In this piece, I summarise the key themes from the OfS “Sexual misconduct survey 2025” analysis report, and the follow up analysis of student groups and study contexts. I also reflect on what the survey reveals about students’ experience of reporting sexual misconduct to a university, because that is where students most often feel unsupported, confused, or simply worn down by process.
Who is the Office for Students?
The Office for Students is the independent regulator of higher education in England. It is a non-departmental public body sponsored by the Department for Education.
In practical terms, the OfS regulates universities and colleges through a system of registration and registration conditions, with the ability to impose sanctions where universities breach those conditions. It also has a clear stated aim, to help ensure that every student, whatever their background, has a fulfilling experience of higher education that enriches their lives and careers.
Sexual misconduct matters in that regulatory and practical context because it goes to student safety, student wellbeing, equality of opportunity, their academic aspirations and the quality of the student experience. The OfS survey work is part of building an evidence base about what students actually experience, and how effectively universities respond.
The survey in brief: what the OfS asked and who responded
The OfS sexual misconduct survey was delivered as a follow up set of questions after the 2025 National Student Survey, and it was open to final year undergraduate students at English providers who met the eligibility criteria. The OfS received just under 52,000 responses, which is large enough to identify meaningful themes, while still requiring some caution because response rates varied across groups.
The survey focused on:
- experiences of sexual harassment (unwanted behaviours of a sexual nature)
- experiences of sexual assault or violence (unwanted sexual contact)
- confidence in seeking support and reporting, and
- intimate personal relationships between staff and students.
The follow up report expands the analysis by looking at additional characteristics and contexts, including subject of study, provider type, study location, domicile, parental higher education, and disability type.
Key findings: who is most likely to experience sexual misconduct?
A headline finding is that sexual misconduct is not confined to one “type” of student or one “type” of institution. However, the OfS analysis does identify groups who report higher prevalence, and these patterns are broadly consistent with those observed in wider contexts, suggesting that sexual violence and harassment are experienced disproportionately by similar marginalised groups.
Students more likely to report sexual harassment and sexual assault or violence
Across the main report, the groups more likely to report experiencing sexual harassment and sexual assault or violence include:
- women
- students who are lesbian, gay or bisexual, or who report another sexual orientation
- those who were under 21 when they started their course
- disabled students
- certain religion or belief groupings, including Jewish, no religion, and any other religion or belief
The expanded analysis adds important nuance. It highlights higher reported prevalence among:
- students who study somewhere not local to their home address
- students reporting a mental health condition or multiple and other impairments
- EU domiciled students compared with UK students (with rest of world students reporting lower prevalence)
- students with at least one parent with a higher education qualification, and
- students at higher tariff providers.
The OfS also reports variation by subject area, with higher reported prevalence in areas such as language and area studies, veterinary sciences, and medicine and dentistry. My experience is that reporting and responding students have a range of subject background, so I do not believe much weight can be given to this particular aspect of the analysis.
A realistic profile of reporting students
It is tempting to talk about “the typical victim”, but the survey is clear that experiences cut across the student population. Indeed, that is my own experience when I come to providing help to students who have either been accused of sexual misconduct or have previously experienced such behaviour: whilst any student may experience sexual harassment or misconduct, these matters disproportionately affect students from marginalised backgrounds. What the findings do show, however, is that students who already face barriers in higher education such as disability, mental health conditions, or being part of a sexual minority are often reporting higher exposure to harassment and assault or violence.
This is important because the impact of misconduct rarely sits neatly in one box. It affects wellbeing, housing, social life, attendance, concentration, and sometimes a student’s ability to continue on their course. These consequences are often central to what a fair university response should address.
What forms of sexual misconduct are most commonly reported?
The OfS report distinguishes between harassment behaviours and unwanted sexual contact.
Sexual harassment: common behaviours
For sexual harassment, the most common behaviour was ‘making sexually suggestive looks or staring at your body’. The next most common pattern included unwelcome sexual comments or sexualised questions about someone’s private life, body, or appearance.
