshipman Craine
    referenced that in her situation, I think, she was moved. It
    appears more often than not when there is sexual assault or
    sexual harassment, that it is the victim that is moved, not the
    perpetrator. Are we looking at whether or not that is the
    appropriate action?
        Admiral Carter. Yeah, I would like to take that one since
    it was my active midshipman. We leave that, first of all, up to
    the victim first. As she pointed out it, it was her choice to
    move. Our first reaction is if the perpetrator is in the same
    company, we want to move the perpetrator while that person is
    either going through a legal review or some other process, but
    oftentimes the victim says, No, I would like to move, or I
    would like to take the sabbatical. So we make that an offer,
    and that is their choice.
        Ms. Speier. All right.
        Admiral Carter. The other point, just to finish off with
    Midshipman Craine. In her case, there was an opportunity for
    that to go all the way to court-martial. The victims actually
    had the choice to say, No, we will accept that perpetrator's
    dismissal from the Naval Academy, and that ended in a very
    positive way for the survivors.
        Ms. Speier. One of the data points in the report showed a
    prevalence of unwanted sexual conduct among women with higher
    in the upper classes than the freshmen. So there is something
    going on where upper classmen believe that they can sexually
    assault lower classmen, and there was some talk earlier about
    this role that upper classmen play in managing the plebes and
    freshmen.
        Dr. Van Winkle, can you comment on that in 3 seconds?
        Dr. Van Winkle. I can try. That is a data point we are
    looking at because over the years, what we traditionally see is
    that sophomores are the class year that have the highest rates,
    particularly as they go from freshman year where they are
    fairly locked down. So we have this sophomore year effect.
        This year was different with the juniors and seniors, so we
    really are taking a closer look at that to understand it
    better.
        Ms. Speier. All right.
        General Caslen. We think there is two reasons why that is.
    That has got my attention, and I am very concerned about it. It
    is--reason number one is now you are of age to drink alcohol,
    and because alcohol is such a high prevalence to potential
    sexual assault, at 50 to 60 percent as you mentioned, you are--
    21 years of age occurs when you are normally a junior or
    senior, so that that has something do with it.
        The second thing it indicates is that those who have been
    in the program, or have higher prevalence indicates that our
    prevention programs are not producing what we want them to
    produce, which causes a reflection to see what we are doing and
    what we need to change, and that is where we need to address
    the root causes and address these root causes with the upper
    class.
        Ms. Speier. I yield back. Thank you.
        Mr. Coffman. Mr. Russell, you are now recognized for 5
    minutes.
        Mr. Russell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Each of you, in your
    testimonies, have spoken about substantiation rates and the
    validity of those. General Caslen, you had even mentioned about
    the magistrate not taking cases. This seems to convey a
    confidence in the justice of the military system.
        Could each of you please explain, the service academy
    chiefs, could each of you please explain the importance of a
    commander's query, 15-6, IG, CID investigations, you know, as a
    body of work, and if you believe that the UCMJ provides the
    best tool as opposed to civilian courts that we see in our
    universities, and yet the academies have the better performance
    rate.
        Every time these cases come up, immediately, the Uniform
    Code of Military Justice comes under some type of fire, and yet
    what we have heard in the testimony here today is that the
    substantiation rates are actually pretty solid. And so if each
    of you could comment on these commander's tools and the UCMJ.
    General Caslen.
        General Caslen. Well, the commander's--if an incident
    occurs and it is in the chain of command and the chain of
    command is going to do the initial investigation, that is a
    commander's inquiry to see if something is there.
        If it is a potential crime, we are going to turn it over to
    the CID, and the CID will begin the investigation. If it is not
    a criminal act but misconduct, we will probably do the 15-6.
    But I will give you some statistics here of, you know, our
    jurisdiction and some our substantiation rates.
        So looking at our CID cases over the last 4 years, to
    include this year, we have had--where I have had jurisdiction,
    we've had 47 cases. Of the 47, 21 were founded, and charges
    were preferred for 7 of the 21. And the other--and 8 of the 21
    had misconduct administrative investigations with
    administrative action that include separation.
        If I look at the cases where I did not have jurisdiction,
    there were 24, and although our CID still may have done the
    investigation, 8 of the 24 were founded, but since it was
    outside our jurisdiction, only one charge--once was charges
    preferred. So it is a significant difference from a case that I
    have jurisdiction for as compared to----
        Mr. Russell. So the actual results and substantiation and
    even punishments were higher under the UCMJ.
        General Caslen. Absolutely.
        Mr. Russell. Admiral Carter.
        Admiral Carter. The first thing I would say is our Naval
    Criminal Investigative Service increased the number of agents
    for not only the Navy but to also help at a place like the
    Naval Academy. So their timeline to get through investigations
    has improved just during the time I have been superintendent as
    an independent investigative body, and then they turn those
    results over to us.
        Over the last 2 years, 32 unrestricted reports; 19 of which
    were under my jurisdiction; 10 were advised by outside judge
    advocate generals through my lawyers to move forward for
    preliminary hearings; and of those, 7 either went through
    general court-martial or left the Naval Academy. So four of
    those actually went to general court-martial.
        So again, I think those statistics are significant and
    shows that we are resourced properly with the right
    authorities.
        Mr. Russell. Thank you. General Johnson.
        General Johnson. So thank you. Thank you. Likewise, we have
    2 of the 24 worldwide Air Force special victim investigation
    and prosecution capabilities at the Academy. So when our OSI
    [Office of Special Investigations] agents talk to our victims,
    they know how to do it in a way that when someone is
    traumatized, that they know how to discuss with them, so that
    it would help it be easier for them to report.
        And we have 9 of the 11 agents are graduates of the Air
    Force's sex crimes investigator training program, so we have
    the specialized training to do these investigations.
        And what we have seen is, is our accountability has
    increased. So in 2012 and 2013, we had 19 completed
    investigations, 3 court-martials, and 6 cadets were
    disenrolled, so that is only about a 50 percent accountability
    rate, and the next year's likewise.
        But in the last 2 years, we had 16 completed
    investigations, 5 resulted in criminal charges, 7 were
    disenrolled, and 4 adverse administrative actions, so 87
    percent. So--and then this last year was 86 percent. So because
    of the different tools we have, we can try to take it to court,
    and then we can also use other disciplinary tools to follow
    through, based on the investigations.
        Mr. Russell. Well, thank you for that. And Mr. Chairman, it
    seems to convey that the UCMJ is sound in these cases, and with
    that, I yield back.
        Mr. Coffman. I wish to thank all the witnesses for their
    testimony this afternoon. This has been a very informative
    hearing. There being no further business, this subcommittee
    stands adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 7:00 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

