University of Manchester Report and Support Annual Report 2024/2025 

Annual Report 2024/2025 

Introduction 

At The University of Manchester, we believe that bullying, harassment, and discrimination are never okay. Report and Support, our online tool, aims to provide a fair, unbiased, confidential reporting platform and process that treats people with respect and allows them to be heard. It is a standalone platform which allows staff, students, visitors and the public to seek support in relation to any form of bullying, harassment, discrimination, victimisation, gender-based violence, hate or micro-aggressions they may have experienced or witnessed or to raise another safeguarding concern.

Report and Support is overseen by the Advice and Response team (A&R, Safeguarding, Gender-Based Violence, and Hate sub-team) for student cases, and by Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) for colleagues cases.

If a student case progresses to investigation or disciplinary action, the Conduct and Discipline sub-team and Advice and Response investigators may become involved.

Updates, highlights and campaigns

Reporting Trends and Institutional Response – Academic Year 2023/24

During the 2023/24 academic year (read the full report here), bullying and harassment emerged as the most prevalent issues reported by students. In response, we have strengthened our incident response protocols and updated relevant policies and procedures to better support those affected.

Sexual misconduct continues to be a key area of concern. The volume and nature of these reports highlight the ongoing need for education, prevention, and visibility of existing support services. We remain actively engaged with the Gender-Based Violence Action Network for Students, collaborating on shared concerns and emerging themes across local universities and the wider Greater Manchester area. This includes joint actions and campaigns aimed at ensuring the safety of both students and the broader community.

New Regulatory Requirements

From 1 August 2025, universities in England are required to meet new regulatory expectations from the Office for Students (OfS) regarding responses to harassment and sexual misconduct. At Manchester, we already have robust support systems and processes in place. To meet the new requirements, we are enhancing coordination and visibility of our efforts:

• A new single-source webpage will provide staff and students with easy access to all relevant policies, procedures and support resources. 
• In Semester 1 of 2025/26, all new students will receive details about mandatory online training focused on consent, boundaries, and respectful behaviours.
• Throughout the academic year, targeted training will be delivered to colleagues in key student-facing roles.

Commitment to Tackling Gender-Based Violence

Our University has demonstrated its commitment to addressing gender-based violence (GBV) by becoming one of the first institutions in England to participate in the EmilyTest GBV Charter pilot.

Alongside Anglia Ruskin University, Birmingham City University, the University of East London and the University of Warwick, we have contributed to the adaptation of the EmilyTest GBV Charter framework for the English education system. This work aligns with the new OfS Condition of Registration on harassment and sexual misconduct.

The Charter is built on five core principles:

• Open and learning
• Educated and empowered
• Comprehensive and connected
• Equal and inclusive
• Safe and effective

Campaigns and Training

The Essential Courses programme was rolled out across staff to help maintain a safe, welcoming, and compliant environment. By the end of February 2025 all staff were required to complete the following mandatory courses:

• Diversity in the Workplace
• Unconscious Bias
• Disability Equity
• Sexual Harassment

In July 2025, colleagues from the Division of Campus Life, ResLife, and Campus Support and Security worked with local partners to undertake training on the administration of anti-opioid medication. This initiative supports our Harm Reduction approach, ensuring staff are equipped to respond effectively to substance-related emergencies and promote student wellbeing.

Service spotlight - Student Wellbeing Team

The Student Wellbeing Team, a key sub-team within the Advice and Response service, plays a vital role in promoting the wellbeing and academic success of students at The University of Manchester. Their work is guided by the University’s Six Ways to Wellbeing framework and combines both proactive and responsive approaches to student support.

Throughout the year, they have delivered a wide range of services, including:

• Direct support through face-to-face and online appointments, and a daily live chat service.
• Wellbeing workshops aimed at helping students build resilience and maintain positive wellbeing.
• Digital resources and e-learning developed for both students and staff, enhancing access to wellbeing information and tools.

The team have also led several large-scale wellbeing initiatives, including University-wide events, targeted communications, and the coordination of the Student Wellbeing Champion scheme, which empowers students to promote wellbeing among their peers.

A dedicated strand of their work focuses on supporting care experienced and estranged students, ensuring they receive tailored support throughout their time at Manchester.

To improve access to support, the Student Wellbeing Team manage the Student Support website and oversee the central student support contact form, helping students connect with the right services when they need them most.

