i think it is good to understand what is there. if you're looking at improving an instrument or additional an r additional questions, that gives you data points to start to lynn on that information. it is there. i've not seen me data, but my view of the survey would indicate that those are possibilities to be explored. and then with the survey itself, we can talk about the global changes, again, going back to the design features of the scope, how they are screamed, -- screen, the mode, focusing on a specific sexual assault survey worse is a -- versus an omnibus workplaces from a nation survey. i would be happy to talk about more of those kinds of details if you're that kind of work. i do not want to take up too much time. >> thank you, professor. any questions or comments?

>> i have got a question. , itaining to the police data am assuming municipal police, state police, county police, and then campus police. i was thinking of the demographics that we are working with here. demographic and givinen i lot of that demographc resides on, and -- on college campuses. jurisdiction, when it is reported to give his police, they sometimes retain in there, and they are not reporting it possibly to the minute is a pull. -- to the municipal. so when you got the police reports, where did that come from? >> that is a good question. what they love these data sources that you do have overlapping jurisdiction.

so for the fbi, the uniform crime reporting program data, and those were the data i present, but if you're interested, i will have you gain those data. , they are frome local police, there from campus, campus police included in those data, state police, county police, so they are all different police organizations that are included in those data. so depending on where the ,ictim, or whoever is making reporting to the police, making unknown to police -- it could be through the campus police. it also depends on their relationship with municipal police. there might be certain things that is reported to campus police, but the name melissa paul -- but then the municipal police takeover. >> ok, thank you. >> thank you very much for your

presentation. just a couple of questions. first of all, if someone were to massage the data or suggested be done, what kind of task with at the? how long would it take for the narrative that you mentioned exists to be analyzed and reported on? are we talking about a 10 year job, two months, push a computer button and get it in a second? what are we talking about? >> between a second and 10 years. no, actually, it depends on the -- in some ways, the number of people you have. it is certainly not going to take 10 years. it depends on the number of -- again, i have the frequency for the number of dissatisfied, or might be -- i do not know the

actual number, depending on the number of narratives, how long they are, and how complex, i can see it taking maybe a few months with a team of researchers doing coding of those. it is certainly not something that would take 10 years or that sort of thing. unfortunately, because of what we call qualitative data, it is not necessarily pushing a button so much as some of the other comparisons i was mentioning where you are looking at what we call consensus he -- call contingency tables or putting variables together. have a physical program you can utilize there. but this would be very helpful -- >> but this would be very helpful, or you think, to the military and in terms of understanding how to dealing with victims? >> i completely agree with that. again, the one caveat with various data is it depends on what you have got, what the

person writes inside or decides to write inside. we all know from taking surveys or filling out forms we can be more or less detailed depending on our interest, our time, that sort of thing. but it certainly would be worth exploring to see what information is there. it might be a complete bust. but i have been impressed with my work with the data and looking at some of those other categories where they are putting in additional information to get patterns, to understand a little bit better 'sat is going on in the victim mind or the paradigms of the responses that we sought. to aody might give particular question and realizing there is a whole other area out there that we have not really thought about about why is somebody dissatisfied or

other responses. >> the bridge on of the information that you also recommended by nature of the , describe itduct that way, could that be done with the existing data collection? >> yeah. >> how long would that take to do? on behalf ofng the staff of the office, sure, they can do it in a few seconds. but i would think that would not take long. ,> my understanding of the data i have seen the survey instrument, and an analysis of others might, so extrapolate on that, but basically the survey asks the person -- did this happen to you? yes or no. ?ow many times you g they sunny instrument that had

the greatest effect on you, what was the behavior that was involved in that. so you can get the behavior from that question, and then to the analyses with the contingency analyses. >> i do not want to take up too much more time, i just want to you -- can you make some recommendations about how you would change this form and why? doyeah, do you want me to that right now. >> if you have thoughts now, that would be great. >> sure you're i. i would break those down -- >> if that is ok with the chair. >> i think we have got two areas there. one is kind of a global, large change, like if you wanted to change this, again, the convex taking out of that workplace survey and making it a true kind survey/sexual assault and focusing on its, there has