    =======================================================================

                                A P P E N D I X

                                  May 2, 2017

    =======================================================================

                  PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                                  May 2, 2017

    =======================================================================

      [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    =======================================================================

                       DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                                  May 2, 2017

    =======================================================================

        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    =======================================================================

                  WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING

                                  THE HEARING

                                  May 2, 2017

    =======================================================================

                 RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. COFFMAN

        Dr. Van Winkle. Overall estimated rates of unwanted sexual contact
    measured in the 2016 Service Academy Gender Relations (SAGR) found that
    12.2 percent of Academy women and 1.7 percent of Academy men
    experienced some form of sexual assault in the year prior to being
    surveyed. The Active Duty measure of sexual assault in the 2016
    Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of the Active Duty (WGRA) is
    different, but produces statistically similar results as the estimated
    measure of unwanted sexual contact used at the Academies. The 2016 WGRA
    found that 7.7 percent of Active Duty women 18 to 22 years old and 1.0
    percent of Active Duty men 18 to 22 years old were estimated to have
    experienced some kind of sexual assault in the past year.   [See page
    37.]
                                     ______

                 RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. SPEIER
        Dr. Van Winkle. Each of the Military Service Academies have
    policies in place for addressing underage drinking and collateral
    misconduct when sexual assault is involved. Each individual Academy is
    best positioned to provide you with their exact policies and practices
    regarding underage drinking and sexual assault. However, most of them
    observe the flexible response provided by DOD Instruction 6495.02
    ``Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) Program Procedures,''
    which indicates that commanders may wait to administer accountability
    actions for alcohol infractions once the sexual assault has been fully
    investigated. The Instruction also encourages commanders to weigh all
    available evidence in determining appropriate accountability for
    collateral misconduct.   [See page 52.]
        General Caslen. To provide some context to the commissioning
    standard and USMA's approach to granting waivers; AR 40-501 (Standards
    of Medical Fitness), Ch 2, para 2-27-K, having a history of post-
    traumatic stress disorder is a medically disqualifying condition for
    commissioning. In situations where the condition is not significantly
    impairing and is under good control a waiver can be granted. The
    decision to grant a waiver for commissioning is made during a Cadet's
    Firstie year. The fact that an individual is on medication does not
    determine whether or not they will receive a waiver. In the past 5
    years there have not been any Cadets with PTSD secondary to a sexual
    assault who were not allowed to commission at the end of their Firstie
    year because of treatment they were receiving. Given our standard of
    granting waivers if this situation were to occur, the fact that they
    were receiving treatment with or without medication would not be the
    determinant factor.   [See page 53.]

