SMART FY Campus Sexual Assault Perpetrator Treatment Pilot Project
According to a 2007 study of campus sexual assault, nearly one in five women has been sexually assaulted while in college.
Most college victims are assaulted by someone they know, especially in incapacitated assaults.
Reporting rates for campus sexual assault are very low:
on average only 12% of student victims report the assault to law enforcement.
Perpetrators often prey on incapacitated women, and even provide their victims with drugs or alcohol.
A study of repeat rapists found that over 80% of undetected college rapists reported committing rapes of women who were incapacitated because of drugs or alcohol.
Evidence further suggests that many campus perpetrators of sexual assault are serial offenders.
The same study found that 63% of rapists reported committing repeat rapes, averaging six each.
More than two-thirds (68%) of the repeat rapists admitted to other forms of interpersonal violence, averaging 14 violent acts.
These data indicate that college perpetrators are similar to rapists in the general population and that alcohol is often used to facilitate the assault.
Unfortunately little happens to the campus perpetrator, and many are found not responsible by the campus judicial process.
Research is desperately lacking in this area.
Anecdotal information suggests that consequences for offenders include reprimand, suspension, counseling, community service, probation, stay-away or no-contact orders, residence hall and/or parking lot restrictions.
Perpetrators might also be removed from a class or activity they had in common with the victim.
Sometimes the perpetrator voluntarily withdraws and expulsion is rare.
Treatment targeting the sexually abusive behavior is not an option, nor is it a consequence for the pepetrator.Recent research has shown a relatively consistent pattern of positive findings related to treatment effectiveness for individuals who commit sexual assault.
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses that employ more advanced and scientifically rigorous methods consistently indicate that treatment works.
For example, one study found that cognitive-behavioral/relapse prevention treatment, behavioral treatment, and hormonal medication significantly reduced sexual recidivism.
For sex offenders receiving cognitive-behavioral/relapse prevention treatment, the study showed an average recidivism rate of 9%, compared to an average recidivism rate of 21% for untreated sex offenders.
A recent meta-analysis of six highly rigorous studies of adult sex offender treatment with aftercare found that these programs reduced recidivism, on average, by nearly 10%.
In addition, these programs produced a net return on investment of more than $4,000 per program participant.
Taken together, the overall pattern of positive findings from single studies and synthesis research lend support to the conclusion that treatment for sex offenders can be effective.Many campuses lack the training and resources to adequately address sexual assault, and rape crisis services are often minimal; appropriate sanctions and treatment options for perpetrators are practically nonexistent.
To address this dearth of programming, the SMART Office has developed this solicitation in order to create a treatment curriculum for campus perpetrators of sexual assault based upon treatment approaches demonstrated to be effective through empirical research.
The curriculum will be implemented and tested on one or more college campuses for the purposes of demonstrating treatment effectiveness with this population and future replication on other campuses.
Goals, Objectives, and DeliverablesThe goal of this project is to develop treatment options for campuses to adequately address sexual assault.
SMART is seeking applications to support the development and implementation of a Campus Sexual Assault Perpetrator Treatment Program.
The applicant, in the narrative, will provide the name(s) of the college campus(es).
Additionally, applicants must collect information about sexual assault adjudication processes and perpetrator adjudication outcomes on the campus; document available sanctions for those individuals found responsible, which provides data on consequences for offenders.
In addition, the developed treatment program could be used as a possible sanction.
An applicant will be selected for SMART Office funding based upon their responses to the Selection Criteria listed in the section, What an Application Must Include on page 1 0. The application should clearly describe and demonstrate how the project will:
Build knowledge and new evidence on sanctions and treatment options to support the program.
Develop and implement an evidenced-based treatment curriculum with fidelity which includes, but not limited to, risk/needs assessment processes; treatment modality; dosage recommendations; treatment progress tracking; provider qualifications; and training and resources available to staff.
Protect victim safety and avoid processes and treatments that may traumatize or blame victims.
Explore the use of the developed treatment curriculum as a possible sanction for perpetrators. Collect program development and participant data.
Work collaboratively with the SMART Office. Participate in an evaluation at a later date (should funds become available).In addition, applications must include a monitoring and evaluation plan for information collection and analysis.
Applicants are encouraged to consider and include the following outcomes of interest in monitoring and evaluation plans:
Descriptive information about perpetrators on the campus(es), including those eligible for the program. Recidivism outcomes (new findings for sexual, violent, and any criminal offenses). Changes in participant behavior, measured, for example, as pro-criminal attitudes or antisocial behavior (outcomes). Employment and housing opportunities for participants. Participant drug and alcohol use. Participation in other treatment, including substance abuse and mental health services.
Program cost effectiveness.A comprehensive report will be the final deliverable for this project.
The report should contain, but not be limited to the following: The final treatment curriculum developed. A detailed description of the theoretical and evidence-base for the treatment curriculum. Documentation of the process of implementing the curriculum. Descriptive information on the number and types of perpetrators served. Offender profiles (including demographics, adjudication information, risk/needs assessment information, treatment received, and a description of adjunct supervision and/or treatment services). Descriptive information about services provided to the victims of these perpetrators. An ongoing monitoring and evaluation plan, including data analysis.
Any outcome information available from the above-mentioned outcomes of interest.
Most college victims are assaulted by someone they know, especially in incapacitated assaults.
Reporting rates for campus sexual assault are very low:
on average only 12% of student victims report the assault to law enforcement.
Perpetrators often prey on incapacitated women, and even provide their victims with drugs or alcohol.
A study of repeat rapists found that over 80% of undetected college rapists reported committing rapes of women who were incapacitated because of drugs or alcohol.
Evidence further suggests that many campus perpetrators of sexual assault are serial offenders.
