Minors On Campus

1. Minors On Campus Paul D. Pousson, ARM Area Senior Vice President, Higher Education Practice 512.652.2443 Paul_Pousson@ajg.com It’s Not Child’s Play

2. Agenda • Who are the minors on-campus? • What are the risks? • What about sexual abuse risk? • What are the potential allegations? • What are some best practices? 

3. It’s Not so Clear Sometimes

4. Who Are The Minors? • Camps: athletic & academic • Matriculated students under eighteen • Precollege prep programs • Overnight recruiting visits • Athletic recruiting visits • Daycare centers • Institution operated K-12 school • Events

5. Who Are The Minors? • Recreation programs • Tutoring, counseling, or medical treatment • Field trips for K-12 students • After school enrichment programs • Children of faculty, staff, or students • Children of neighbors and guests • Community outreach • Tenant’s customers or guests

6. What Are The Risks? • Injuries related to underage drinking • Sexual assaults or sexual misconduct • Physical property conditions • Property/equipment adequate for adultsbut not reasonably safe for minors • Custody issues • Abductions

7. What Are The Risks? • Injuries from: • Sports • Laboratory • Failure to provide • Supervision • Special instruction • Emergency response capabilities • Actions of: • Faculty, staff, students • Contractors / vendors • Tenant’s guests / customers

8. What Are The Risks? • Motor vehicle accidents • Health issues • Allergic reactions • Created or inadequately managed • Malpractice or negligence in providing care

9. What About Sexual Abuse Risk? Scope of the Problem • 8.1% or 1.8m American teenagers report being victims of sexual assault • 1 in 4 girls/1 in 6 boys • Some estimates: As high as 10% of school children have been abused • 74% of assaults committed by someone the victim knew well • More than 80% of abuse never reported to authorities

10. Sexual Misconduct in Higher Ed 10-year UE Claims Statistics 83 incidents/claims 1 in 5 incidents/claims resulted in monetary loss Average loss per claim exceeded $475k Highest loss exceeded $2m

11. Who Are the Victims?

12. Who Are the Victims?

13. Who Are the Victims?

14. Who Are the Perpetrators?

15. Who Are the Perpetrators? • Employees • Faculty • Camp counselor • Coach • Security guard • Clergy • Doctor • Childcare worker • Students • Student teacher • Undergraduate student • Graduate student • Student intern • Work study student • Other • Program volunteer • Former employee • Minor (program participant, camper, high school student) • Contractor

16. Common Elements Offender has special access to children Able to isolate child from others Able to develop a special relationship (“grooming”) Gifts, special privileges, time Families often encourage interaction

17. Common Scenarios Experienced offender seeks access to children in your care, custody, and control Employee Contractor Volunteer Student Young employee, student, volunteer, or contractor discovers attraction to children while working for you One program participant abuses another

18. Eight Steps to Reduce Abuse Risk Policies and procedures Screening and selection Ongoing training: prevention and reporting Monitoring and supervision “Consumer” participation Feedback systems Response plans Administrative practices (3rd parties, media, space management, policy enforcement)

19. After an Incident… Point of contact and support for family Preserve rights of alleged perpetrators Follow reporting obligations Engage outside help for media management sooner than later Use internal resources you may have! Investigate thoroughly, fairly, promptly, and as transparently as possible

20. What Are Potential Allegations? What constitutes negligence, and conversely, what constitutes the exercise of due care, will depend on the circumstances, taking into account the knowledge of the actor, the foreseeability of the harm, and the ability of the actor to take or not take action to avoid the harm

21. Lack of Supervision Graham v. Montana State U, 235 Mont. 284 (1988) · Where a sixteen year old high school student attending a university summer program was injured while riding a motorcycle off-campus, the university was found to have a duty to supervise. · The Supreme Court of Montana stated, “When MSU undertook to have [the minor] live on its campus and supervise her during the program, it assumed a custodial role similar to that imposed on a high school because [the student] is a juvenile. Once MSU assumed that role, it was charged with exercising reasonable care in supervising the [program’s] participants.”

22. Failure to Warn Stanton v. University of Maine, 2001 ME 96 (2001) · Where a minor in a pre-college program was assaulted in her dorm room, the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine stated that the university owed a duty to reasonably warn and advise students of steps they could take to improve their personal safety.

