The U.S. Department of Education announced last month that it would review Brown University’s security procedures to determine if it violated the Clery Act after two students were fatally shot on Dec. 13.
The Clery Act requires colleges and universities to produce annual security reports (ASR) detailing crime statistics on campus, as well as their safety and security procedures. The department is requesting various documents as part of its investigation, including ASRs, records of reported crimes and crime logs from recent years, and a list of timely warnings and emergency notifications issued by the university dating back to 2021, CNN reports. All documentation must be submitted to the department by Jan. 30.
“After two students were horrifically murdered at Brown University when a shooter opened fire in a campus building, the Department is initiating a review of Brown to determine if it has upheld its obligation under the law to vigilantly maintain campus security,” wrote Secretary Linda McMahon. “Students deserve to feel safe at school, and every university across this nation must protect their students and be equipped with adequate resources to aid law enforcement. The Trump Administration will fight to ensure that recipients of federal funding are vigorously protecting students’ safety and following security procedures as required under federal law.”
Is Video Surveillance Part of the Clery Act?
President Trump criticized Brown in the days following the attack, including questioning why there weren’t more images of the suspect from university surveillance cameras.
“Why did Brown University have so few Security Cameras?” he wrote on his social media platform, Truth Social. “There can be no excuse for that.”
Following the shooting, Brown spokesperson Brian Clark said the university has an “expensive network” of more than 1,200 cameras but that they “do not extend to every hallway, classroom, laboratory, and office across the 250+ buildings on campus.” A Providence police affidavit said cameras “do not cover” the room where the shooting happened, the Boston Globe reports.
The Education Department said it would look into whether the camera system was not “up to appropriate standards, allowing the suspect to flee while the unviersity seemed unable to provide helpful information about the profile of the alleged assassin.” However, safety and security experts are questioning why the Trump administration is investigating the school’s lack of cameras as a Clery Act violation.
RELATED: Federal Review Initiated of UC Berkeley Following Protest at Turning Point USA Event on Campus
Campus Safety Editor-in-Chief Robin Hattersley told the Globe that the idea that the federal government is investigating Brown security on the basis of the Clery Act “seems a bit odd to me, in that the Clery Act doesn’t require specific security solutions.”
“Absent saying something in the annual security report about having surveillance cameras, the Clery Act doesn’t touch it,” added S. Daniel Carter, a Clery expert and president of SAFE Campuses, LLC. However, he does recommend schools have a “comprehensive surveillance camera network that covers public areas, entrances and exits, and sensitive areas.”
Many colleges and universities have multiple security systems in place, including video surveillance, access control, and emergency notification systems, Hattersley said.
“It’s kind of a marketing tool, because they can say, ‘Hey, we have installed all of this security technology so your child will be safe when they come here,'” she continued. “They realize that when something like what happened at Brown happens, it’s catastrophic.”
Education Department to Investigate Brown University Timely Warnings
While the Clery Act does not require universities to have video surveillance technology in place, schools are required to issue timely warnings to the campus when there is a threat, which does require an emergency notification system.
Following the shooting, many Brown students and staff reported that the university’s emergency notifications were delayed.
“If true, these shortcomings constitute serious breaches of Brown’s responsibilities under federal law,” McMahon wrote.
RELATED: Essential Campus Emergency Notification Strategies: 15 Critical Practices for Public Safety and Emergency Management Administrators
The first emergency alert went out to 20,000 people at 4:22 p.m., approximately 17 minutes after the first 911 call. Ten subsequent alerts were sent while the campus was in lockdown.
While universities are required to send timely alerts under the Clery Act, they are first obligated to confirm that it is a real threat and not a hoax, Carter told the Globe.
“An institution is not supposed to get a 911 call of an active shooter, and necessarily immediately send out an emergency notification,” he said. “There is a confirmation component. That confirmation is expected to take place very quickly, but the clock does not start ticking with the first 911 call.”
Brown University to Improve Security, Conduct After-Action Reviews
Brown University issued a Dec. 22 news release outlining three immediate actions the school is taking in response to the shooting. Paxson said the school as initiated a rapid response team to focus on immediate safety measures to ensure the campus remains secure during winter break and ahead of the Spring 2026 semester.
The university will also hire outside experts to conduct an after-action review of the shooting, as well as a campus safety and security assessment of the campus. The after-action review will look at campus safety conditions leading up to the incident, how the school responded on the day of the shooting, and how emergency response efforts were handled afterward.
The safety and security assessment will consist of an “on-site physical security assessment of the perimeter of buildings, access points, cameras and technology, and other infrastructure conditions.”
Paxson also announced Brown Police Chief Rodney Chatman has been placed on administrative leave as the school conducts its assessments.