This is a useful reminder that harassment is often experienced as a set of behaviours that can be minimised or normalised in student culture, even when it is persistent or intimidating. The fact it occurs frequently does not make it acceptable and certainly does not make it harmless.
Sexual assault or violence: common experiences
For unwanted sexual contact, the most frequently selected category involved unwanted sexual touching or contact, including being touched in a sexual manner, kissed, pinched, or rubbed up against the private areas of the body (lips, breast/chest, crotch or bottom), or having clothes removed, without consent.
Where and by whom?
Many incidents happen outside a university setting, but still involve someone connected to the university, often another student. In other words, a university cannot simply say “it happened off campus” and treat it as none of its concern. The findings make clear that connections to the university community are significant.
Reporting sexual misconduct to the university
I found this part of the report particularly interesting as this is how I regularly come into contact with those who are in any way involved in allegations of sexual misconduct at university. The statistics are important, but the reporting story is where the real gap between policy and reality becomes visible, not just on these findings but on my own day to day experience when providing advice to students.
Most students do not make a formal report
A striking finding is that only a small minority of students who experienced sexual harassment in the last 12 months made a formal report or complaint to their university or college. The overall reporting rate for harassment is reported as 13.2 per cent in the OfS analysis.
For sexual assault or violence, the expanded report gives an overall formal reporting rate of 16.2 per cent, again indicating that most students do not formally report even serious unwanted sexual contact.
I do not quote those figures to pressure anyone into reporting. I quote them because they underline the reality that universities design reporting systems as if students will automatically use them. The evidence suggests students often do not, and universities need to understand why. Furthermore, the systems used by universities for handling sexual reports need to improve.
Reporting is not evenly distributed across groups
The OfS analysis also shows that reporting behaviour varies significantly across student groups and contexts. For harassment, the expanded analysis points to higher reporting rates among groups such as distance learners and students on other undergraduate qualifications, and variation by domicile and subject area. For sexual assault or violence, the expanded analysis again shows wide variation by study location type and level of study, with particularly high reporting rates in some small subgroups that should be treated with caution due to sample sizes.
The practical point from this analysis is that a single institutional approach to reporting does not work for all students. A process that feels accessible to one group may feel risky or impossible to another. Universities need to understand why there is underreporting.
When students do report, experiences are mixed
The OfS asked students who had reported incidents to rate their experience of the university’s formal reporting process. The results are not uniformly negative, but they are far from reassuring.
For harassment reports, students were more likely to describe their experience as good than poor, but a substantial proportion still rated it poor, with a further group sitting in the middle. For sexual assault or violence reports, a higher proportion rated the experience as good, but again a significant minority rated it as poor.
From a student perspective that mixed picture may be experienced as uncertainty: Will I be believed? Will the university take this seriously? Will my studies be protected? Will I get a fair hearing? Will there be a fair investigation? Will I be kept informed?
Confidence about where to seek support is not universal
The OfS asked all respondents about confidence in where to seek support within their university about an experience of sexual harassment or misconduct. A majority of students reported confidence, but a substantial minority did not, and confidence varies across characteristics.
The expanded analysis adds further detail. Students reporting a mental health condition or multiple and other impairments show lower confidence, and some groups, including lesbian, gay or bisexual female students, show notably lower confidence about where to seek support.
That matters because confidence is not just a feeling. In practice, it can determine whether a student discloses at all, whether they seek interim measures, and whether they engage with a process once it begins.
What students often experience when they report
The OfS data helps explain the scale of underreporting and mixed satisfaction. In my experience, students often encounter predictable pressure points in university reporting systems. If you are considering reporting, or you have already started, these are the areas where you should expect clarity but, if necessary, be persistent.
1. Confusion about routes: disclosure versus formal report
Universities may have multiple entry points: welfare, safeguarding, student services, online portals, department staff, and sometimes specialist sexual violence liaison roles. The OfS findings on confidence suggest that students do not always know where a route leads to.
A key early question is, are you making a disclosure for support, or initiating a formal process, or both? Universities should be able to explain the difference, the likely next steps, and the choices available.