been quite a lots of research and design efforts looking at this area. in fact, the national academy of science is a panel looking at some of the best practices to study sexual victimization issues. i would recommend may be screening and classifying in two different steps so the screening of this particular behavior right now -- the incidents for the victim, these are the behaviors where you could not consent. , not to sophisticated say people get in the survey are not all bright people, but laypeople about consent and those kinds of things. -- did this happen to you, yes or no? one of the things i find with consent is later on in the survey, people are asked, were you drugged, were you threatened with ruining your reputation, think that somebody

might not have thought about as being be -- as being against their consent or kind of a way of forcing sexual activity, you have to make it through that initial identification that you were among did experience unwanted sexual activity to get those questions. another survey instrument to break that out more and put that out front so that the person knows that we are talking about somebody threatening to ruin your reputation as being a lack of consent. we are talking about somebody driving you. so bringing those up front, so everybody has a clearer definition, thinking about the same thing. and then classifying those later on, so getting at the behaviors first, and then classifying them as unwanted sexual activity or touching or sexual intercourse or that sort of thing, so they are more uniform understanding. also, i would say, maybe changing that incident that has

the greatest effect on you. .'m not certain what that means i think that has different meaning to different, which ,here's some benefit to that' but it is not clear. it is also not clear how frequently, at least in the data i got, the frequencies were not reported out, so if everybody is reporting one, the greatest effect is not matter to much. people are reporting 5, 6, 7, what does that mean? and there are specific things with questions and that sort of thing. i'm starting to go through the weeds a little bit, but i would be happy to make further recommendations, it might be something that is better done in a memo for the panel, but i would be happy to work with you further with that. >> that would be great. >> one last question, professor. >> thank you. if i could just follow-up on the surveying issue, one of our struggles is that this is an iceberg that we do not know the shape of, and if we do not have

the baseline, we have trouble comparing data across time as well as across different institutions and systems of investigation and prosecution. how long -- how often it has ncbs change- the the survey method, questions? the kicker. you do it and you want to change it because think, i should have asked this question. ncbs had -- but the one major redesign that was implement it in 1992. i am part of the current redesign. we are looking at redesigning it again. i am working with them on the crime survey. but actually one of the interesting things and 90 92 that was added was a specific thation -- things in 1992 was added with a specific question, behaviors reported in the screener. one of the things that changed in 1992 was the screener

specifically asking about unwanted sexual activity because , the federal government should not be asking about rape/sexual assault. so this is a new change then when the survey was implemented in a 1970's. rates/sexual assaults were reported, but they were reported because victims were responding to general questions about assaultive behavior. the 1992 redesign, those questions were specifically asked. so that is often what you see if you look at the data with the ncbs, you see the it often starts in nice in asia, 93 with that redesign period. they implement other changes as well, but it is -- it has remained pretty stable since 1992. >> professor, to every much. we're going to take you up on your offer to help us.

one of the questions will also be about, and i do not want an answer now, whether computers and online surveys are the best approach. understand that the survey had a very low percentage of return rates, if that is the right way to put it. some of the surveys were not even complete. in any event, we will be talking to you. thank you very much. >> as i mentioned, i am more than happy -- i think this is an incredibly important issue. i am more than happy to work with the panel and assist in any way that i can. so thank you. >> ms. rumburg. >> the morning. chairwoman jones, thank you for asking me. delilahi again, is rumburg. starting in 1981, i was the director of a battered women's shelter. i have that experience behind me. pcar is the oldest coalition in

the country could we were organized in 1975. our primary focus is to work for victims of violence. we work with contracts of many with the right training, right public policy to provide legal protection for victims to enhance public safety. we also operate the national sexual violence resource center, which is a prosecutor's resource on violence against women. i did serve on the two previous task forces, and again in 2009, on the second task force, i visited installations in iraq, kuwait, italy, alaska am a texas, north carolina, and other odds and until u.s. installations to assess the response to sexual assaults.

the task force differs in a report to congress that made recommendations on how the military can improve services to victims of sexual assault in the armed services. i'm asked asked to talk to you in regards to my experience, for my 30 years of experience, including that time on a task force. based on my experience, there are five important things that victims need. it is pretty simple, and i think it serves to inform everything that we do. number one, they want to be believed. secondly, they want to know that they have a right to privacy and it will be upheld. third, to have access to safe and confidential services. and they want to be treated with care and respect. also, the last thing, is to know that the offender will be held accountable. if we just let those five things direct what we do, it will make everything easier. sexual violence can seem overwhelming, but when we take action to prevent it, but we can take action to ravenna.

