Bill Overview
Title: Safe Equitable Campus Resources and Education Act of 2022
Description: 2022 This bill requires the annual campus security report provided by institutions of higher education to current and prospective students and employees to address the needs of individuals with disabilities. Among other requirements, the report and its related materials must (1) be made available free of charge, in a timely manner, and in accessible formats to individuals with disabilities; (2) include current campus policies that ensure that their needs are included in emergency response and evacuation procedures; and (3) include an assurance that campus security personnel and others receive training about working with these individuals.
Sponsors: Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-12]
Target Audience
Population: People enrolled or employed at higher education institutions
Estimated Size: 23000000
- Higher education institutions often have numerous students with disabilities, who will be directly benefited by more accessible resources and better-trained personnel.
- The 2022 NCES report indicates there are over 19 million college students in the US, a percentage of whom have reported disabilities.
- Globally, there are approximately 200 million higher education students, with a similar proportion likely having disabilities.
- The bill requires changes to campus security reports, affecting all students, faculty, and employees who are involved in or benefit from emergency procedures and accessibility initiatives.
- The modifications will influence not only individuals with disabilities but also the general campus culture in terms of inclusivity and safety education.
Reasoning
- The target population includes both individuals with disabilities and the broader campus community, which includes students, faculty, and staff.
- While around 2 million students with disabilities will be directly impacted, the policy will bring changes in safety and accessibility that can raise awareness and inclusivity among all 23 million individuals affiliated with higher education institutions.
- Financial constraints will likely restrict the depth of enhancements or the reach of training sessions, especially in smaller or less-funded institutions.
- Effects will vary depending on the state and institution, with some already having better frameworks for accessibility, while others will use this policy to initiate significant improvements.
- Cantril wellbeing scores will help monitor changes in perceived safety, inclusivity, and support in campus life before and after the policy is enacted.
Simulated Interviews
student (New York)
Age: 21 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I often find emergency alerts difficult to understand due to my hearing impairment, so I hope this policy will make those more accessible.
- Training the campus security to deal with students who have disabilities could be a huge benefit for everyone on campus.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
university administrator (California)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy will require coordination and some budget adjustment to make everything accessible, but it's necessary.
- The training will help us support disabled students and staff more effectively.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
student (Texas)
Age: 19 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe everyone deserves to feel safe and informed on campus, so this policy is incredibly important.
- As a designer, I can see how making materials accessible to all will benefit the whole community.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
professor (Washington)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful this policy will provide the needed resources to support our students better.
- It's crucial that security personnel understand the various disabilities our students have—improving their responses in emergencies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
student (Florida)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I often see campus patrol unsure how to help our disabled peers during drills, so this training is vital.
- It would bring peace of mind knowing that everyone is accounted for during emergencies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
campus security officer (Illinois)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Training on how to assist students with disabilities especially during emergencies is a great direction.
- More knowledge always equips us to do our jobs better and more safely for everyone involved.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
graduate student (Massachusetts)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- So many buildings still have inaccessible emergency exits, so better accessibility planning is crucial.
- Campus security training for accessibility issues can make big differences.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
faculty (Ohio)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Inclusivity should always be prioritized in policymaking, and the benefits of this are immense.
- Training for campus staff will help eliminate misconceptions and improve student interactions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
campus maintenance staff (Michigan)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Good to know there'll be a structured program to address these issues.
- It may take some effort initially, but it looks like it could improve things greatly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
student services coordinator (Nevada)
Age: 27 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy aligns well with existing efforts to increase the accessibility of services.
- It emphasizes the need for training which has often been overlooked.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $120000000)
Year 2: $90000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $110000000)
Year 3: $80000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $100000000)
Year 5: $60000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $80000000)
Year 10: $40000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $60000000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The bill's effectiveness will largely depend on the practical implementation of accessibility changes across diverse higher education institutions.
- Initial setup and training costs could pose challenges for smaller institutions with limited budgets.
- The program's success would be measured not only by compliance but also by improved safety and inclusivity for individuals with disabilities.