    =======================================================================

                  QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING

                                  May 2, 2017

    =======================================================================

                        QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. ROSEN

        Ms. Rosen. Why do you assess there to be a discrepancy between the
    increased incidents identified in the anonymous survey and the decrease
    in reported cases of sexual assault and harassment? Do you believe this
    to be a sign that victims have a severe distrust in the system to
    investigate and pursue justice, and/or a fear of retaliation?
        Dr. Van Winkle. The 2016 Service Academy Gender Relations Survey
    (SAGR) was administered to Military Service Academy students in March
    and April of 2016. The SAGR asks students questions related to personal
    experiences of unwanted sexual contact between June 2015 and the time
    they took the survey, which represents the past academic program year.
    In 2016, the SAGR found that 12.2 percent of female cadets/midshipmen
    and 1.7 percent of male cadets/midshipmen indicated experiencing
    unwanted sexual contact in the past academic program year (unwanted
    sexual contact is the survey term for the range of penetrating and
    contact sexual crimes).
        The survey rates allow us to estimate that about 507 cadets/
    midshipmen experienced some kind of unwanted sexual contact in the year
    prior to the survey. During the same period, 64 cadets and midshipmen
    made a report of sexual assault for an incident that occurred during
    their military service.
        Based on these statistics, we estimate that about 13 percent of
    victimized cadets/midshipmen chose to report their incident of sexual
    assault. This is down from the 16 percent estimated in 2014. While the
    share of cadets/midshipmen who reported their incident decreased
    overall, figures varied by Academy. At USMA, we estimate that about 16
    percent of cadets/midshipmen who indicated they experienced unwanted
    sexual contact chose to report the incident, which is a small increase
    from 14 percent in 2014. Comparable figures for the Naval and Air Force
    Academies both show downward trends. The share of Navy midshipmen
    choosing to report their incident decreased from 17 percent in 2014 to
    11 percent in 2016, while the share of Air Force cadets choosing to
    report decreased from 17 percent to 12 percent during the same period.
    The survey data collected by the Department does not lead us to
    conclude that cadets/midshipmen have a severe distrust in the system to
    investigate and pursue justice. Rather, cadet/midshipmen responses to
    the survey indicated that the top reasons for not reporting a sexual
    assault allegation were they:
          Thought the incident was not serious enough to report.
          Took care of the incident themselves by avoiding the
    person who did it, forgetting about it and moving on, or confronting
    the person who did it.
          Did not want more people to know about the incident.
        Cadets and midshipmen who do decide to report endorse reasons that
    imply some confidence in the military justice system. For example, one
    commonly endorsed reason for reporting for female cadets and midshipman
    was to stop the person(s) (i.e., the accused) from hurting others.
    (Men's reasons for reporting were not reportable due to the small
    numbers of cadets/midshipmen in this survey category). In sum, the
    Military Service Academies are unique environments that present a
    number of challenges.
        Leadership at all levels of the Department is committed to better
    understanding these unique factors and spurring greater reporting of
    the crime.
        Ms. Rosen. What do you believe are the best measures to increase
    victims' confidence in the value of reporting, better protect them from
    retaliation, and foster a command climate where unwanted sexual contact
    is not committed against our brothers and sisters in arms?
        Dr. Van Winkle. The number of Active Duty Service members who
    report a sexual assault has increased over the last few years following
    senior leadership emphasis on the Sexual Assault Prevention and
    Response (SAPR) program, enhanced victim support services and
    protections, legal representation for victims, and changes to the
    military justice system. These changes have also occurred, over time,
    at the Military Service Academies (MSA). However, the unique
    demographic and environmental factors at the MSAs require an approach
    directed at young adults in a collegiate setting.
        Evidence suggests that greater cadet/midshipman involvement with
    the SAPR program may be essential to increased reporting and command