sexism, attitudes about the -- gender and sex roles allow some to be valued over others. to end sexual violence, we have to and oppression and sex of your sexual violence is learned and supported a larger culture that accepts islands of a norm, male dominant, and power over others in a justification of women and children. these cultural norms, these sexual violence in all forms, from sexual harassment to unwanted touch to rape and to death. most people who perpetrate sexual violence are people the survivor noted 80% of survivors know their perpetrator, and a number goes up to 90% on college campuses. it is important to know that this is not just a woman's issue, and we have talked about it so much recently in that vein, that the majority of service members who are sexually assaulted each year are men. my understanding, the pentagon recently estimated that 26,000 service members experienced

unwanted sexual contact in toys well, up from 19000 and 2010. those cases, 50 three percent involved attacks on men, mostly by other men. after members sexual assault is never the survivor's fault. . ever. the self claimed survivor's guilt about what happened to them is direct result of internalizing society's ms. belief about how societies should have done more to prevent their own victimization here we have to boot -- we have to remember the fault lies with the perpetrator. an individual perpetrate sexual violence anytime he commits -- he or she commits or tends to commit against another person without that person's consent. this includes an unwillingness or inability to consent. perpetrators of sexual violence target individuals with vulnerabilities. less power, less a voice,

isolated, and they are unlikely to tell or when they do, they're unlikely to be believed. sexual violence can occur once or repeatedly over time. the methods arbitrators used to the mets sexual violence can be verbal, it can be physical emotional, or psychological. released aty see report is earning the partner violence. therding to the military, prevalence of sexual violence was similar among women in the u.s. population active duty women and wives of active-duty men. the report also stated that with respect of deployment history, active-duty women who were three years prior to the survey were significantly more likely to have experienced contact sexual violence earring that time period compared to

active-duty women who were not deployed. sexual violence is a major public health problem. many survivors experience physical injury, mental health consequences such as depression, and zaidi, low self-esteem, suicide attempts, and other health consequences. prevention efforts have healthy,at promoting respectful relationships and families. by fostering healthy parent child relationships and developing positive family dynamic, an emotionally supportive environment. further research would improve our understanding of the factors that increase the risk for sexual violence against women and men, including factors that may be shared between the military and the general population. beitional research would important to improve our understanding how military specific factors such as deployment might increase the risk. funding this research should be a priority for congress.

they need sexual -- they need coordination to ensure healing and prevent further victimization. the healthcare systems result -- result -- response needs to be better coordinate to help navigate the system and help organize the counseling and resources in a short and the long term. military nurses can receive sexual assault training, but they are not required to be trained in cash at sexual assault nurses. medicalvide compressive care and obtain further evidence accurately and facilitate prosecution. i think our nurses should be certified. survivors may be reluctant to disclose a victimization for a variety of reasons including shame and of embarrassment, fear of her pretrip -- fear of retribution, or belief that they may not receive support from law enforcement. lots may not be enforced

adequately or consistently. it is important to enhance the training efforts within the criminal justice system to better engage and support survivors and to hold the perpetrators accountable. an article by sadler published in 2003 focus on factors associated with women's risk of rape in the military environment. the article stated that three fourths of the women who were raped did not report the incident to a ranking officer. of these, one third noted they were uncertain how to. sadler believes that rape was to be -- some of these believes that rape was respected in the military. one third said the rape was with a ranking officer, one third said the rape with a friend of the rating officer. these women believed nothing could be done, that reporting would make the situation worse, or the military careers would be adversely affected. we heard that consistently, that if they reported, it was a

disaster for their future career. ranking officer immediate supervisor behaviors were strongly associated with the frequency of rape. officers allowing or initiating sexually demeaning comments or gestures toward female soldiers was associated with a three to four fold increase in the likelihood of rape. the results demonstrate that women had significantly elevated odds of rape when they were living or working in environments that were sexualized. work environments that allow inappropriate sexual conduct can significantly increase the woman's risk of rape. suggesting a continuum of violence with rape being the most severe form of the coercion. found that 2009 sexual harassment while surfing is experienced by evan d to -- 70% to 90% of the female academy.

