ÐÜèAVÃâ·Ñ

Safety Committee

Campus Safety Advisory Council (CSAC)

Integrated Governance, Intake, Reporting, and Advisory Framework

The ÐÜèAVÃâ·Ñ is implementing the Campus Safety Advisory Council (CSAC) to strengthen enterprise-wide coordination, visibility, prioritization, and accountability for campus safety. The proposed framework creates an integrated approach for receiving safety concerns, assessing and routing issues, coordinating affiliated safety committees, and advancing significant recommendations to University leadership while preserving the legal and operational authority of responsible departments.

Why This Council Is Important

Campus safety concerns often cross organizational boundaries and may require coordinated attention, resources, policy consideration, or executive action. The redesign is intended to make CSAC USF’s principal enterprise-level advisory and coordinating body for campus safety, with a clear governance pathway that promotes proactive improvements, practical solutions, risk-based prioritization, transparency, and accountability.

A central principle of the model is that issues should be handled at the lowest organizational level capable of appropriately resolving them and elevated only when enterprise visibility or multidisciplinary coordination is needed. Operational, investigative, regulatory, technical, and command authority remains with the department or committee that owns the work.

Scope

The framework addresses campus-wide safety, security, preparedness, infrastructure, operational practices, and community concerns. Examples include:

• Physical security, building access, lighting, security cameras, emergency communications, and safety technology.
• Pedestrian and traffic safety, transportation, special-event safety, and crime-prevention/CPTED initiatives.
• Residence hall and campus safety trends, workplace violence-prevention initiatives, public awareness, and safety education.
• After-action reviews, policy recommendations, infrastructure needs, and other cross-functional safety matters.

CSAC is advisory and does not adjudicate individual student behavioral cases, personnel matters, workers’ compensation or risk-management claims, regulatory compliance inspections, criminal investigations, or emergency-response command decisions. Enterprise implications arising from those areas may still be elevated in sanitized or decision-level form when coordination, prioritization, resources, policy, or executive action is required.

Timeline

• Phase 1: (We are here) Assess, Design, Plan
• Phase 2: Develop, Communicate, pilot
• Phase 3: Launch and Sustain

The governance document proposes an implementation and operating cadence rather than a fixed project start-and-end schedule. During implementation, the Core Assessment Team (CAT) is expected to meet approximately weekly for 30–60 minutes, with expedited assessments as needed. The full CSAC is expected to meet quarterly, and affiliated safety committees and workgroups would submit standardized reports approximately 30 days before each quarterly meeting. 

Project Governance

The proposed model is federated rather than a traditional parent/subcommittee hierarchy. Authority remains with the office or committee that legally and operationally owns the work, while enterprise safety visibility, prioritization, coordination, and recommendations converge at CSAC.

• Executive Leadership — receives recommendations and enterprise issues and provides direction or decisions when required.
• CSAC — establishes enterprise visibility and priorities, considers cross-functional matters, makes recommendations, and monitors strategic outcomes.
• Core Assessment Team (CAT) — serves as the assessment, triage, and governance gateway for intake, routing, escalation, tracking, and preparation of matters for CSAC.
• Affiliated Safety Committees and Workgroups — conduct subject-matter work, report significant activity and trends, and refer issues requiring enterprise attention.
• Responsible Operational Departments — retain legal, regulatory, technical, investigative, command, and implementation authority.

What to Expect

Under the proposed framework, members of the USF community would have a defined pathway for submitting campus safety concerns. The Intake Coordinator would acknowledge submissions, conduct an administrative review, assign a tracking number, and transmit the matter to CAT. CAT would assess risk, ownership, priority, sensitivity, and the appropriate disposition.

Routine or low-risk matters may be routed directly to the responsible department and tracked as appropriate. Cross-functional and strategic issues may be placed before CSAC for multidisciplinary discussion, prioritization, funding or policy consideration, recommendation, or executive escalation. Sensitive information would be handled through a tiered information-governance process designed to protect restricted, privileged, investigative, and legally protected information.

Frequently Asked Questions

Contact for Questions

For more information about the study, please contact Chris Daniel, Assistant Vice President, USF Division of Public Safety.