    climate improvements. The 2016 Service Academy and Gender Relations
    Survey asked why cadets and midshipmen who reported their sexual
    assault did so, and the survey allowed them to choose more than one
    reason. The survey found that nearly 70 percent of female cadets and
    midshipmen indicated that they reported the situation because someone
    they told about the sexual assault encouraged them to report. More than
    one-third indicated that they officially reported the situation in
    order to stop the alleged offender(s) from hurting others. In addition,
    about a quarter indicated that they reported to raise awareness that
    [sexual assault] occurs at the Academy. These findings suggest that
    those who made a report did so because they experienced some kind of
    external motivation. While each of the MSAs has a peer-led program that
    promotes the SAPR program, greater acceptance of the tenets of the SAPR
    program--dignity and respect--throughout the student body may encourage
    greater reporting, an improved climate, and ultimately, fewer sexual
    assaults.
        Ms. Rosen. Why do you assess Air Force Academy reporting to be
    significantly down while Annapolis and West Point have greater reports
    of unwanted sexual contact? Why are reports of sexual harassment down
    for all three?
        Dr. Van Winkle. Sexual assault reporting: We respectfully defer to
    the Military Service Academies to explain their year-to-year changes in
    the number of reports. Historically, United States Air Force Academy
    receives the largest number of sexual assault reports, but the totals
    have also fluctuated from year to year. Overall reports at United
    States Military Academy and United States Naval Academy show a small
    but steady increase over the past several years.
        In addition, the Department estimates the rate of reporting using
    data from official reports and comparing it to prevalence estimates
    from the Service Academy Gender Relations (SAGR). About 16 percent of
    cadets at USMA who indicated that they experienced unwanted sexual
    contact on the 2016 SAGR subsequently made an official report. This is
    an increase from 14 percent in 2014. Comparative reporting rates for
    USNA show a decrease from 17 percent in 2014 to 11 percent in 2016,
    while figures for USAFA show a decrease in the reporting rate from 17
    percent in 2014 to 12 percent in 2016.
        Sexual harassment reporting: The behaviors that constitute sexual
    harassment do not always rise to the level of criminal misconduct, and
    therefore these behaviors require a different response than sexual
    assault behaviors. Department policy encourages resolution of sexual
    harassment allegations at the lowest interpersonal level, meaning that
    cadets and midshipmen can address sexually harassing behaviors
    themselves, or by involving leadership. The formal and informal
    complaint processes in place at the Academies provide additional
    support and resources to address these problem behaviors.
        This statement is supported by results from the 2016 SAGR. Forty-
    three percent indicated they took care of the problem themselves by
    confronting the person who harassed them.
        Ms. Rosen. Why do you assess there to be a discrepancy between the
    increased incidents identified in the anonymous survey and the decrease
    in reported cases of sexual assault and harassment? Do you believe this
    to be a sign that victims have a severe distrust in the system to
    investigate and pursue justice, and/or a fear of retaliation?
        General Caslen. The national average of case incidents to reports
    is roughly 1:6. USMA's average is generally 1:4. We believe that the
    increase in reporting we have seen this year is a key indicator that
    our Cadets are becoming more confident and trusting of the reporting
    process. We've seen an increase of over 50% from last year's reporting
    numbers. The issue of whether victims don't report as frequently as
    we'd like has much to do with what victims want and when. Justice and
    accountability are not usually immediate priorities for most victims,
    especially if the incident is not recent. The important thing we have
    focused on this year is key changes we made to our policy allowing
    third party disclosures without triggering an investigation and the
    establishment of a private, easily accessible SHARP Resource Center. We
    believe these changes have contributed directly to the significant
    increase in reports for AY16-17.
        Ms. Rosen. What do you believe are the best measures to increase
    victims' confidence in the value of reporting, better protect them from
    retaliation, and foster a command climate where unwanted sexual contact
    is not committed against our brothers and sisters in arms?
        General Caslen. Providing victims with support and assistance as
