NCHERM is a think-tank of ten consultants who create multi-disciplinary prevention models for colleges and universities.  We are systems-level thinkers whose model policies, protocols, practices and strategies are in wide use in the higher education field.  As a not-for-profit corporation, NCHERM believes its intellectual property ought to be open-source and freely available to all who can use it to enhance the safety of colleges and universities.  If you want to engage our services to consult with you on implementation of our models or have us provide training, we'll be happy to do it, but access to our intellectual property is free of charge.  All we ask is that you cite NCHERM clearly as the source for any materials you use or adapt from us. 

Our open source models include the following topics:

• CAMPUS SEXUAL MISCONDUCT
• STRATEGIC PREVENTION
• STUDENT ORGANIZATIONS RISK MANAGEMENT
• BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION AND THREAT ASSESSMENT
• MEDICAL/PSYCHOLOGICAL WITHDRAWAL MODEL POLICY AND PROCEDURE
• CAMPUS SUICIDE INTERVENTION/PREVENTION PROTOCOL/CHECKLISTS
• MODEL DEVELOPMENTAL CODE OF STUDENT CONDUCT (COMING IN 2011)

CAMPUS SEXUAL MISCONDUCT

NCHERM has developed extensive models on campus sexual misconduct comprised within the following set of documents:

• NCHERM MODEL CAMPUS SEXUAL MISCONDUCT POLICY
• NCHERM CAMPUS SEXUAL ASSAULT RESPONSE PROTOCOL
• NCHERM SEXUAL MISCONDUCT JUDICIAL PROCEDURES BEST PRACTICES
• INVESTIGATION BEST PRACTICES
• NCHERM CAMPUS SEXUAL MISCONDUCT JUDICIAL TRAINING MANUAL (IN REVISION)
• NCHERM CAMPUS SEXUAL MISCONDUCT JUDICIAL TRAINING MATERIALS
• SANCTIONING FOR SEXUAL MISCONDUCT
• TITLE IX COMPLIANCE BEST PRACTICES
• TITLE IX LITIGATION RISK MANAGEMENT
• CAMPUS SEXUAL MISCONDUCT ARTICLE SERIES

STRATEGIC PREVENTION

NCHERM has developed a comprehensive framework for campus violence prevention, key concepts of which are elaborated within the following set of documents:

• STRATEGIC PREVENTION WHITEPAPER
• STRATEGIC PREVENTION ARTICLE SERIES
• STRATEGIC PREVENTION MATERIALS

STUDENT ORGANIZATIONS RISK MANAGEMENT

The NCHERM Student Organizations Risk Management Protocol is the primary document for this model, accessible here.

BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION AND THREAT ASSESSMENT

NCHERM has developed the CUBIT model (College and University Behavioral Intervention Team) currently in use on 400 college campuses.  With NaBITA and the Center for Aggression Management, NCHERM has developed a widely-accepted Threat Assessment Tool.  The NCHERM behavioral intervention and threat assessment models are comprised within the following documents:

• TEAM FORMATION AND OPERATION
• TEAM OPERATIONAL BEST PRACTICES
• DISTINGUISHING THE BIT AND TAT FUNCTIONS
• NaBITA THREAT ASSESSMENT TOOL
• NCHERM BIT FAQ (AN ENTIRE SENTENCE OF ACRONYMS!)

MEDICAL/PSYCHOLOGICAL WITHDRAWAL

NCHERM has become concerned that colleges and universities are using flawed  mechanisms to facilitate the process of voluntary or involuntary withdrawal of a student based upon medical or psychological concerns.  To help establish best practices, comply with federal disabilities law, mimimize risk and maximize the safety of students, NCHERM has developed a model involuntary/voluntary medical/psychological withdrawal protocol and policy, together with a suicide prevention/intervention protocol, elaborated here.

SAMPLE MODEL POLICIES

We are often asked by our clients to identify campuses with model policies. 
Below are excellent policies on hazing and sexual misconduct developed by Trinity University in San Antonio, TX. 

HAZING

Trinity University is concerned about the emotional, psychological, and physical health and well-being of its students. Any form of hazing is unacceptable and is in direct conflict with institutional values related to the rights and dignity of students, all of whom have the right to belong to groups without risk of danger or humiliation. Consent to hazing is never a defense to a violation of this policy.

New members of groups and teams can expect to participate in educational and fun activities that build teamwork and camaraderie among all members of the group. Such activities are intended to create a sense of identity and commitment within a group and are generally acceptable and encouraged. Students should check with Campus & Community Involvement staff, advisors, sponsors, and coaches if there is any question about an activity constituting hazing.

There are two primary conditions that create a hazing dynamic.

