Overview

Campus safety is a top priority for institutions, students, and parents alike. By analyzing campus crime data from the past three years, we gain insights into patterns and priorities for creating safer learning environments.

Liquor and drug-related offenses dominate campus crime reports, making up the majority of incidents. This highlights the need for targeted interventions, such as substance abuse education and enforcement of campus policies.

Yearly Change in Crime Types

While major crime types dominate the overall trends, smaller categories have shown notable shifts. We visualize the year-over-year differences in crime totals, revealing both alarming and promising trends.

Among the most striking observations is the sharp rise in Motor Vehicle Theft, which tops the chart with an increase of over 4,000 cases between 2021 and 2022. This upward trajectory calls for immediate attention to parking lot security and theft deterrence.

Stalking has also seen a significant uptick, requiring stronger protections for victims and better awareness campaigns. Meanwhile, categories like Dating Violence and Burglary show noticeable changes, pointing to opportunities for intervention.

Encouragingly, some crimes, such as Incest, have remained at a low baseline. Rape and Fondling have shown declining patterns, offering a glimmer of hope that education, awareness campaigns, and institutional policies are making an impact.

Understanding campus crime trends is just the beginning of addressing safety challenges in educational institutions.

What shapes campus crime patterns?

Key influences include state crime rates, school control and rankings, political climates, and local economic conditions. Examining these factors reveals how broader contexts intersect with campus safety, offering opportunities for targeted solutions.

State Crime & Campus Crime

While the campus crime data is informative, analyzing it along with the state crime data could present us with a more comprehensive perspective of the national crime.

While Alcohol Offense is the top crime type across campuses, it only takes up a very limited portion of the state crimes. On the other hand, the second-highest crime type on campus is also the dominat offense in state crime, being Drug Offenses. Compared to the top campus crimes, violent crime appears to take up a significant portion.

Now, if we compare state crimes and campus crimes side-by-side, we observe that while New Mexico and Alaska have the leading state crime rate reported across the nation, the highest campus crime concentration actually occurs in Colorado (Boulder) and Indiana (West Lafayette and Bloomington). We would assume that the density of state crime aligns with that of the campus crime, and this brings us to think about the issue of data humanism: Whether or not the campus crimes are being reported truthfully.

College Types and Rankings

When choosing a college, students typically prioritize factors like the institution’s type—public or private—and its academic ranking. However, how do these considerations relate to campus crime rates?

Based on the chart data, crime rates vary more among private universities than public ones. The spread of crime rates (interquartile range) is wider for private universities (0.41%) compared to public universities (0.28%).

Also, the median crime rate is higher for private universities (0.33%) than for public universities (0.22%). Mike Chapman’s article, “Perceptions About Public v. Private College Crime Rates Aren’t Accurate,” reveals that public schools don’t necessarily have higher crime rates than private schools when adjusted for enrollment size. Per capita calculations show private colleges exceed public institutions in crime rates, challenging common assumptions.

Blue dots represent university rankings decreasing from left to right, and colored lines show crime rates — grey indicate lower rates, while red signify higher rates.

Among the top 70 QS-ranked universities, Stanford, the University of Michigan, and NC State have notably higher crime rates (red lines). Universities ranked beyond 70 generally display lower and more uniform crime rates (mostlygrey lines), suggesting better campus safety. Even though the crime data is sourced from the authoritative U.S. Department of Education, we remain skeptical about whether some institutions have accurately reported their data.

Political Climate

The common belief that liberal areas inherently have higher crime rates often extends to campuses. However, we uncover trends that challenge assumptions and highlight regional disparities.

To compare campus crime rates (2020) with state political leanings (based on the 2020 election results), the color shows the clear partisan divide of states (Democratic-leaning and Republican-leaning), while the cartogram states are resized based on their average campus crime rates, revealing a shift in proportions.

Republican-leaning states account for 56.97% of the total adjusted area, compared to 43.03% for Democratic-leaning states. This suggests that campuses in Republican-dominated states experience proportionally higher average crime rates, challenging the common narrative associating liberal areas with higher crime.

This disproportionate representation in the cartogram also highlights a significant contribution from certain Republican-leaning states, most notably Texas.

Average Campus Crime Rate vs. State Political Tendency

As the largest outlier, Texas alone drives much of this imbalance, with an average campus crime rate of 19.83%—a figure that far exceeds the rates observed in both Republican and Democratic-leaning states, which generally remain below 8.5%.

Such a stark contrast invites deeper scrutiny into the unique factors at play in Texas, including its extensive campus networks, the influence of statewide policies, and potential disparities in crime reporting practices.

Unemployment Rate

Does higher unemployment mean more campus crimes?

As unemployment rises, campus crime rates fall. This is most evident in areas with unemployment above 10%, where crime consistently stays below 5%. Why might this happen?

One possibility is underreporting—colleges in high-unemployment areas may lack resources or fear reputational harm, leading to fewer crimes being logged. Another factor could be campus specific dynamics: despite higher unemployment, these areas show large absolute employment numbers, suggesting active communities. High student engagement or other local factors may influence crime rates. These insights suggest the trend may reflect reporting practices and campus dynamics rather than a direct link between unemployment and crime.

Conclusion

Campus crime is a complex issue shaped by regional, institutional, political, and socioeconomic factors. Our analysis revealed surprising patterns, such as higher crime variability at private universities and unexpected links to political and economic contexts.

These findings raise questions about the transparency and truthfulness of crime reporting, emphasizing the need for ethical practices grounded in data humanism. To create safer academic environments, targeted measures and truthful reporting must be prioritized.