    they navigate the aftermath of a sexual assault incident is our primary
    effort within the Advocacy Program. Victims' needs are our first
    priority and while we prefer that every incident that occurs is
    reported and investigated, we know that in dealing with the crime of
    sexual violence that is not a reasonable expectation. These crimes cut
    to the core of the victims, and our key message is that Advocacy is
    done at the victims' cadence. When they are ready to move forward with
    an investigation, we make that transition in our assistance to them
    through the investigative and legal process. A key element to
    addressing retaliation and building a healthy command climate to
    protect victims who have reported an assault, are around increasing
    empathy and respect for any parties involved in a sexual assault
    incident. Many times behaviors that a victim experiences that feel like
    isolation and retaliation are a function of the fact that as they
    withdraw from their social circles due to being wary of who they can
    trust, which makes their social network uncertain about how to interact
    with them. It is a fundamental human reaction to withdraw in response
    to someone withdrawing. This natural human experience on both sides of
    a situation like a sexual assault will certainly create a sense of
    isolation that the victim will experience. The challenge for us in
    education is to highlight that while this may be natural, it is
    important for those who know anyone involved in an incident of sexual
    assault to be cognizant of how much peer support means in the overall
    experience of recovering one's sense of self-worth and dignity
    following this sort of personal trauma. We need to explore these issues
    in a healthy and productive manner within our education program and
    provide Cadets with strategies to manage the social discomfort that
    occurs in a small cohesive groups where an incident has occurred.
        Ms. Rosen. Why do you assess Air Force Academy reporting to be
    significantly down while Annapolis and West Point have greater reports
    of unwanted sexual contact? Why are reports of sexual harassment down
    for all three?
        General Caslen. We look at the increase in our reported incidents
    as a strong indicator that Cadets believe they will receive the support
    they need and want, regardless of whether they report restricted or
    unrestricted. We look at this over time as a key indicator that our
    Advocacy, Investigation and Accountability processes are effective and
    we continue to build on these successes. This is what we know about
    USMA's reporting. We do not have enough information about the issues at
    the other MSAs to make an assessment as to why these reporting
    differences exist. Sexual harassment reports are likely down because in
    our education program we discuss three ways to deal with harassment,
    one being directly confronting the harasser. This may be one reason the
    reports are decreasing because Cadets are handling the matter
    themselves and the behavior stops.
        Ms. Rosen. Why do you assess there to be a discrepancy between the
    increased incidents identified in the anonymous survey and the decrease
    in reported cases of sexual assault and harassment? Do you believe this
    to be a sign that victims have a severe distrust in the system to
    investigate and pursue justice, and/or a fear of retaliation?
        Admiral Carter. There are many reasons why victims or survivors
    choose not to report an incident of unwanted sexual contact. Incidents
    of unwanted sexual contact can range from unwanted touching to
    penetration. The Annual Report on Sexual Harassment and Violence at the
    Military Service Academies (MSA) for Academic Program Year 2015-2016
    identified an increase in overall prevalence from the 2014 levels but
    an overall downward trend since 2010. This suggests general progress
    but with a lot more work to do.
        For the Naval Academy, reporting rates continued to increase; we
    think this indicates that we are gaining the trust of the midshipmen.
    Notably, there were 11 conversions from Restricted Reports to
    Unrestricted Reports where the previous four years saw 4 total
    conversions. MSA Report Data suggests that the midshipmen are trusting
    of their chain of command. Midshipmen willing to seek help from the
    chain of command increased to 88%.
        Ms. Rosen. What do you believe are the best measures to increase
    victims' confidence in the value of reporting, better protect them from
    retaliation, and foster a command climate where unwanted sexual contact
    is not committed against our brothers and sisters in arms?
        Admiral Carter. The Annual Report and Violence at the Military
    Service Academies (MSA) for Program Year 2015-2016 indicated that our
    response efforts continue to improve. Reports by victims continue to