2. The immediate impact: interim measures and academic protection
For reporting students, the most urgent needs are often practical: safety planning, accommodation changes, timetable adjustments, no contact arrangements, extensions, or placement considerations. The survey shows many incidents involve someone connected to the university, often another student, which makes these protections essential.
A good process does not wait for an investigation outcome before thinking about how a student can continue studying. It is important that both reporting and responding students are treated fairly in this respect, not prejudging outcomes.
3. Delay, drift, and inconsistent communication
Students tell me that the hardest part is not one meeting; it is the weeks and months of not knowing what is happening. The OfS findings that a sizeable minority rate reporting experiences as poor align with this kind of lived experience.
You should expect:
- a clear written summary of your report
- realistic timescales
- regular updates
- a named contact person, and
- clarity on confidentiality and information sharing.
If a university cannot provide these basics, that may be a sign of deeper procedural concerns.
4. Fear of being disbelieved or blamed
The OfS survey does not diagnose the reasons students do not report, but the scale of underreporting and lower confidence in some groups is consistent with what students describe: fear of not being taken seriously, fear of being judged, and fear of repercussions in social or academic life.
A well-run university process should be fair and sensitive, without requiring a student to prove themselves at the first hurdle.
5. Fairness for the responding student
Sexual misconduct processes must be fair to both parties. If you are responding to an allegation, you are entitled to understand the case against you and to participate meaningfully. This is not a technicality. If a university process is unfair, it can collapse, and that can retraumatise the reporting student while also damaging the responding student.
This is one reason why I welcomed the OIA consultation on a new section of the Good Practice Framework on handling harassment and sexual misconduct. In my earlier blog I explained that the draft guidance, if implemented well, could embed processes that are fair, clear, and sensitive for reporting students and legally robust for responding students.
6. What happens when the university gets it wrong: the OIA route
The OIA is the external complaints scheme for students once internal university procedures are complete. Its Good Practice Framework is designed to help providers develop fair processes and is also a useful reference point for students and advisers.
In my work, I see cases where a student’s core complaint is not only the underlying incident, but the way the university handled the report. Delay, poor communication, inadequate support, perceived bias, or failure to implement interim measures are common themes. The fact that a significant minority of students rate their reporting experience as poor makes it unsurprising that these issues reach the OIA.
What the survey reveals overall
For me, the OfS sexual misconduct survey reveals three uncomfortable truths.
First, sexual misconduct is a mainstream student experience, not a marginal one. The overall reported prevalence of harassment and unwanted sexual contact is too high for any university to treat this as an occasional problem.
Second, risk is not evenly shared. Certain student groups report higher prevalence, including women, sexual minority students, disabled students, and students with mental health vulnerabilities.
Third, reporting systems are not yet earning student trust. When only a small minority of students make a formal report, and when experiences of reporting are mixed, universities should treat that as an urgent call to improve accessibility, communication, support, and fairness, for both reporting and responding students.
How I can help: support for reporting students and responding students
I advise students and their parents on complex higher education issues, including sexual misconduct, complaints, appeals, and OIA complaints. I support both reporting and responding students in need of clear advice and robust representation through university investigations and disciplinary processes.
If you are a student who has experienced sexual harassment or sexual assault, I can help you:
- understand your university’s policies and reporting options
- prepare a clear report or complaint with the right supporting evidence
- request interim measures to protect your studies and wellbeing
- challenge delay, unfairness, or poor communication, and
- escalate matters through internal stages and, where appropriate, to the OIA.
If you are responding to an allegation, I can help you:
- obtain clarity about the allegation and the evidence early
- prepare your response and manage procedural deadlines
- ensure the process is fair, unbiased, and consistent with university regulations, and
- protect your academic position while the investigation proceeds.
I take a pragmatic approach. My focus is on helping you make decisions, protecting your wellbeing and legal position, and pushing for a process that is fair, clear, and workable.
If you are dealing with university sexual misconduct issues right now, early advice can make a real difference to your current anxiety and outcomes. We offer a fixed fee online consultation so if you want to talk through your story, with no obligations beyond that consultation and with certainty of cost, please contact me.