Summary of 24/25 Report and Support disclosures

Report and Support - online reporting platform

The Report and Support platform is an online tool to enable students, staff, and members of the public to report incidents of:

• Bullying and harassment
• Discrimination
• Hate crimes
• Microaggressions
• Safeguarding concerns
• Sexual harassment and assault
• Domestic abuse
• Stalking
• Spiking
• 'Honour'-based abuse
• as well as incidents that do not easily fit within the categories listed above.

Reporters can select multiple categories when describing their experience, which means the total number of disclosures may exceed the total number of individual reports. For example, a single submission may include both sexual harassment and spiking and will be counted under both categories.

Reports can be submitted in two ways:

• Anonymously, allowing users to share concerns without revealing their identity.
• With contact details, enabling follow-up support from trained advisors.

The platform includes a feature that allows users to switch between reporting anonymously or providing contact details before submitting their form, in case they change their mind and decide they would prefer to speak with an advisor.

The platform is designed to be accessible, confidential, and supportive, helping individuals seek guidance and enabling the University to identify and respond to patterns of behaviour across the community.

Support is available for both students and colleagues, with dedicated advisors assigned to help navigate options for reporting, complaints, and wellbeing resources. The platform also includes educational materials and links to external support services.

By collecting data on reported incidents, the University uses the platform to inform preventative actions, such as targeted training, awareness campaigns, and policy development.

Each report is reviewed by a relevant team member, and the reporter is offered a meeting to explore available options - this may include submitting a formal complaint to the University. However, submitting a report through the Report & Support system does not automatically trigger a formal disciplinary or investigative process.

Overview of 24/25

The report and data presented relate to the academic year from 1st August 2024 to 31st July 2025. During this period, we received 886 reports submitted through Report and Support.

Our busiest month was December 2024, with 132 reports submitted. Of these*:

• 88 were related to discrimination,
• 45 to hate, and
• 45 to bullying.

*Some individuals who submitted reports selected more than one category to describe what happened to them. For example, one person might have ticked “discrimination,” “hate,” and “bullying” all in the same report to reflect the complexity of their experience. So, the totals above may involve overlapping categories.

In December alone, there were 84 anonymous reports, and a notably high number of 35 reports submitted by members of the general public. Most of these reports were in relation to discriminatory online posts indicating a University of Manchester student as an author - these were looked into by our team. For context, only 71 public submissions were received across the entire 2024/25 academic year.

Anonymous reports are valuable in helping us identify broader trends and patterns of behaviour within our community. These insights can inform proactive measures, such as targeted training or awareness campaigns.

Because the reporting system is fully anonymous, we do not receive any identifying information about the reporter. As a result, we are unable to provide updates, offer direct support, or take individualised action in response to these reports.

The level of detail provided in an anonymous report can also affect our ability to respond. For instance, if a report contains limited information, we may be unable to take further action or initiate a formal investigation.

Over the past two academic years, we’ve observed consistent patterns in both the volume and nature of issues reported through the online platform. However, the month-by-month comparison highlights noticeable spikes in reports during October 2023 and May 2024 (academic year 2023/24). These fluctuations may be linked to incidents or disturbances, whether local or global that can directly or indirectly impact our community and its sense of safety. Given the diversity of our community, we strive to provide tailored support to everyone who reaches out.

We received 557 reports from students, 7 fewer than in 2023/24, when the total was 564. Additionally, 191 reports were submitted by staff members, which is 49 fewer compared to the previous academic year. Additional reports were submitted by individuals from the wider university community and the general public:

• 11 reports came from past or future UoM students, such as applicants and alumni.
• 71 reports were submitted by members of the general public.
• 37 reports (including one report in which the individual did not answer this question, therefore their connection to the university is unknown) were submitted by individuals who did not identify with any of the listed categories. Instead, they described their connection to the university in their own words. These included probation staff, family or friends of students, and staff from other universities.
• 6 reports were submitted by visitors or parents/guardians of UoM students.
• 13 reports were submitted by students from other universities, reporting incidents involving UoM students or affecting safety on campus.

The University of Manchester Equality Information Report (March 2025, page 2) explains that "we pride ourselves in being one of Britain’s largest single site universities with a diverse community of over 12,000 colleagues and approximately 48,000 students." Based on these figures:

• Student reporters represent 1.2% of the total student population.
• Staff reporters account for 1.6% of the overall workforce.

585 reports involved individuals who chose to speak with an adviser to discuss their report in more detail, explore available options, consider next steps, and access appropriate support.