they demonstrated the world -- the role of leadership or supervisor behavior to contribute into a environment that tolerates or encourages that behavior, that directly or eventually result in sexual violence toward military women. conversely, officer or supervisor conduct and promote healthy work environment for women. interventions with training and supervision of those officers are clearly indicated in those findings. the 2003 sadler findings mirrored the 2009 defense task force on sexual assault and the military. in the task force, we divided our assessment into four critical topics. strategic direction, revenge, training, response to victims, and accountability. the task force or repeatedly observed that sexual prevention and response program funding was sporadic and inconsistent. commanders and their sets frequently told us the sexual assault prevention and response was an unfunded rogue remedy mandate and they had to resource it locally and it was a problem.

the difficult and distinct foring is essential building a foundation for the sexual assault prevention and response row gram, which i refer to as fapro. -- to reflect the expertise necessary of prevention, response, training, and accountability. fapro must manage, ss, and ensure that the services comply with these standards. it must be actively engaged in prevention policy development or legislation peer tweets support the senate authorization language that calls for fapro to more clearly define the -- the tasknds of force concluded that permitting

the task force to adopt their own house he has adversely affected the quality and the consistency. accordingly, it was recommended that the secretary establish new uniform sexual assault prevention and response terminology. and core structures at the education -- execution level ensure consistency. a conference of strategy that encompasses strategic, for prevention, response, and accountability. havestrategy must communication plans. any service specific policies must also align with any of dod's strategies. we recommend that sapro work with the military services and the national expert of sexual violence prevention. the task force found that sapro had no means for assessing the overall effectiveness for sexual assault prevention,

training efforts. we recommend that they develop a plan to evaluate the efforts and effectiveness of its prevention strategy. outcomesand intended at the department of defense and levels. we recommend sapro collaborate with civilian efforts in the lining a systematic evaluation plan. we recommend that sapro develop training policies and exercise oversight over those military service training programs. sexual assault prevention and response training must strengthen individual knowledge, skills, and capacity to prevent and respond to sexual assault. think you will find each service have their own plan and their own language for the sexual assault prevention and response office. i think consistency will be one of the way that we can do a better job of that. i also noted that the house version of the national defense authorization act requires the secretary of defense to develop a uniform curriculum for training members of the armed forces and civilian employees on sexual assault by june .14, and

i hope that it's going to happen. the department of the fence has made progress in providing assistance to victims of sexual assault, restricted reporting was one of the main things that we accomplish early on that was key, and it prevents -- it permits the victim to engage in counseling without engaging law enforcement or command authority. it is an important first step, however, we still have a lot to accomplish her to the military has been at the vanguard of translating new research into practical tools for investigating. detectives and agents are now interviewing an investigation course. i applaud those efforts. i hope dr. lisa will tell you more about that when he gets here because that is groundbreaking information. if i were a victim of the path, i would want my case to be prosecuted by the civilian and not the military. military appellate courts have read the term that usually

required evidence much more broadly than many civilian courts, including the u.s. supreme court. basically, the vet of -- the balancing of the victims privacy versus the accused rights have been cross-examined as long as the court find something relevant. i strongly support rape shield policies that reject survivors privacy and dignity. i also believe that the alleged perpetrator's character as it relates to military action should not play a role in deciding whether to prosecute. communications between sexual assault survivors and victim advocates are not currently afforded absolute privilege under military law. in contrast, 35 states in our nation provide a privilege for communications between the victim and an advocate. the absence of a privilege limits the effectiveness of victim advocates in the military community. military survivors of sexual assault deserve comparable services. i noted that certification of victim advocates is now being

required as recommended. one thing that the civilian we'reis doing now -- actually evaluating the outcome of our client services, including client that section surveys and the analysis of direct service outcomes. i recommend this be limited by the department of defense. i recommend we ask survivors to evaluate the military justice process. the nda is requiring a review of current investigation protocols, recording results of investigations, victims impact and feedback is critical as lynn stated in her report as well. i recommend that's women's of the armed forces who report they are sexually assaulted have access because the victims rights law is a highly sophisticated area of law. this would enhance the quality of service. thetask force recommended secretary of defense establish a

an advisory board modeled after other defense advisory boards. this board should include outside experts on criminal law and sexual assault prevention, response in training as well as host [indiscernible] and other agencies. there has been a sexual assault working integrated product team developed, and i do not think that is what the task force had in mind. a product time is not woman fuzzy if you are a victim. and improvingro the visibility of its mission are essential as the need to provide a credible data and reporting system and establish consistency in the sapro program and around the services. creating sexual assault court maters and victim advocates are critical for success. i urge the department of