    rise at the U.S. Naval Academy (USNA), which we believe is an
    indication of increased trust in our system. Some probable reasons for
    this improvement can be attributed to the continued efforts of our
    dedicated and caring response personnel. USNA has two Sexual Assault
    Response Coordinators, a dedicated team of Victim Advocates, and a
    recently added (2013) Victims' Legal Counsel. We also have a recently
    added Sexual Assault Trauma Counselor at our Midshipman Development
    Center to complement our continued support from Chaplains, and medical
    personnel, all of whom put the survivors' care as priority #1. We have
    relocated the Response Office out of the dormitory where all could see
    victims seeking assistance, to a nearby, but private location. The
    leadership continues to emphasize confidentiality to those that need to
    know, and where evidence supports, holding perpetrators accountable.
        With regard to retaliation, the MSA reported extremely low
    incidents of retaliation. The USNA complies with the DOD Quarterly
    Reporting requirements of retaliation and have no reported incidences
    this Academic Program Year. The report did find there was evidence of
    peer-to-peer retaliation happening on social media. We are addressing
    those challenges in both our Sexual Assault Prevention and Response
    (SAPR) efforts and our leadership training.
        Ms. Rosen. Why do you assess Air Force Academy reporting to be
    significantly down while Annapolis and West Point have greater reports
    of unwanted sexual contact? Why are reports of sexual harassment down
    for all three?
        Admiral Carter. We do not know what the reasons are for the decline
    at the Air Force Academy, however, our increase in reports is viewed as
    a sign that we are successfully increasing the trust of our midshipmen
    and active duty Sailors to come forward and seek help. The success of
    our response efforts must now be complemented by positive efforts in
    our prevention program.
        Our midshipmen tell us that the reason that sexual harassment
    reports are decreasing is that they want to handle those situations on
    their own. Our prevention education gives them tools to address
    attitudes and beliefs and confront harassment situations at their
    level. Those skills are important as we prepare Junior Officers to lead
    in the Fleet and Marine Corps.
        Ms. Rosen. Why do you assess there to be a discrepancy between the
    increased incidents identified in the anonymous survey and the decrease
    in reported cases of sexual assault and harassment? Do you believe this
    to be a sign that victims have a severe distrust in the system to
    investigate and pursue justice, and/or a fear of retaliation?
        General Johnson. Though the prevalence of sexual assault for
    Academic Program Year (APY) 15-16 went up and the reports went down,
    the overall trend for both has been relatively stable over the last 10
    years, with prevalence trending down and reports trending upwards. This
    indicates a trust in leadership and the military justice process, and
    most cadets who formally report a sexual assault indicate that they
    would do the same again. The Service Academy Gender Relations (SAGR)
    anonymous survey also reports that cadet have confidence in their
    leadership to take reports seriously, protect their confidentiality,
    and ensure their safety. At the military service academies, as with
    society as a whole, most survivors of sexual assault never tell anyone
    about their assault. Reasons vary from not wanting others to know about
    the incident to feeling it was not serious enough to report. Unwanted
    sexual contact, as defined by the Uniform Code of Military Justice
    (UCMJ) as well as the SAGR survey, includes behaviors along a continuum
    of harm, from unwanted sexual touching to rape. Some individuals may
    not report instances that fall along the touching end of the spectrum,
    and in fact the SAGR showed that 40% of cadets addressed the unwanted
    behaviors themselves when it occurred. Further, 38% of reports in 2016
    were of incidents that occurred prior to military service, and we
    support victims with our programs regardless of when or where sexual
    misconduct took place. The reports of prior assaults are also a sign of
    trust in the system and in leadership. At USAFA, we follow every court
    case with a statement from leadership that includes guidance from Judge
    Advocate (JA) to ensure cadets understand the process and support those
    who come forward to report these crimes. When a victim chooses to ask
    for help, whether through a restricted or unrestricted report, we
    immediately offer support and ensure that all resources are available
    for their recovery. All incidents across the spectrum of harm are