301 reports were submitted anonymously, with varying levels of detail. Some provided sufficient information for our team to take action and implement informal measures to address the concerns raised. However, a portion of the anonymous reports contained very limited information, which unfortunately prevented our team from taking any meaningful action.

Incidents reported by staff and students

Please note that multiple incident types can be selected within a single report. As a result, the total number of incidents reported will exceed the number of reports submitted.

As mentioned above, students submitted 557 reports and staff submitted 191 reports. Within these, students raised 1,027 distinct incidents and experiences, while staff raised 338.

Students’ disclosures

In academic year 24/25 we received 557 reports submitted by students, and as mentioned above within those students raised 1027 incidents. This suggests that students are likely to report more than 1 incident within their submission.

1. Main incidents

Most reports were in relation to harassment (157 reports), bullying (145) and discrimination (141). There were over 100 reports of hate incidents and nearly a hundred safeguarding concerns raised. 73 reporters chose None of the above when categorising their experiences, however 12 were in conjunction with other categories like discrimination, safeguarding concern or microaggression. Some reports under the None of the above heading described incidents that could be seen as fitting some of the already listed categories. However, we acknowledge that often those who experienced adverse incidents are sometimes unable to categorise it in the same way as those without their lived experience. We encourage reporters to use their own words and work with them and survivors to better understand their experiences.

Other incidents grouped under None of the above were in relation to: financial matters, risk of homelessness, conduct of other students or intimidation.

Reports involving incidents of sexual misconduct remain relatively high with 74 reports of sexual assault, 78 of sexual harassment, and 8 for spiking. Some of these relate to experiences that occurred before students began their courses. However, the impact of such experiences often continues, and students may require ongoing, consistent support throughout their time at the University. We are working collaboratively across internal and external services to deliver tailored support, provide training, and implement preventative measures.

2. Contributing factors  

The online reporting form includes a section where the reporting party can indicate any factors that contributed to their experience. This question is optional, so not all reports contain this information. However, identifying contributing factors provides valuable insight into individual experiences and helps us identify recurring patterns.

As shown in the table below, homophobia and racism have been significant contributors to cases of bullying. Racism also played a major role in incidents of discrimination among students. In cases of harassment, the primary contributing factor was not listed among our predefined categories, though racism and misogyny were also frequently cited. Hate incidents were most often motivated by racism and religious hate.

3. Anonymous reports.

Students submitted 146 anonymous reports, while 411 provided their contact details and requested to be contacted by an Advice & Response (A&R) caseworker. Incidents involving discrimination or hate accounted for the highest number of anonymous submissions. However, across all categories, the proportion of named reports consistently exceeded that of anonymous ones.

This trend is encouraging, as we want everyone within our community to feel that they will be heard. While the option to report anonymously remains a vital feature - and all disclosures are valued - our ability to take further action is often limited in such cases due to the lack of follow-up opportunities. Named reports, on the other hand, enable us to tailor our response and support, and offer more effective resolutions.

4. Reasons for reporting anonymously

The primary reason students chose to report anonymously was a desire to ensure the university was informed, coupled with concerns that their disclosure might lead to repercussions for themselves or others. Notably, 32 individuals expressed fear that they would not be believed.

We wish to reassure all members of our community that every report is taken seriously. We are committed to providing support to anyone who chooses to disclose concerns.

5. Types of incidents split by reporter's gender

Of the incident reports received, the question about the reporter’s gender was optional, resulting in some missing data.

Among student respondents, the female and male categories include trans women and trans men. Of those who identified as trans, 5.2% reported experiencing bullying, 5.2% reported harassment, and 4.5% reported sexual harassment. The numbers of trans women and trans men are not reported separately to protect individual identities.

When students chose to self-identify their gender, the most common response was non-binary. A number of reports did not specify gender and are presented below under not answered or prefer not to say

6. Location

Out of all incidents reported by students, 120 took place on campus and 147 off campus. There were 23 reports of incidents that took place in university halls and 33 in private halls. Additionally, 98 incidents occurred online, highlighting that digital environments are a significant context for student-reported issues.

A further 77 students selected the option "combination of the above," suggesting that incidents often span multiple locations - for example, an online incident that also involved an off-campus setting, or any other combination of more than one place.

The "Other" category often refers to such combinations, but in some cases, it may also indicate that the incident took place abroad.

