Alright, let's get straight to it. Caldera Arts, a Portland-based nonprofit, is dealing with a serious situation: the arrest of Zackary James Perry, a former employee, on multiple sex crime charges. The details are grim: 1st degree rape, sexual abuse, sodomy, the works. The alleged incidents occurred at Camp Caldera, their arts camp near Suttle Lake.
What's interesting from my perspective is the claim that Caldera Arts conducts "thorough background checks" and adheres to a "rule of three" – at least two staff with one youth, or vice versa. Sounds good on paper, right? But does it actually work?
Let's break down this "rule of three." On the surface, it seems like a reasonable attempt to prevent abuse. More eyes, less opportunity for misconduct. But here's where the data analyst in me kicks in: what's the actual statistical probability of preventing abuse with this rule? It's not zero. But is it significantly lower than, say, a "rule of four" or simply better training and oversight? That's the question no one seems to be asking.
The problem, as I see it, isn't necessarily the number of adults present, but the quality of their supervision and the culture within the organization. A poorly trained, disengaged staff member is just another body in the room. And if the culture tolerates or even normalizes inappropriate behavior (even unintentionally), the rule of three becomes a fig leaf – a superficial measure that provides a false sense of security.
Consider this: the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office (JCSO) is encouraging anyone with additional information to contact them. This suggests that the initial reports might just be the tip of the iceberg. How many other incidents went unreported? How many victims felt unable to come forward? These are the unknowns that keep me up at night.
And this is the part of the report that I find genuinely puzzling. Caldera Arts emphasizes its background checks. Fine. But background checks are backward-looking. They tell you about past behavior, not future intentions. A clean record doesn't guarantee someone won't commit a crime. It's a binary data point that ignores the complexities of human behavior.
Moreover, Caldera Arts clarified on Facebook that Perry was a "Youth Advocate and Media Coordinator," not a "camp counselor." (A distinction, I assume, they believe is important.) But does this distinction really matter to a victim of sexual abuse? Does it change the power dynamic? I suspect not. It feels like a PR move, an attempt to distance themselves from the situation. Camp Caldera says no indication youth impacted in sexual abuse case; suspect not counselor - Central Oregon Daily
The fact that staff raised concerns before the JCSO got involved is significant. It suggests that the internal mechanisms for reporting and addressing misconduct did function, at least to some extent. Caldera Arts fired Perry and contacted law enforcement – a responsible action. But the question remains: why did it take so long? What were the warning signs that were missed?
I've looked at hundreds of these filings, and this particular sequence of events is tragically common: initial concerns dismissed, escalating misconduct, and then a reactive response. The proactive measures are always the hardest to implement and, frankly, the most boring to fund. It's far easier to point to a "rule of three" and say, "We're doing everything we can."
The "rule of three," thorough background checks… these are all risk mitigation strategies. They're designed to reduce the likelihood of something bad happening. But they're not foolproof. They don't eliminate the possibility. And when it comes to protecting children, "likely" isn't good enough. We need certainty. And certainty, in this context, is an illusion.
The real solution, as I see it, lies in creating a culture of transparency, accountability, and zero tolerance. It requires ongoing training, open communication, and a willingness to listen to and believe victims. It means empowering staff to speak up without fear of reprisal. It means constantly reevaluating and improving safety protocols. It's a never-ending process, not a box to be checked.
Caldera Arts' "rule of three" is a well-intentioned, but ultimately insufficient, safeguard against abuse. It's a paper shield in a world that demands concrete protection.
