Lessons Learned in Creating a College Consortium

  • Emily R. ClearEmail author
  • Ann L. Coker
  • Heather M. Bush
  • Candace J. Brancato
  • Danielle Davidov
Original Article


This paper offers lessons learned in evaluating the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (2013) requirement that colleges receiving Title IX funds provide bystander programming to reduce sexual violence. To conduct this evaluation a national college consortium was created [multi college bystander efficacy evaluation (mcBEE)]. Through this consortium 24 public colleges were recruited and their choices regarding bystander programming options were queried. Concurrently, rates of violence perpetration and victimization were measured over 4 years among undergraduate students at each college. Description and details of experiences in recruiting colleges into a college consortium, addressing regulatory compliance, approaches to selecting and launching college-wide surveys to undergraduate students across several large campuses, and strategies to communicate findings and data back to each recruited campus are presented. Suggestions for future consortium building include budgeting sufficient time to recruit colleges, manage regulatory processes, and ensure adequate response rates through short surveys and enticing incentives. In building a national consortium, lessons such as flexibility, networking, and communication contributed to mcBEE’s success.


Sexual violence Dating violence Consortium College Bystander Prevention Evaluation Violence Against Women Act 



Research was supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Cooperative Agreement U01 CE002668. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had a supervisory role in the design and conduct of the study but had no direct role in the collection, management, analysis, or interpretation of the data; the preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; or the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Research was supported by the NIH National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences through grant number UL1TR001998. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. The findings and conclusions in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Supplementary material

10896_2019_105_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (244 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 244 kb).