Investigation data

• The types of cases handled by Lead Investigators

We conduct investigations across a range of complex case areas including behavioural concerns, sexual misconduct, harassment and hate involving students and, on occasion, staff.  Complaint handlers within in schools and faculties also carry out investigations, although not into cases of sexual misconduct or more serious harassment and bullying cases. Investigations into staff complaints are led by People Directorate.

• Assessment of cases

Our investigations are governed by a comprehensive policy framework, made up of the Dignity at Work and Study Policy, Regulation XVII (Conduct and Discipline of Students) and the Sexual misconduct procedure. They are conducted by independent investigators, which may be a member of staff or someone from an external provider.  

Investigations are evidence-led, which means that decisions and outcomes are based on factual information and proof rather than assumptions, opinions or personal feelings. This approach ensures fairness, transparency and reliability. Evidence gathered during the investigation process may include statements from relevant parties, documents, digital records, or physical evidence. Situations, that involve conflicting accounts with limited corroborating evidence, are addressed through a careful analysis of credibility and reliability.  

For investigations into allegations of gender-based violence, harassment and hate, the University takes a trauma-informed approach.  

Decisions are made on the balance of probabilities, which means the investigator is looking to determine whether the evidence indicates that the misconduct is more likely to have occurred than not. The investigator will write a detailed report outlining their findings and make recommendations as to next steps, which may include a referral to a disciplinary panel for consideration or that no further action will be taken. A finding of no further action does not mean that misconduct has not taken place, but means that based on the available evidence, a finding could not be made.  

Decisions and recommendations are reviewed by the Head of Advice & Response and/or Director of Campus Life (or an appropriate member of staff if the investigation was handled outside of A&R). 

• A summary of investigation process 

When a formal report is made, the reporting party will be invited to an initial meeting with a member of staff, who will explain the process and procedure in detail, gather further information to inform any precautionary measures that the University may need to take, and ensure they have access to all available support. 

On occasion, a member of staff may conduct an initial assessment of the case to determine whether a full investigation is appropriate. This decision will include a consideration of the student status of those involved, time elapsed since the date(s) of the alleged behaviour(s), the evidence that is or may be available, and any other relevant information. If an investigation does not happen, this is not the same as saying that misconduct did not occur, but rather that there are not sufficient information, evidence, or available lines of enquiry to progress the case further. 

If a formal investigation is confirmed, the respondent is notified of this. The respondent will also be invited to an initial meeting with a member of staff, who will explain the process and procedure in detail, gather further information to inform any precautionary measures that the University may need to take, and ensure they have access to all available support. 

The investigator may invite both parties to an initial meeting to introduce themselves and answer any potential questions.  

The investigator will then commence the information and evidence gathering process. It is their responsibility to determine the key lines of enquiry. This will generally include conducting investigation meetings with those involved (including witnesses where appropriate) as well as obtaining other evidence (e.g. digital records, physical proofs, CCTV). 

The investigator will review all of the information and evidence and write a report, considering whether, on the balance of probabilities, there is a case to answer for the respondent for misconduct.  

Once the decision and recommendation have been reviewed by the Head of Advice & Response and/or Director of Campus Life (or an appropriate member of staff if the investigation was handled outside of A&R), the outcome of the investigation is delivered to the reporting party and respondent. 

• The data 

This covers all cases logged as referred into A&R Investigations between 1 August 2024 and 31 July 2025. 

Across all allegation categories and policy areas, a total of 21 cases were referred to A&R Investigations during the reporting period.

• Sexual Misconduct Allegation - The majority of cases in this category were managed under the Sexual Misconduct (SM) policy area, with 9 cases recorded.
• Behavioural Misconduct (including Fraud/Dishonesty) Allegation - in total 7 cases were handled under Conduct & Discipline (C&D) and Dignity at Work and Study (DaWS) - to protect anonymity we are unable to present the split.
• Harassment Allegation - 5 cases fell under the DaWS policy area.

Cases by allegation category and outcome 

Cases marked NFA (no further action) do not necessarily indicate that no misconduct has taken place; this is a reflection of whether the evidential threshold to investigate or proceed to disciplinary/other action has been met.

Conduct and Discipline

A case is brought to the Conduct and Discipline team when a breach of the University’s regulations is believed to have occurred. The regulation, and definition of misconduct, that the Conduct and Discipline work to is Regulation XVII, Conduct and Discipline of Students. 

