Trust, Transparency, and Accountability

**IMPORTANT: This article contains mentions of gun violence and mental health. If you feel uncomfortable with these topics, please refrain from reading.

The days August 28 and September 13 still live in the back of our minds, a wake up call for the ongoing events transpiring throughout the country. (1) Rather than advocating once more for common sense gun reform measures as I did in my previous article “A Day in the Life”, I decided to adopt another frame. (2)

Over the past three weeks, I thought about this issue as one about trust. How might institutions safeguard the trust of their constituents especially in situations regarding health? While this article will focus on gun violence at the University of North Carolina (UNC), I will discuss other instances of declining trust. I hope to discuss the lead poisoning on UNC’s campus that was found in early 2022 and which I documented in my article “Is Health a Priority?”. (3) I also hope to recontextualize the issue of declining faith in the CDC after the COVID-19 pandemic which I previously described in my article “The Glue that Binds.” (4)

While the second gun violence incident on UNC’s campus was not necessarily an act of violence culminating in injury or death, it was a clear demonstration of the administration’s inability to protect its constituents (namely students, staff, and faculty on campus and Chapel Hill community members). But, rather than focusing on the issue, I would like to focus on a potential solution. What factors cause declining trust? And, is this a policy or financial issue?

Former president of the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators, John Ojeisekoba argues that “it all does not amount to finances and money.” (5) Many UNC students have complained about rising feelings of insecurity especially given the fact that campus security fees doubled in 2021, amounting to $13 million of funding for campus security in 2022. Logistically, however, campus security fees support a wide variety of programs including officers and equipment, sexual violence prevention, substance abuse prevention, suicide prevention, and Title IX compliance.

Ojeisekoba states that unless a would-be shooter tells someone, identifying acts of gun violence before they happen is almost impossible. Thus, he advocates for more cost-effective methods for students and employees to report suspicious behaviors.

The brightline is that communication and transparency solve problems. If an institution’s constituents do not have much say in what policies are enacted and how the institution itself is run, the leaders of that institution should at least clarify why those policies were made and why the institution is run in the way it is. Not everything is financial: improving transparency by enhancing connection between administrators, members, and constituents is clearly an inexpensive means for constituents to learn what institutions are doing.

This is clearly a national issue, so am I arguing that all institutions that lack credibility are inherently non-transparent? Below, I provide a graph aggregating faith in American institutions over time. (6)

I would argue that many institutions, particularly smaller decentralized organizations, have remained transparent, yet the data seems to suggest a growing generalized sense of distrust towards American institutions. So what does this mean in action?

Lead Poisoning at UNC

In the Fall of 2022, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill’s drinking water fixtures were tested as part of an academic project; the fixtures tested positive for lead, a deadly contaminant in the human body. It is not a stretch to argue that everyone (students, faculty, and administration) was surprised by the contamination; however, UNC administrators had knowledge about a growing maintenance backlog. (7) As the oldest public university, UNC has buildings dating back to the 18th and 19th centuries. In 2023, the university had a backlog of $357 million for HVAC, $82 million for plumbing, $70 million for fire prevention, and $47 million for lift maintenance.

While administrators may have known about the backlog, I, and I am sure many other students and faculty, did not. I argue that a key component of trust is maintaining transparency regarding important data and goals. If university constituents had known about this backlog, perhaps they would have questioned whether frequently used fixtures were being routinely tested. While administrators did not need to take action immediately after recognizing the backlog, simply sharing university data with stakeholders and constituents would have provided people with the ability to learn more. Hiding this data results in questions: Why was the data hidden in the first place? Where was the funding going? Why were water fixtures not being routinely tested? Trust is not built in a single day; yet, by providing stakeholders and constituents with the space to question the status quo, trust may increase over time.

CDC Post-Pandemic

CDC Director Dr. Mandy Cohen describes strategies to restore trust in the organization which has declined as a result of health politicization, structural and racial inequities, and contradictory information provided over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. Dr. Cohen states that constituents frequently state “We understand that the CDC is important, but we need to see more about what they do. We need to understand it better.” (8) I believe that institutions and industries in general cannot thrive outside the public eye. Accountability is an important part of trust; stakeholders need to be aware of what is happening and have the power to potentially say “no.”

In “The Glue that Binds,” I argue that “while COVID has pushed public health research and organizations like the CDC into the public conversation, how and why research is conducted remains difficult to understand.” I pose that the CDC and science in general should be held more accountable to stakeholders (the general public) and data used to make policy-related decisions be publicly available for individuals to inspect, analyze, and question for themselves. By hiding behind public officials like Dr. Anthony Fauci, the CDC has kept itself concealed from the public eye raising questions about the organization’s purpose, function, and true goals. By maintaining a greater level of accountability, the CDC might increase trust in the long-term as stakeholders realize they have some say in the decision-making process.

Gun Violence at UNC

The fact that two similar gun-related events occurred on campus within the span of a month means that public perception was never going to be positive; even if UNC had implemented every possible prevention measure, trust would have eroded. This issue seems to be similar to the prior Lead Contamination at UNC. The fact that security fees increased and that the students and parents paying the fees did not know where the money went evokes questions. What specific policies or security measures are in place now in October that were not in place back in August? How do these policies actively prevent individuals from bringing firearms on campus? What additional mental health resources are available to support students who need it? I pose that because those affected by gun violence do not know how institutions are changing their policies post-violence, a growing divide is forming between institution leaders and those affected by gun violence. Solving this issue involves transparency and accountability. Institutions must be transparent regarding policies put in place, clearly communicating changes to stakeholders and constituents. Institution leaders must also be accountable to stakeholders, changing or adapting policy when necessary.

The two gun violence incidents at UNC and several other apparent oversights have resulted in declining trust in the institution as a whole. Transparency and accountability are critical to maintaining trust; institutions must use open channels of communication while respecting the opinions of stakeholders and constituents. Trust must be earned over time; perhaps, in the future, as the situation stabilizes and as university administrators update long standing policies to prevent similar oversights from repeating themselves, constituents’ trust in UNC will be restored.