Hate Report continues to be delayed by officials

By Jewels Phraner

Published Nov. 13, 2007

The Hate Report is now caught in a red-tape tangle with university administration. It has been more than a year after the Missouri Students Association Senate passed a resolution to re-implement the system, a statistical log of anonymously reported hate crimes, after an eight-year absence.

The resolution called for the MSA executive branch to create a Bias Incident Reporting System "to mediate campus climate concerns with official police reports on sexual offenses, harassment and hate crimes," and it passed Oct. 25, 2006.

The Hate Report has two parts. First, students could anonymously report instances and circumstances of hate crimes on campus via a Web site set up by the Equity Office. Second, the results of the survey would be compiled into a database so MSA could report the data.

In a January Maneater report, MSA President Rachel Anderson said the process of implementing such a system was "moving right along," and it was at the top of her list of priorities.

By October, Anderson and MSA's Department of Student Communication Director Amanda King said they did not know the status of the report. They said they never received the survey from Kelley Robinson, former MSA executive assistant for Diversity Affairs, according to a previous Maneater report.

But in an e-mail dated March 13, Robinson sent her final draft of the survey to King.

After an Oct. 9 Maneater report, MSA Senate Speaker Jonathan Mays said he would assume responsibility for the project.

Since Oct. 12, Mays has met with Director of MU Equity Noel English, Associate Vice Provost Michael Prewitt, Assistant Director of Student Life Pablo Mendoza, Kelley, Anderson and King to find out the Hate Report's status and what steps to take to get something online as soon as possible. More than 15 e-mails were exchanged between those involved, Mays said.

Mays said at this point, MSA is waiting on the Equity Office to make a simple form available online.

"We decided on a three-phase process because I understood the Equity Office could not give us everything we wanted in a timely manner," Mays said.

For now, the plan is to create "a minimalist form," similar to a comment box, English said in a Nov. 6 e-mail.

"It's a step in the right direction," Mays said. "I'm pleased that they're moving forward."

English said this first part of the process will be available "almost immediately."

In an e-mail sent this past Monday, English stated the Equity Office is waiting for Web site and e-mail approval from the Division of Information Technology.

After that form is up, the next step is to get the original form that Robinson designed online.

As of Oct. 24, any complaint form made available online has to go through the Campus Institutional Review Board for approval, English said in an e-mail to Mays.

"That means more of a delay, I'm afraid," English said in the e-mail.

According to their Web site, CIRB is responsible for reviewing all "human subject research applications."

Mays and Robinson offered to resubmit the form to CIRB for certification, but English said it makes more sense for the Equity Office to go through the CIRB process.

The office of CIRB said it could not comment on any ongoing projects, so it is unknown whether it has been contacted regarding the survey.

Finally, the Equity Office will work to create a database to analyze the reports and be able to give the data to MSA.

English said the Equity Office did not have a timeline for publication.

"We're working as quickly as we can," she said.