    reported and taken seriously. Our multifaceted approach that incudes
    education, accountability, and a robust victim support system is
    central to our effort to foster a positive climate of trust that is
    free from the fear of retaliation.
        Ms. Rosen. What do you believe are the best measures to increase
    victims' confidence in the value of reporting, better protect them from
    retaliation, and foster a command climate where unwanted sexual contact
    is not committed against our brothers and sisters in arms?
        General Johnson. One way in which we are looking to increase victim
    confidence is enhancing our communication to cadets about outcomes of
    cases that did not go to court-martial. We have a strong process in
    place to advertise and educate about court-martial outcomes, but given
    that most cases are resolved outside of the court-martial process
    (unbeknownst to most cadets), we are exploring ways to communicate
    those administrative outcomes, while also protecting privacy, so that
    cadets understand that accountability can take many forms. Many of
    those forms of accountability, even though not courts-martial, are
    based on the input and desires of the victims, and not all victims view
    a court-martial conviction/jail as the optimal outcome. This also helps
    to educate cadets about due process, and shows that no matter what the
    outcome there is a process in place to balance the rights of the victim
    and the accused. When individuals truly understand the dynamics of
    offending, and victimization and reporting is seen and valued as
    courageous, victims may have more confidence to report. When victims
    trust that they will be believed and supported they are more likely to
    tell others, formally through reports or informally for support. When
    sexual assault is no longer seen only as a female issue we may see more
    men reporting and less women being ostracized for being a victim of a
    crime. When victims see that justice, however they define it for
    themselves, whether through the legal process, being heard, or being
    supported to heal, does come from reporting, others will see the value
    in reporting. When all, and not just victims, see the value in
    reporting, we will reduce retaliation. Until then, we ensure victim
    privacy and provide support emotionally, psychologically, legally, and
    academically, and we will actively address issues of retaliation if
    they should occur.
        At USAFA, we are building the proper foundation for a climate where
    sexual assault is not committed or tolerated, and it starts with
    education and leadership and character development. Leaders at all
    levels are charged to foster a climate that eliminates sexual assault
    and develops a force that shows respect for all human dignity--owning
    the problem across every mission element, from top to bottom.
        Ms. Rosen. Why do you assess Air Force Academy reporting to be
    significantly down while Annapolis and West Point have greater reports
    of unwanted sexual contact? Why are reports of sexual harassment down
    for all three?
        General Johnson. USAFA's reports have fluctuated more than the
    other two academies, which have a steadier incline, yet USAFA
    consistently has the most reports of sexual assault, to include in APY
    15-16. We all have the goal of increasing reports and supporting
    victims as they make the decision to report. The 2016 Military Service
    Academy Defense Equal Opportunity Climate Survey (MSA DEOCS) shows that
    61.8% (57.3) of the people who experience sexual harassment did not
    report the incident to anyone. Of those people who experienced sexual
    harassment at USAFA and did not report, 66.7% (72) of men, and 71.4%
    (71) of women did not report because they did not think it was
    important enough. 33.3% (12) of men and 25% (29) of women listed fear
    of reprisal. The MSA DEOCS does not give a clear indication of where
    that reprisal might come from regarding specifically sexual harassment;
    however, Table 28 did show 45.3% (39.4) of men 58.9% (58.1) of women
    selected negative social outcomes for reporting fellow cadets for
    misconduct. Although, not specific to sexual harassment, these numbers
    lead Equal Opportunity (EO) to believe there is a fear of reprisal from
    the cadets' peers, creating an environment where men and women do not
    believe the issue was important enough, considering the social
    ramifications. Culture change in cadets measuring professionalism
    versus social pressures is essential, as well as creating trust in
    leadership, the EO office, and other helping agencies is a critical
    challenge. The measures we have taken thus far were to move the EO
    office closer to cadet area, and implementing an increase of EO
    training for leadership and cadets.

                                      [all]