defense and the services to andvigorate core programs develop the strategic strategies supported by a clear plan for continuous evaluation. sexual assault does occur in all cultures, but the conditions under which it occurs any responses to a differ depending on the values and the norms of that culture. military culture has its own values, rules, customs, and norms. the physical rules of sexual assault, victims of psychological reactions can be prolonged. , reactions include psu, -- common reactions include ptsd, depression, withdrawal, and security. military victims of sexual assault may be unable to rip -- to perform their assigned duties due to medical treatment or counseling, or fair reek located from the unit to ensure their safety. victims who continue to serve in the same unit with their assailant are likely to have

diminished ability to perform their duties due to concerns over personal safety and potential revictimization. whether the victim of a servicemember or a civilian, sexual assault violates military ,ulture values, self-discipline trust, selflessness, and honorable conduct. the dod, sapro, and military services must fully integrate prevention strategies and training the right to receive care and treatment and the appropriate legal process. creates shorte long-term needs for survivors, and we have to recognize every survivor will respond differently to the attack, and thus a range of service options is critical. in addition, service should be available on an ongoing basis to each survivor so each survivor will be ready for a particular service at a different time. forced tod not be engage in any service or process they do not feel it's right for them. for example, survivor should have access to mental health

services, even if they're not interested in pursuing a court- martial or other legal responses. all members of the armed forces or families or socio-personnel should have access to these services regardless of status. the military should require commanding officers to inform -- investigative immediately after receiving a set report of sexual assault. commanding officers should also into the information in a database. data should be collected and analyzed on a regular basis in order to ensure continued functioning of the system among which should be uniform across the department of services. in hereo put a concert that victims need not be re- interviewed for the additional information. they could be completed with information from the investigation. reinterviewing many time traumatized as the victim. the discussion on whether and how to proceed with a core

marshal should be taken out of chain of command for both the survivor in the accused feared special prosecutor should be appointed to handle special sexual assault cases within the military justice system. these prosecutors and investigators should be trained and certified according to standards established by a committee of national experts. the training should address victim interviewing, neurobiology of trauma, making sure the victims have the support to enable them to feel, and also to participate in a military justice system. you should have received a copy of the national alliance of sexual violence policy statement on military sexual assault that i sent earlier, and i really encourage you to review that. i know how crucial the issue of confidentiality as to those whom our civilian network provides services. there are two promises that we civilian service providers make to put survivors. their information will be kept confidential, and they will be believed.

these promises forge a bond that allows the survivor to know that it's that -- as advocates, we hold the telling of the most heinous crimes, advocates say by the survivor as they navigate through the labyrinth of the criminal justice system. members theervice same right and commitment of privacy and advocacy that exists in our local communities. ant important, we need enforceable victims rights statute. preventing sexual violence and for trying to survivors will enhance our military readiness. mutual trust and respect are key to service members' performance and well-being. sexual violence is a pervasive problem. boundaries across the military and general population. preventing all forms of sexual violence before they begin, stopping further harm to victims by providing support, services, legal assistant, and protection orders and holding perpetrators accountable are more important -- the most

important components necessary to address these important public health problems. thank you. >> thank you very much, ms. rumburg. a lot to think about their. questions, comments. hillman.an -- dr. >> thank you, madam chair. you mentioned the good military care. can you talk about the impact 'sat that has on a victim perception of the trial and also on the outcome of the trial? >> the victim wants to be believed. they don't want their character brought before the courts. as we all know, there was a case recently where an officer's good conduct actually was overturned a conviction. that is what is is about, , that thethe victim perpetrator actually did commit a crime, and that it will be believed, and let justice

prevail. so i think that is where that is coming from, that we should not have the ability to overturn a case just because that perpetrator is a good citizen. most of the perpetrators of sexual assault appear to everybody as fine, outstanding men or women. they don't walk around with a sign on their head. >> thank you. one other question, if i might, related to the services you just mentioned, the victims ought to be able to access regardless of whether a court- martial or investigation ensues. the restricted reporting option in the military has come under some fire. what is your opinion of having that restricted reporting option for active-duty service members? >> i think it is critical. we heard how on ships and some deployment areas that was a real concern. for commanding officers, they fell like they had to know what was happening on their ship or in the

deployment. victimsl, i think should not have to tell. i think it is really important. i think they should have access. now, if they were somewhere where there is 20, 30 people out in the field and they had to be flown out in a helicopter, you could not keep that quiet, but i anyway that we can preserve that restricted reporting option is just really critical. because if you don't have that, if you try to force a victim, you are not going to have a good case anyway. so i think it is just really clear that that is still an important option for survivors. >> madam chairman, may i have a question? .> ithank you for your time it is true in order to hold the perpetrator accountable in a criminal sense, depend on the evidence admissible to be presented against the person charged. a lot of that depends on the actions of the victim at the