  1. Administrator-Researcher Campus Climate Collaborative (ARC3). (2015 September 1). Retrieved from
  2. Association of American Universities (2015 September 3). AAU climate survey on sexual assault and sexual misconduct. Retrieved from
  3. Babin, E. A., Palazzolo, K. E., & Rivera, K. D. (2012). Communication skills, social support, and burnout among advocates in a domestic violence agency. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 40(2), 147–166. Scholar
  4. Banyard, V. L. (2014). Improving college campus–based prevention of violence against women: A strategic plan for research built on multipronged practices and policies. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 15(4), 339–351. Scholar
  5. Banyard, V. L., Moynihan, M. M., & Plante, E. G. (2007). Sexual violence prevention through bystander education: An experimental evaluation. Journal of Community Psychology, 35(4), 463–481. Scholar
  6. Basile, K. C., DeGue, S., Jones, K., Freire, K., Dills, J., Smith, S. G., & Raiford, J. L. (2016). STOP SV: A technical package to prevent sexual violence.Google Scholar
  7. Black, M. C., Basile, K. C., Breiding, M. J., Smith, S. G., Walters, M. L., Merrick, M. T., & Stevens, M. R. (2011). The national intimate partner and sexual violence survey: 2010 summary report (Vol. 19, pp. 39–40). Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.Google Scholar
  8. Bush, H. M., Coker, A. L., Davidov, D. M., & Clear, E. R. (2019). The opportunity – VAWA 2013 reauthorization provides a natural experiment for bystander efficacy evaluation. Journal of Family Violence (in press).Google Scholar
  9. Campus Sexual Assault Elimination Act. The Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013. Pub L No 113–4, §304, 127 Stat 54, 89–92.Google Scholar
  10. Cantor, D., Fisher, B., Chibnall, S. H., Townsend, R., Lee, H., Thomas, G., … Westat, I. (2015). Report on the AAU campus climate survey on sexual assault and sexual misconduct.Google Scholar
  11. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2006). Physical dating violence among high school students--United States, 2003. MMWR: Morbidity and mortality weekly report, 55(19), 532–535.Google Scholar
  12. Coker, A. L., Cook-Craig, P. G., Williams, C. M., Fisher, B. S., Clear, E. R., Garcia, L. S., & Hegge, L. M. (2011). Evaluation of green dot: An active bystander intervention to reduce sexual violence on college campuses. Violence Against Women, 17(6), 777–796. Scholar
  13. Coker, A. L., Fisher, B. S., Bush, H. M., Swan, S. C., Williams, C. M., Clear, E. R., & DeGue, S. (2015). Evaluation of the green dot bystander intervention to reduce interpersonal violence among college students across three campuses. Violence Against Women, 21(12), 1507–1527. Scholar
  14. Coker, A. L., Bush, H. M., Cook-Craig, P. G., DeGue, S. A., Clear, E. R., Brancato, C. J., et al. (2017). RCT testing bystander effectiveness to reduce violence. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 52(5), 566–578. Scholar
  15. Coker, A. L., Bush, H. M., Davidov, D. M., & Clear, E. R. (2019). Mentoring multi-college bystander efficacy evaluation – An approach to growing the next generation of gender-based interpersonal violence intervention and prevention (VIP) researchers. Journal of Family Violence (in press).Google Scholar
  16. Darley, J. M., & Latané, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 377–383. Scholar
  17. Davidov, D. M., Coker, A. L., Bush, H. M., & Clear, E. R. (2019). Using a multiphase mixed methods triangulation design to measure bystander intervention components and dose of violence prevention programs on college campuses. Journal of Family Violence (in press).Google Scholar
  18. Edwards, D. (2009). Green Dot curriculum manual. Lexington: University of Kentucky.Google Scholar
  19. Foubert, J. D. (2000). The longitudinal effects of a rape-prevention program on fraternity men's attitudes, behavioral intent, and behavior. Journal of American College Health, 48(4), 158–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gidycz, C. A., Orchowski, L. M., & Berkowitz, A. D. (2011). Preventing sexual aggression among college men: An evaluation of a social norms and bystander intervention program. Violence Against Women, 17(6), 720–742. Scholar
  21. Harris, P. A., Taylor, R., Thielke, R., Payne, J., Gonzalez, N., & Conde, J. G. (2009). Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 42(2), 377-381.Google Scholar
  22. Koss, M. P., Gidycz, C. A., & Wisniewski, N. (1987). The scope of rape: Incidence and prevalence of sexual aggression and victimization in a national sample of higher education students. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55(2), 162. Scholar
  23. Koss, M. P., Abbey, A., Campbell, R., Cook, S., Norris, J., Testa, M., et al. (2007). Revising the SES: A collaborative process to improve assessment of sexual aggression and victimization. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31(4), 357–370. Scholar
  24. Krebs, C. P., Lindquist, C. H., Warner, T. D., Fisher, B. S., & Martin, S. L. (2009). College women's experiences with physically forced, alcohol-or other drug-enabled, and drug-facilitated sexual assault before and since entering college. Journal of American College Health, 57(6), 639–649. Scholar
  25. Miller, E., Tancredi, D. J., McCauley, H. L., Decker, M. R., Virata, M. C. D., Anderson, H. A., et al. (2013). One-year follow-up of a coach-delivered dating violence prevention program: A cluster randomized controlled trial. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 45(1), 108–112. Scholar
  26. Moynihan, M. M., Banyard, V. L., Arnold, J. S., Eckstein, R. P., & Stapleton, J. G. (2010). Engaging intercollegiate athletes in preventing and intervening in sexual and intimate partner violence. Journal of American College Health, 59(3), 197–204. Scholar
  27. National Institutes of Health Office of Extramural Research Grants & Funding. Single IRB Policy for Multi-site Research (2018, January 8). Retrieved from
  28. Orchowski, L. M., Edwards, K. M., Hollander, J. A., Banyard, V. L., Senn, C. Y., & Gidycz, C. A. (2018). Integrating sexual assault resistance, bystander, and Men’s social norms strategies to prevent sexual violence on college campuses: A call to action. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse,
  29. Senn, C. Y., Eliasziw, M., Barata, P. C., Thurston, W. E., Newby-Clark, I. R., Radtke, H. L., et al. (2013). Sexual assault resistance education for university women: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (SARE trial). BMC Women's Health, 13(1), 25. Scholar
  30. University of Kentucky Office of Research Intergrity. (2018). Reliance standard operating procedures. Lexington, KY 2019.Google Scholar
  31. Violence Against Women Act, §§ 42–13701-14040 (1994).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Public HealthUniversity of KentuckyLexingtonUSA
  2. 2.College of Medicine/OBGYNUniversity of KentuckyLexingtonUSA
  3. 3.School of Public HealthWest Virginia UniversityMorgantownUSA

Personalised recommendations