The University’s Conduct and Discipline team receive cases from different areas within the University. Commonly, referrals come from Schools and Faculties, the central Examinations team and ResLife. Cases can generally be split into two types:

• Academic Malpractice (including, but not limited to, plagiarism, exam malpractice and generative AI misuse)
• General Misconduct (including, but not limited to, harassment, bullying and sexual misconduct).

The Conduct and Discipline team also receive cases from the Advice and Response Investigators. These are generally complex General Misconduct cases, and the investigator’s report can recommend that a case be taken to a disciplinary panel to assess and decide if a breach has occurred on the balance of probabilities. In these instances, the Investigator’s report will be made available to all members of the disciplinary panel, and the Investigator will usually present the case at a hearing.

There are two different levels of disciplinary panel that can occur:

• Summary Disciplinary Panel (SDP): this level of disciplinary action can be handled either with a fast-track letter or through a panel. It is a lower level of panel with a limited number of penalties available for the panel to impose.
• University Disciplinary Panel (UDP): this is the highest level of disciplinary panel and does not have a fast-track process attached to it. It provides the panel with a broader range of penalties, with the most serious sanction being expulsion from the University.

Any case being investigated, or made the subject of a subsequent disciplinary referral, needs to align with one or more definitions of misconduct from Regulation XVII, Conduct and Discipline of Students. 

The categories of report through Report and Support, do not always directly align with a corresponding definition from the Regulation; the definitions are more overarching.

Cases referred internally from Report and Support submissions to an investigation or disciplinary panel commonly align with the following definitions of misconduct:

• 2(i) discrimination, bullying, harassment and/or victimisation of any student, member of staff or visitor to the University, as defined in the University’s Dignity at Work and Study Policy
• 2(j) sexual misconduct and/or gender-based violence (see the Sexual Misconduct and Gender Based Violence Procedure).

While these definitions are frequently applicable, it is important to note that the issues raised in a case may relate to a range of misconduct types. In the table below, we have identified cases where definitions 2(i) and 2(j) apply. However, in some instances, other definitions may be more appropriate depending on the specific behaviours involved.

Students can make formal complaints of a Dignity at Work and Study nature through Regulation XVIII (Student Complaints Procedure). The data relating to these complaints and a broader view of disciplinary cases taking place across the University is captured in the Senate Report.

Additional definitions for the cases in the table:

• 2(c) violent, indecent, disorderly, threatening or offensive behaviour or language however expressed (including via social media) towards any student, member of staff or visitor to the University;
• 2(d) the distribution or publication of a poster, notice, sign or any material which is offensive, intimidating, threatening, indecent or illegal, including the broadcasting and electronic distribution of such material;
• 2(l) the misuse or unauthorised use of University premises, intellectual property or items of property, including misuse of computers and the communications network or any other breach of the University policy on use of information systems;
• 2(n) conduct which may constitute a criminal offence
• 2(s) failure to comply with a previously-imposed penalty or reasonable instruction under this Regulation or any other University Regulation, Policy, Procedure, Code or Agreement.

This approach ensures that each case is assessed in line with the most relevant definitions, even when the initial concern may suggest a different category of misconduct.

Important Things to Know About the Disciplinary Process:

It’s important to understand that the initiation of an investigation or referral to a disciplinary panel does not automatically mean there will be a finding against the respondent. Cases often evolve as more information becomes available.  For instance, a case may begin with an allegation of intercourse without consent, but the final outcome may be a finding of attempted intercourse without consent.  Ultimately, cases will ebb and flow throughout the process.

Additionally, the focus of a case may shift during the process - cases may sometimes focus on the dominant issue, which can mean that even though a case may have a particular feature within it e.g. racism, the type of misconduct the student is referred for aligns more closely with a seemingly unrelated definition of misconduct.  For example, a student using inappropriate references to book a room, may instead be found to have misused the IT booking system. This reflects the complex and dynamic nature of case handling.

• Summary of Cases Referred to Disciplinary Panels (inc. the data)

The following data relates to cases referred to disciplinary panels during the 2024/25 academic year. Please note that the timeframe for Conduct and Discipline spans from 1 October 2024 to 30 September 2025, whereas data from the Report and Support service is recorded from 1 August 2024 to 31 July 2025.