, and rape, act violence, sexual assault. do you have some recommendations for the military, or maybe we'll will hear from general patent that this is the case, that female members are told if this is happened to them, they did to , not washd really them is a very close, save their bedding, all of the sorts of things do you have some insight on that? >> again, i think i understand your question. i think it is critical -- what happens with that restricted reporting, if they do restrictive reporting, they should still have access to good medical care and counseling right in and there, and that is why it is critical. -- with goodn support, we saw a lot that became unrestricted. so the first critical moment of what happened than somebody reports and after restricted is

really critical that they are believed and they get good care. the one thing we heard consistently for people that testified before the task force, as they were treated with lack of respect. if the system had believed them and treated them respectfully, we would not have had a lot of angry soldiers. not that anybody ever wanted to be raped, but what that happens, if they were treated with the , theyst care and respect would have been in a better place going forward. >> i agree 100% it should be treated with care and respect, but in terms of being believed, i understand the victims advocate will make the commitment come i will believe you, but investigators and prosecutors are necessarily and ethically inclined and directed to keep an objective view of their victims in any case. don't necessarily believe or accept as completely true the statements of victims or malicious wounding victims or

even victims of theft. i'm sure you would agree that the prosecutor need to take an objective view, as do the investigators, and assessing any case. at least in virginia, and in most states, it is unethical to bring it case to court that we do not believe in and we do not believe we have sufficient admissible evidence. >> i will send you an article -- why don't cops believe? -- it is excellent. lee sac is dr. still coming. they're giving prosecutors, investigators now, they said as police officers, they cannot would out why some women have no effect at all when it is been raped, that they could not understand why they did not resent like other crime victims, what the study does now and

training does this teaches those investigators and prosecutors how to ask the questions. once they started asking in a certain way, then they got to the truth. if they started asking, talking about the sounds, what do you remember their? because the trauma of the sexual assault, you may not remember the facts right away, or you contradict yourself as they come back, so that is why i say that trading for -- training for prosecutors and investigators is so critical because they rape crime is buried different, and everybody who has experienced something that dramatic, the trauma is very different than a trauma somebody is feeling -- from somebody stealing your purse or something. that is how the understanding of that trauma can impact and so critical. the other thing, i would like to make a statement on that i saw time after time that i sometimess just -- they are predators and sometimes they are defense attorneys, i understand how that happened, and we get experience both sides, and from some of the

other attorneys i talked to, i think it would be really critical if we could just make sure that they did the prosecution before they were the defense because what the anecdotal information is, when they come in after being a defense attorney first, as a prosecutor, they are almost jaded. they come in thinking all victims lie. because they work with the defense. many times they will lie about their innocence. i've heard that pretty consistently in some of the jag's and military folks i stayed in contact with. that may be one thing that would help because again the and maybe flip that around so -- thatefore anybody their prosecutors first rather than defense. i believe in justice. i'm not trying to tilt it, i'm just saying more we can learn from and how can we more effectively try those cases? , goingmore question back, i just did not catch it, the two-week training you are

talking about, is a something military investigators and prosecutors are going through? about this man mr. strand? >> i do not think that is what strand is doing. . do not have that with me >> maybe, madam chairman, that is something we ought to talk about because i understand this strand, has a contract to do all the training for the military investigators. there are some very good training programs outside the military. i am not suggesting that he not do a great job. i have never observed him. but the national insert attorneys association repeatedly has training in this area, as do most straight -- state prosecutors associations, which are open to military members. >> one of the programs we fund, they train press cures as well. i work with russ. i respect him. he is one of the guys who really