23. Negligent Hiring McMahan v. Crutchfield, 1997 Wash. App. LEXIS 66 (1997) · The Court of Appeals of Washington State held that a community college was liable for physical harm to a 5-year-old girl who accompanied her mother, a student there, to the campus cafeteria and was assaulted by a 21-year-old mentally retarded male employee because the man had a history of behavior problems, a mental-health clinician had recommended that he not have access to young children, and the college “breached its duty to exercise reasonable care,” thereby “proximately causing the attack” on the young girl.

24. Negligent Retention Evans v. Ohio State University, 112 Ohio App.3d 724 (1996) · Plaintiffs brought an action for negligent hiring and negligent retention against the university after their child was sexually assaulted by a program volunteer who had previously served a prison sentence for gross sexual imposition and corruption of a minor. · The court found that since the volunteer worked in a controlled setting and the assault took place over one year after the volunteer’s employment ended, the university did not breach its duty of care and was not liable.

25. Vicarious Liability Dismuke v. Quaynor and Grambling State University, 637 So. 2d 555 (1994) · Where an employee of the university raped a minor victim, the Court of Appeals of Louisiana concluded that the university was vicariously liable for the tort.

26. Breach of Duty of Care In MaintainingProperty in a Safe Condition Bolkhir v. North Carolina State University, 321 N.C. 706 (1988) · Where a child was injured by a door in university-owned housing, the university had a duty to exercise due care in making repairs, and the Supreme Court of North Carolina stated, “in the exercise of reasonable care [the university] had a duty to recognize that children have less discretion than adults and may be unmindful of dangers that adults would recognize.”

27. Best Practices • American Academy of Pediatrics • American Camping Association • American Heart Association • Campus Safety Health & Environmental Management Association • Coast Guard • National Fire Protection Association • National Research Council • Red Cross • URMIA http://studentactivities.tamu.edu/camps/forms

28. Supervision • Staff Ratio: 1 Staff to: Age Overnight Day 4-5 5 6 6-8 6 8 9-14 8 10 15-18 10 12 • Event/Location minimum of 2

29. Hiring Regular, Seasonal & Volunteer • Reference checks • Background checks • Previous work/volunteer experience • Sexual Offender Registry • Personal interview • Demonstrated competence

30. Staff Orientation • Program purpose & outcomes • Special Needs differences • Safety, skills & operating procedures • Participant supervision • Behavior management & discipline • Emergency procedures • Recognition, prevention & reporting • Protocol for “late hires”

31. Participant Orientation  • Day • Overnight • Activities & parental authorization • Behavior expectations • Areas that are off limits • Safety practices for activities

32. Parent Orientation Role & Responsibilities of Program • Services provided, not provided • Notification standards • Behavior & discipline • Medical & special needs protocols • Emergency transportation • Drug dispensing (including OTC)

33. Maintaining Safe Conditions • Release of participants • Checking on absentees • Intrusion of unauthorized persons • Program equipment inspections • Safety regulations & instruction • Personal Protective Equipment • Behavior & discipline • Structured vs unstructured activities • Sexual abuse & molestation

34. Emergency Services Foreseeable Emergencies • Evacuation vs lockdown • Communications: Internal, Parents • First aid, CPR, EMS response time • Authorization for treatment • Missing or runaway 

35. Residential Programs • Controlled access to housing • Participant emergency orientation • Curfew • Random checks • Bunk bed safety compliance • Medical assistance • Behavior & discipline www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/camps/bunk_bed_guardrails.htm

36. Transportation • Orderly arrival & departure • Staff vs commercial providers • Weather & road conditions • Travel/Destination safety awareness • Group management & safety • Overnight accommodations • Emergency procedures

37. Other • Aquatics • Lifeguards • PFDs • Participant orientation & abilities • Equestrian, Adventure/Challenge • Archery, air/pellet guns • Protective gear • Maintenance & safety of facilities

38. Common Occurrences & Insurance Coverage

39. Questions

40. Acknowledgements With sincere appreciation, we especially recognize the work and contributions of: Benjamin E. Saunders, Ph.D., National Crime Victims and Treatment Center Dept. of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina Constance Neary, Vice President of Risk Management, United Educators Insurance