The disciplinary data is considerably small therefore, we are unable to provide a granular figures to protect identities, but some general observations can be made:

• A total of 16 cases were referred to disciplinary panels during the reporting period with the cases originating from different departments at the University.
• The majority of cases were handled at the Summary Disciplinary Panel (SDP) level, accounting for 9 cases, followed by University Disciplinary Panel (UDP) with 6 cases, and 1 case processed through the Fast-Track route.
• 15 of the cases were raised against undergraduate students.   
• Gender analysis shows a significant imbalance, with 13 cases involving male students and 3 involving female students.
• Themes for the misconduct types included indecent exposure, offensive comments, racism, violence, sexual misconduct, and harassment, indicating a diverse range of misconduct issues requiring disciplinary action.
• In terms of outcomes, 15 cases resulted in a breach finding, while 1 case was withdrawn. There were a variety of different penalties applied including warnings, training, non-contact, undertakings, apologies, and removal of inappropriate material, with a few of the more serious cases leading to exclusions and expulsions (or deferrals thereof).  It is noteworthy that no student decided to make an appeal against the outcome of their disciplinary panel.

Decision makers or panels are required to approach each case independently and reach a final finding based on the balance of probabilities. Where penalties are imposed, they are intended to be proportionate to the misconduct. The range of penalties may vary depending on the level of the panel involved.

Further details can be found in the  Guidance on Applying Student Disciplinary Penalties.

Equality and monitoring data  

The information below reflects data collected through the Report and Support platform. It includes submissions from students, staff, and others who have submitted a report.

Please note that this section of the reporting form is optional. Reporting parties may choose to skip the entire section or only answer selected questions.

The questions in this section relate to:

• Age
• Disability
• Ethnicity
• Gender
• Gender identity
• Religion or belief
• Sexual orientation

For information about the overall student and colleagues population and their equality data, please refer to the Equality Information Report 2025 - a publication that provides detailed Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) information for The University of Manchester.

Reporters' gender

A total of 886 reports were received. Of these:

• 522 were submitted by individuals identifying as female.
• 180 were submitted by individuals identifying as male
• 9 reporters chose to self-identify using their own terms.
• 113 reporters preferred not to disclose their gender.
• 62 reports had this section left unanswered.

Please note that the female and male categories also include individuals who identified as trans* women and trans* men. These were not separated further to protect anonymity and avoid potential identification.

*An accepted umbrella term which describes the range of people whose gender identity and expression does not match with the sex they were assigned at birth.  This includes, but is not limited to, transgender, genderqueer, agender and non-binary.  For example, a trans man is a man who was assigned female sex at birth.

The visual representation of reporters' gender also includes information and data on the types of reports and incidents submitted by each gender.

Reporters with disabilities among students and staff only

Out of 886 total reporters, 216 confirmed that they have a disability. This group includes:

• 140 students (out of 557 student reporters)
• 48 staff members (out of 191 staff reporters)

Please note that 61 reports had this question left unanswered.

Below is a breakdown of how reporters responded to the question about identifying as having a disability.

Disability Disclosure Rates Among Staff and Students

According to the Equality Information Report:

• 15.2% of all University staff disclosed a disability through the Disability Advisory Support Service (see page 17).
• Among undergraduate students, 7.9% have reported a disability (see page 49 of the same report).

According to Disability Advisory and Support Service (The University of Manchester) there are over 12,000 disabled students on their database. Not all are fully registered with DASS, but each has shared a disability in some form - whether via UCAS, self-referral, or referral from other University services. This equates to approximately 25% of the student population, of which 1.2% have reported an incident through the Report and Support platform.

If we look at the population of students who have not disclosed a disability to the university and the number of reports from these students, we can conclude that less than 1% reported an incident through the Report and Support platform.

Staff reporters with disabilities make up 0.4% of the total staff workforce and 2.5% of staff registered with DASS.

Similarly, if we look at staff who have not disclosed a disability and the number of reports from this group, we can conclude that less than 1% reported an incident through the platform.

Bullying, Harassment, and Discrimination are among the most frequently reported incidents by staff and students with disabilities, as presented below.

Focus on some of the reported incidents by Students and Colleagues with disabilities

Below we have focused on the number of reported incidents of Harassment, Bullying, Sexual Assault, and Sexual Harassment submitted by students and staff who identified as having disabilities.

Please note that reporting parties may select more than one incident type within a single R&S submission. As a result, some individuals may have reported both harassment and bullying, or other combinations of incident types. Additionally, we have combined staff reports of sexual assault and sexual harassment due to the lower number of submissions in these categories, in order to protect anonymity.