gets it. one of the other things i said here consistently, it still feels like the military is not listening to us civilians because we all don't walk around with ph.d.'s and years of experience of research. -- we have know learned from the victims. you have got to let the victims and form what we know and what we do. and that is why the civilians have that bigger, better perspective because we have lived in it, many of us, from 10 years to 30 years, and that is where you really learn what victims need and want and will help them heal and become whole again. so i really encourage you somehow or another to find a way -- at least we try to encourage the task force. for example, military installations were in 2009 asked to have in him i you with local crisis center spirit that is not happening is this only. so they are contacting with the local services in their

communities, they are going to have that access to that on the ground knowledge that will help them better serve the victims on their installation. i think that is critical. that would be an important piece to standardize. >> admiral. , forank you, ms. rumburg your work. i wonder if you could elaborate on the role of alcohol in this. i think the data shows, and it may not be precisely right, that somewhere between 40% and 50% in the military involve alcohol. do you have thoughts on this? on what the military might to do differently with regard to the alcohol. >> number one, focus on the perpetrators who use alcohol as an excuse to per portray sex crimes. we know also that the -- we talk about risk reduction. certainly that is to be part of it.

i have even told my husband, if you go out and get drunk, you don't go rob a bank. if you don't have a propensity to rob a bank. this is what people forget. , oh,ese perpetrators essay i was wrong, she was wrong, we didn't know -- you know what? no. you did not become a rapist because you are drunk. they use it as an excuse to rape. it is not change who you are when you drink too much. all of us should be aware of that. so i think that is critical so you have got to look at it at two weights and say alcohol is not an excuse. and you should note just because the victim was drunk is no excuse to rape them. focus on ae to pervert trader who uses alcohol as an excuse. >> -- on the perpetrator. >> i think this is an important

point. the questions in the workplace survey, it is together, so did you, the victim, or the offender, were you using alcohol? so it is not separated out. it does put those together. also i think this is an import and point to go through the disaggregating those types of sexual offenses or unwanted sexual content to see what is the touching, what is the attempt, what is the completed, to better understand their relationship with alcohol and unwanted sexual contact. i think that would be important to better understand. >> i realize my question was open ended, so i ought to clarify a bit. i'm not suggesting for a minute that alcohol use is an excuse. i'm focus really more on the issue of overall prevention because we have seen many

situations where alcohol, and to your point, it is difficult to know sometimes exactly what we're talking about. and i think that, i mean, one of my concerns going forward is how we -- what prevention methods for alcohol use are going to be helpful in trying to help diminish these events going forward. so i think that -- >> that is where we need more research dollars to help us figure it out. i know the navy four years ago at a really good program. so i think they have been trying. i think the services are trying to find ways to educate and --isurage the use -- dr. the expert on people who use alcohol to perpetrate here and he probably has some more knowledge on what -- and his studies about prevention. but it certainly is a struggle. we need more money for research to really get drill down for primary prevention of alcohol

abuse as well as sexual violence. plug ford love that more dollars for research. i also think it is important, again, we're talking about the greatest effect. it would be interesting to see, it could be more or less, so somebody might say it had the greatest effect because a funder thedrunk, or less because offender was wrong, and so maybe it has minimized it here so that would be very interesting, again, another research question because we just know about the one incident where the victim said at the greatest effect on them. so it doesn't skew things a little bit, understanding what the true issue is. this, another way of aggregating the data by saying these are the incidents where alcohol was involved in some way, this is the type of , completedouching

sexual intercourse, and then reporting. how does that affect reporting? is a victim less likely to report because i was drinking or he was drinking, so it would be interesting to see. that goes to your point of pinpointing policy or where the direct efforts because if people are not reporting because of the alcohol issue, that is a completely different issue than oh, yeah, i am reporting and i do not care whether out of all is involved or not. i think there are ways of confirming that point. again, these are all knowable things based on the data that we have. >> thank you. >> i want to go back to the issue of the rape shield law and your concern about how it stands -- how it is being utilized in the military. could you elaborate on that a little bit more? you mentioned the military court of appeals. ,> as i was researching this one of the cases, and i do not have in my folder, but it is an

example of that is that a woman -- i doan affair, and not know if i have it in my bag are not. her husband found out about it, beat up the perpetrator, and then later she was raped, and the fact that she had had an affair, committed adultery, was entered into the case. and that impacted the outcome of the case. --t is an example >> and you are saying this is different in the military from the way it is in civilian court. >> yes, we have rape shield laws were your prior history cannot -- that is why i'm saying your history cannot be brought into course. federal rapehe shield law, so i'm very concerned. i want to find out more about it. >> the fact that this is -- the perpetrator is an outstanding officer and has a clean slate,

so people try your experience should not impact the decision. >> ms. rumburg, since you were on the task force in 2009, have you seen any changes, positive changes since then you go -- since then? a lot of your recommendations were about improving training. >> training is critical. i do not think it is where it ought to be. i think there are people always working on it, but i still don't think it is where it should be. we still talk to victims and survivors and hear anecdotal information about some of the things we hoped would be changed by now, and they have not. 'sdo believe that sapro strategic plan, the night before last, and in there, it says follow all recommendations from the 2009 report.