The same study found that 63% of rapists reported committing repeat rapes, averaging six each.
More than two-thirds (68%) of the repeat rapists admitted to other forms of interpersonal violence, averaging 14 violent acts.
These data indicate that college perpetrators are similar to rapists in the general population and that alcohol is often used to facilitate the assault.
Unfortunately little happens to the campus perpetrator, and many are found not responsible by the campus judicial process.
Research is desperately lacking in this area.
Anecdotal information suggests that consequences for offenders include reprimand, suspension, counseling, community service, probation, stay-away or no-contact orders, residence hall and/or parking lot restrictions.
Perpetrators might also be removed from a class or activity they had in common with the victim.
Sometimes the perpetrator voluntarily withdraws and expulsion is rare.
Treatment targeting the sexually abusive behavior is not an option, nor is it a consequence for the pepetrator.Recent research has shown a relatively consistent pattern of positive findings related to treatment effectiveness for individuals who commit sexual assault.
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses that employ more advanced and scientifically rigorous methods consistently indicate that treatment works.
For example, one study found that cognitive-behavioral/relapse prevention treatment, behavioral treatment, and hormonal medication significantly reduced sexual recidivism.
For sex offenders receiving cognitive-behavioral/relapse prevention treatment, the study showed an average recidivism rate of 9%, compared to an average recidivism rate of 21% for untreated sex offenders.
A recent meta-analysis of six highly rigorous studies of adult sex offender treatment with aftercare found that these programs reduced recidivism, on average, by nearly 10%.
In addition, these programs produced a net return on investment of more than $4,000 per program participant.
Taken together, the overall pattern of positive findings from single studies and synthesis research lend support to the conclusion that treatment for sex offenders can be effective.Many campuses lack the training and resources to adequately address sexual assault, and rape crisis services are often minimal; appropriate sanctions and treatment options for perpetrators are practically nonexistent.
To address this dearth of programming, the SMART Office has developed this solicitation in order to create a treatment curriculum for campus perpetrators of sexual assault based upon treatment approaches demonstrated to be effective through empirical research.
The curriculum will be implemented and tested on one or more college campuses for the purposes of demonstrating treatment effectiveness with this population and future replication on other campuses.
Goals, Objectives, and DeliverablesThe goal of this project is to develop treatment options for campuses to adequately address sexual assault.
SMART is seeking applications to support the development and implementation of a Campus Sexual Assault Perpetrator Treatment Program.
The applicant, in the narrative, will provide the name(s) of the college campus(es).
Additionally, applicants must collect information about sexual assault adjudication processes and perpetrator adjudication outcomes on the campus; document available sanctions for those individuals found responsible, which provides data on consequences for offenders.
In addition, the developed treatment program could be used as a possible sanction.
An applicant will be selected for SMART Office funding based upon their responses to the Selection Criteria listed in the section, What an Application Must Include on page 1 0. The application should clearly describe and demonstrate how the project will:
Build knowledge and new evidence on sanctions and treatment options to support the program.
Develop and implement an evidenced-based treatment curriculum with fidelity which includes, but not limited to, risk/needs assessment processes; treatment modality; dosage recommendations; treatment progress tracking; provider qualifications; and training and resources available to staff.
Protect victim safety and avoid processes and treatments that may traumatize or blame victims.
Explore the use of the developed treatment curriculum as a possible sanction for perpetrators. Collect program development and participant data.
Work collaboratively with the SMART Office. Participate in an evaluation at a later date (should funds become available).In addition, applications must include a monitoring and evaluation plan for information collection and analysis.
Applicants are encouraged to consider and include the following outcomes of interest in monitoring and evaluation plans:
Descriptive information about perpetrators on the campus(es), including those eligible for the program. Recidivism outcomes (new findings for sexual, violent, and any criminal offenses). Changes in participant behavior, measured, for example, as pro-criminal attitudes or antisocial behavior (outcomes). Employment and housing opportunities for participants. Participant drug and alcohol use. Participation in other treatment, including substance abuse and mental health services.
Program cost effectiveness.A comprehensive report will be the final deliverable for this project.
The report should contain, but not be limited to the following: The final treatment curriculum developed. A detailed description of the theoretical and evidence-base for the treatment curriculum. Documentation of the process of implementing the curriculum. Descriptive information on the number and types of perpetrators served. Offender profiles (including demographics, adjudication information, risk/needs assessment information, treatment received, and a description of adjunct supervision and/or treatment services). Descriptive information about services provided to the victims of these perpetrators. An ongoing monitoring and evaluation plan, including data analysis.
Any outcome information available from the above-mentioned outcomes of interest.
Related Programs
Comprehensive Approaches to Sex Offender Management Discretionary Grant (CASOM)
Department of Justice
Obtain Full Opportunity Text:
Not Available
Additional Information of Eligibility:
Not Available
Full Opportunity Web Address:
http://www.smart.gov/pdfs/SMARTFY14CampusSexualAssault.pdf
Contact:
Faith BakerAssociate DirectorPhone 202-305-2586
Agency Email Description:
faith.baker@usdoj.gov
Agency Email:
faith.baker@usdoj.gov
Date Posted:
2014-04-29
Application Due Date:
2014-06-13
Archive Date:
2014-07-13
Social Entrepreneurship
Spotlight
Keeping Half the Profits Beats Non-profits for Social Impact
Melbourne social enterprise Who Gives A Crap sold nearly 3 million rolls of toilet paper in 2014/15 and gave half the proceeds to WaterAid Australia, but co-founder Simon Griffiths says the donation would have been less had the startup adopted a non-profit model when it launched two years ago.
Learn How to Identify and Avoid Grant Scams
