A UC Independent Review released Nov. 14 criticized UCLA’s failure to plan and coordinate effectively during protests on campus last spring, leaving the university unprepared to manage escalating conflict.

The report was commissioned by the UC Office of the President and conducted by 21st Century Policing Solutions after counter-protesters stormed the UCLA Palestine solidarity encampment April 30. The report said that due to unclear roles, campus entities, administrators and responders struggled to protect student safety, causing “institutional paralysis.”

[Related: Pro-Israel counter-protesters attempt to storm encampment, sparking violence]

A primary failure identified in the report was ineffectiveness of leadership structures.

The report said that the purpose of the Incident Response Team’s meetings was not made clear to members, causing mass confusion. The Emergency Management Planning Group held disorganized meetings, delayed or continuously revisited critical decisions and excluded the UCLA Police Department from crucial planning discussions.

“This created a frenzied decision-making process and left University leaders ill-equipped to guide and gauge the level of police intervention,” the report said.

Communication challenges further hampered police response, the report states, adding that UCLA’s reliance on informal communication methods – such as text messages and ad hoc meetings – contributed to confusion and delays. The report found that officers were also left lost and confused due to their lack of training on how to navigate campus.

The review also faulted UCLA for failing to properly apply recommendations from the 2012 Robinson-Edley report, which outlined strategies to improve administrative responses to campus protests. As a result, the report states that the university repeated many past mistakes, causing preventable safety risks.

To address these shortcomings, the review proposes several reforms, adding that implementing them will encourage more effective future responses to a wide range of events on campus.

“These recommendations are designed to ensure that UCLA’s response to acts of civil disobedience aligns with its commitments to freedom of expression and the protection of the health, safety and well-being of the UCLA community,” the report states.

A primary recommendation of the report is for UCLA to develop detailed campus safety plans that clearly define roles, responsibilities and decision-making authority. It suggests implementing an Incident Command Structure, which would designate a single commander to act as a central point of contact during campus emergencies.

The report also highlighted the need for a more robust set of resources beyond law enforcement, including the creation of a team of full-time, unsworn professionals to handle community safety, providing an alternative to police intervention in nonviolent situations.

“Public safety is not a synonym for police,” the report states. “Campus safety and well-being must be preserved and promoted through any of an array of diverse campus resources.”

The report recommended strengthening UCLA’s Emergency Operations Center, which would be designed to support incident management and address information sharing and coordination activities “by gathering the right leaders and personnel,” the report states.

The report recommends UCLA host regular training exercises with all personnel included in response to disruptions to ensure efficient response plans. It added that the permitting process for on-campus events should also involve consultation with police and other stakeholders to identify potential safety risks.

“Had they (UCPD) been consulted, they may have been able to alert administrators to the danger of the two protest groups being so close to one another,” the report states.

Edward Maguire, a professor of criminology and criminal justice at Arizona State University, said in an emailed statement that the report does not address whether UCPD has appropriate guidelines for officers about how to do challenging and sensitive work.

“Training on the use of proper strategies and tactics can play a crucial role in whether such events result in conflict and violence,” Maguire said in the statement.

The report also recommends that UCLA share information with the community both during and after critical incidents. It states that increased trust between administration and stakeholders could better equip the university for future events.

Grace Hong, a member of Faculty for Justice in Palestine at UCLA, said she believes UCLA administration has become less transparent since the events of last spring.

“The administration can put out as many communiques as it wants, but if there’s no trust there, any of these attempts at transparency are going to fall flat,” she said.

Hong, a professor of Asian American studies and gender studies, added that after the spring protests, UCPD’s response was punitive, with officers arresting protesters hours after the event and denying immediate access to lawyers under restrictive interpretations of the law.

Hong said FJP did not participate in 21CP’s investigation because they did not want to engage with a consulting company made up of former police officers. She said she believes police brutalized protestors when clearing the solidarity encampment, released pepper gas and shot a student in the chest with a rubber bullet.

“Why would people trust a consulting company ran by ex-police?” she said. “There is a question of trust and transparency.”

[Related: Op-Ed: 21st Century Policing Solutions investigation is a ‘sham’ shielding UC, police]

Maguire, whose research focuses primarily on policing and violence, added in the statement that the report’s recommendations do not truly address the heart of the matter.

“Because the report largely ignores key issues like the policies and training in place for responding to protests, UCLA could implement every recommendation from this independent review and still not be ready to respond skillfully to protests,” Maguire said in the statement.

In a statement, a UCLA spokesperson said the university is committed to enhancing campus safety and learning from the events of last spring.

“We appreciate the work that went into producing the report and will continue to implement the recommended reforms – many of which are already underway,” the spokesperson said in the statement.

The report ends by urging UCLA to fundamentally reassess its approach to campus safety, emphasizing a need for transparency and structural reforms.

“UCLA must ensure that it is clear – within the administration and in communicating outward – on the role of the police to ensure the foundation for a responsive, equitable and effective safety system of campus safety in the future,” the report concludes.