i also talked with a member that served on that task force with me, and she also recommended that would be a really good place to start, all those implemented -- recommendations being implemented because those tend to replicate that work. it was intense. we had a lot of good experts, like dr. addington, that presented on a panel, making recommendations here to going back through that report and trying to determine how much of that had been implemented. makenk they are trying to progress, but they are nowhere where they need to be yes. >> i noticed that your task force did interviews and had focus groups and did your own surveys. back in 2009. we are in the process of trying to get all the data am a which is a mountain of data, even beyond what your survey did. what would you say would be the utility of that for our panel?

>> maybe lynne can answer that, but i think cannot hurt. i think the main thing is what i said earlier -- the victims input. that input is going to drive more about what needs to be done than anything. with thesurveys people, the boots on the ground, the people who have been through the system, the people who have access to military , that is where you are going to get what makes the difference, is really serving the people who have been impacted, that serve, and listen to what they tell you. that is what has informed everything we have done things -- have done. even our relationship with the center for disease control, it informs our work. it also informs what we are doing around primary prevention. that is where i have not seen a connection to somebody with military and cdc. the work that we have done over the four years as rape crisis

advocates, we use to be crisis response, that is all we were, hotlines, talking about the court, and the hospital. cdc is really pushing up, making us really into primary prevention. so instead of us going out and we used to brag, we provided 600,000 students in pennsylvania received a program from our rape crisis center. cdc said no i might not work anymore. so we are chained -- said no, it is not work anymore. so we are changing the way, when we are talking prevention, go to the community, meet with parents of pto, talk about sexuality, had he taught your children, talk to them about all leading. so we have many experts right now that are really focused on primary prevention. you really have to drill down into the grass seeds -- and i mention that, star with families, because the people that are in the military come

from our communities. so that is why the military needs to be working in the communities. what are we learning their? congress needs to support that research on primary prevention. those 30 minute, one out -- one- hour training do not prevent sexual assault. everybody gets proud about the training work, but they have to be developed differently. they need to be in small groups where we are actually having an interaction, talking about your core efforts, your beliefs, because what's you talk about those kinds of things, then you'll find out do you respect women or other men, those kinds of things, those big classroom training are good for learning some of the facts, but they're not going to prevent sexual violence feared we have to find other ways to do it. >> all right. thank you for a much. we are going to take our lunch break right now. we will see everybody in an hour. i really appreciate both of you, making your presentations. >> it was an honor. thank you so much.

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> a couple of things to tell you about this morning. the house oversight committee meets to discuss a resolute and -- a resolution discussing whether lois lerner waived her commitment rights. if they vote to adopt the resolution, it could bring lerner back for more questions. that is on c-span two at 9:00 eastern. later in the morning, the u.s. institute of peace will host a panel of young afghan ease talking about their country's future. you can see that on c-span3 at

10:30 eastern. in a few moments, today's headlines, your calls, and tweets live on "washington journal." the house of representatives returns in a couple of hours to finish work on a bill regarding offshore oil and gas drilling. our life road to the white house coverage continues at 6:30 eastern with kentucky's senator rand paul at a south carolina gop fundraiser. and we will follow that with former florida governor jeb bush speaking at a fundraiser for the conservative party aof new york. and in 45 minutes, we will be joined by representative doug collins, a georgia republican, a member of the judiciary and foreign affairs committees. he will take your questions about this week's supreme court decisions, the u.s. role in syria, and immigration policy. we will continue the discussion on immigration at 8:20 eastern

with representative luis , a member of the hispanic immigration task force. host: the a nays areys are 68, the 32. host: with immigration moves to the house. good morning on this friday, june 28, 2013. a $60 billion price tag. it would also require the construction of 700 miles of fencing, doubling the number of border patrol agents, and require employers to use the government's e-verify