Staff without disabilities report more incidents overall; however, both groups experience bullying most frequently. Sexual assault and harassment represent a smaller proportion of total incidents for both groups, with only a slight difference in relative risk between staff with and without disabilities.

Students with disabilities report fewer incidents in these categories overall; however, they face a higher relative risk of sexual misconduct. The proportion of sexual assault and sexual harassment among their reported cases is significantly higher compared to bullying and harassment. This indicates that students with disabilities are disproportionately affected by sexual assault compared to students without disabilities, despite reporting fewer total incidents.

Overall among students, differences in reporting rates between disabled and non-disabled individuals are very small. Non-disabled students are slightly more likely to report any issue, including bullying and harassment, whereas disabled students are marginally more likely to report sexual harassment and sexual assault.

Reporters' ethnicity

Please note that 63 reporters decided not to answer this question.

Some of the self-identified ethnicities included: Arab & White, Middle Eastern, Indian, Irish Traveller, and Iranian. At the start of the 2025/26 academic year, we expanded the list of prescribed ethnicity options within our reporting form. However, we also retained the self-identification option, allowing reporters to describe their ethnicity in their own words if they prefer.

Students only reports:

Most reports came from White students, who primarily reported harassment (48 instances) and bullying (42 instances).

The second largest ethnic group among students were those from Asian or Asian British backgrounds, reporting bullying and harassment 30 times each.

Chinese students followed, with 21 reports of bullying, and 19 reports each of harassment and hate incidents.

Reporters' sexuality

The majority of reporters identify as heterosexual across both staff and student groups. However, a substantial proportion of students chose not to disclose their sexuality (164 out of 557), and a smaller number left the question unanswered. This indicates a notable level of non-disclosure among students compared to staff. Bisexual identification is more common among students than staff, while gay/lesbian identification remains relatively low for both groups.

Focus on selected incidents reported by both students and staff.

Bullying and Harassment dominate across heterosexual orientation. Sexual assault has higher number of reports among non heterosexual identities.

The following table outlines reported incidents, organised according to the sexual identity of the reporting students.

Heterosexual students reported the highest number of incidents (234), Prefer not to say remains the second largest group (164). Bisexual individuals report significantly more incidents (68) than Gay/Lesbian reporters (18).

Analysis of Incident Types and Sexual Identity Correlation:

• Heterosexual students report the highest numbers across all four categories (bullying, discrimination, sexual assault, and sexual harassment). This is likely influenced by their larger population size.
• Non-heterosexual students consistently report significant numbers, particularly in bullying and sexual harassment, indicating these issues may disproportionately affect this group.
• Students who prefer not to disclose their sexual identity report notably high levels of discrimination, which may suggest a link between non-disclosure and experiences of bias or stigma.

Bullying is the most reported issue overall. Heterosexual students account for the majority (84), but non-heterosexual students also report a notable number (23), suggesting they experience bullying at a significant rate relative to their population size.

Discrimination is the second most reported category. Interestingly, those who prefer not to disclose their sexual identity report discrimination more frequently (41) than non-heterosexual students (18), which could indicate a correlation between non-disclosure and perceived discrimination.

Sexual harassment is the third most reported issue. Non-heterosexual students report harassment more often (25) than assault (18), indicating harassment may disproportionately affect this group.

Sexual assault reports are high among heterosexual students (74), but non-heterosexual students also report at a similar proportion to discrimination (18). This suggests vulnerability across all groups.

Action Plan 25/26

1. To develop relationships with Schools in order to raise awareness of Advice and Response, as well as continuous Report and Support awareness campaigns amongst students and colleagues.
2. To introduce two‑way messaging to enhance the support available to individuals submitting anonymous reports. This functionality within Report and Support would enable direct communication with anonymous reporters, allowing us to provide more specific guidance and tailored assistance.
3. To further consider demographic data breakdown and actions.
4. To work with EDI to produce a calendar of 'safeguarding/EDI' events.
5. To foster A&R's data-management/data analysis offer through specialist training and job role development.
6. To include in quarterly reports a narrative on any relevant feedback from colleague new starter, one year and leaver surveys.
7. To increase the number of Harassment Support Advisors to improve our response to colleagues.
8. To develop a thematic lead within the team on male and LGBTQ+ victims.
9. There will be a shift toward a restorative just culture that prioritises early resolution, inclusive practice, and psychological safety – a number of colleagues in the People and EDI Directorates have undergone training which we hope to build on this year.