“The era of sweeping it under the rug is over,” said Karin Roland, who heads organizing efforts for UltraViolet.

The campus sexual assault epidemic has been grabbing headlines for months, with dozens of higher education institutions, including some of the nation’s most prestigious, coming under fire for egregiously mishandling the issue. Nearly 100 schools are under investigation as part of a federal Department of Education probe into their compliance with Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits gender discrimination but is also used as a tool to regulate sexual violence policies. Meanwhile, a White House task force has developed guidelines in its effort to solve the issue, including a recommendation that every college conduct a campus-climate survey to gauge the prevalence of problems like sexual violence.

In some of the more high-profile controversies—such as the federal complaints involving Columbia University, which for its part has since responded with a website about its commitment to “Sexual Respect”—the school administrations are accused of discouraging rape survivors from reporting their experiences and failing to properly adjudicate cases. Unfortunately, it’s easy to see why the institutions might have taken this approach: Better support means more transparency, and that’s not good for the schools’ reputations. The Princeton Review, it seems, is reinforcing this mentality by failing to provide information on which schools appropriately respond to reports of sexual violence—and which ones don’t.

Robert Franek, The Princeton Review’s senior vice president and publisher, said in a statement that the company is doing its due diligence to address the sexual-violence epidemic, pointing to its webpage on campus safety. The site offers tips on how parents and prospective students can ask colleges about their sexual assault policies, but it doesn’t delve into school-specific data. Earlier this year, in response to feedback from students and parents, the review also added links on its website to 1,200 colleges’ Clery Act reports, the documentation schools are required under federal law to post online annually detailing campus-safety information such as crime statistics.

“Every year, colleges and organizations suggest new lists and information,” he said in the statement. “We believe student safety is paramount and we are constantly looking at new ways to provide the best data for students and prospective students.”

But Roland doesn’t buy it. The Clery Act information, she noted, is self-reported by the schools themselves. The Princeton Review’s rankings, on the other hand, are based entirely on student surveys—a democratic tactic the company proudly describes on its website. If the review developed a sexual-violence list, those rankings would reflect the campus atmosphere according to the students; it would avoid the conflict-of-interest risks inherent in self-reported data and afford respondents the off-the-record anonymity integral to getting accurate results on sensitive subjects such as this. Roland even speculated that The Princeton Review has an incentive not to take action on the issue, pointing to its strong relationships with the very schools that might rank poorly on this front.