1. New members often wish to be accepted, either formally or informally, into any group, and will submit to hazing in order to be included. Because of this, consent to be hazed does not excuse hazing. Students have died or been seriously injured as a result of participating in activities to which they have “consented.” The psychological pull to be accepted is so strong that hazing victims cannot be expected to resist hazing, even if the hazing is presented as optional. That this pull can be so coercive should make this need to prohibit this conduct, to any degree, undeniably clear.
2. Any activity that places new members in a subservient position to experienced members creates an unhealthy and unsafe power dynamic in which control has been yielded to the experienced member. New members in any organization may expect to be trained, oriented, or indoctrinated, but membership in any group that puts a new member in a lesser role, unrelated to the original conditions for membership or mission of the group, is inappropriate and unfair to the new members. Any activities of membership should be equally shared among experienced and new members.

The University prohibits hazing by individuals or groups and defines it as follows:

Hazing is any reckless or intentional act, occurring on or off campus, that produces physical, mental, or emotional pain, discomfort, humiliation, embarrassment, or ridicule directed toward other students or groups (regardless of their willingness to participate), that is required or expected of new members and which is not related to the mission of the team, group, or organization. This includes any activity, whether it is presented as optional or required, that places a new member in a position of servitude as a condition of membership. Prohibited acts of hazing include those covered under Texas State law.

Though it would be impossible to list all behavior that could be deemed to be hazing, the following are some typical examples of hazing and are prohibited:

1. any physical act of violence expected of, or inflicted upon, another
2. any physical activity expected of, or inflicted upon, another, including calisthenics
3. pressure or coercion of another to consume any legal or illegal substance
4. making available unlawful substances
5. excessive fatigue or sleep deprivation as a result of any activities
6. forced exposure to the weather
7. kidnapping, forced road trips, and abandonment
8. required carrying of or possessing of a specific item or items
9. servitude (expecting a new member to do the tasks of an experienced member)
10. costuming and alteration of appearance
11. line-ups and berating
12. coerced lewd conduct
13. degrading games, activities or public stunts
14. interference with academic pursuits
15. violation of University policy
16. assignment of illegal and unlawful activities

Alleged violations of this policy will result in campus judicial action and may be subject to criminal prosecution. Any retaliation against any person who reports, is a witness to, or is involved with or cooperates with the adjudication of hazing is strictly prohibited.

Texas State Law on Hazing
Students should be acquainted with the law on hazing. The following excerpts are from the law that makes hazing at or in connection with an educational institution a crime.

Hazing includes but is not limited to:
         1. any type of physical brutality, such as whipping, beating,
            striking, branding, electronic shocking, placing of a harmful
            substance on the body, or similar activity;
         2. any type of physical activity, such as sleep deprivation,
            exposure to the elements, confinement in a small space,
            calisthenics, or other activity that subjects the student to
            an unreasonable risk or harm or that adversely affects the
            mental or physical health or safety of the student;
         3. any activity involving consumption of a food, liquid,
            alcoholic beverage, liquor, drug, or other substance which
            subjects the student to an unreasonable risk of harm or which
            adversely effects the mental or physical health or safety of
            the student;
         4. any activity that intimidates or threatens the student with
            ostracism that subjects the student to extreme mental stress,
            shame, or humiliation, or that adversely effects the student
            from entering or remaining registered in an educational
            institution, or that may reasonably be expected to cause a
            student to leave the organization or the institution rather
            than submit to acts described in this subsection;
         5. any activity that induces, causes, or requires the student to
            perform a duty or task which involves a violation of the
            Penal Code. Sec. 4.52.

A person commits an offense if the person:
         1. engages in hazing;
         2. solicits, encourages, directs, aids, or attempts to aid
            another in engaging in hazing;
         3. intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly permits hazing to
            occur; or
         4. has firsthand knowledge of the planning of a specific hazing
            incident involving a student in an educational institution,
            or firsthand knowledge that a specific hazing incident has
            occurred, and knowingly fails to report said knowledge in
            writing to the Dean of Students or other appropriate
            officials of the institution.  

An organization commits an offense if the organization
Condones or encourages hazing or if an officer or any combination of members, pledges, or alumni of the organization commits or assists in the commission of hazing.
 
Consent Not a Defense
It is not a defense to prosecution for the offense under this
subchapter that the person against whom the hazing was directed
consented to or acquiesced in the hazing activity.

Immunity from Prosecution Available
In the prosecution of an offense under this subchapter, the court may
grant immunity from prosecution for the offense to each person who is
subpoenaed to testify for the prosecution and does testify for the
prosecution. Any person reporting a specific hazing incident involving
a student in an educational institution to the Dean of Students or
other appropriate official of the institution is immune from
liability, civil, or criminal, that might otherwise be incurred or
imposed as a result of the report. Immunity extends to participation
in any judicial proceeding resulting from the report. A person
reporting in bad faith or with malice is not protected by this section.

Trinity University's Sexual Misconduct Policy (PDF)

BACK TO TOP