A Defense Department review earlier this month found that a succession of leaders at the United States Air Force Academy were to blame for a decade of sexual assault and harassment at the Colorado school. While it is helpful to know the shortcomings of the leaders, none of whom were named in a publicly released version of the report, the inspector general had few specific recommendations for ensuring that such abuse does not happen again. Responsibility for changing the culture at the academy then falls to Congress, which is expected to hold hearings on the report early next year.

The first thing a returning Congress should do is assure the Air Force that allowing victims of rape to remain confidential when reporting such crimes seems to work in the rest of the world. The Air Force remains conflicted on this issue. A civilian review commission, set up by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to investigate charges that sexual assaults went unreported, uninvestigated and unpunished at the academy, last year said that confidential reporting was critical.

When the sexual assault scandal erupted, the Air Force Academy dropped its confidentiality policy and reverted to the Defense Department’s policy of mandatory reporting. Air Force officials say that if a victim reports a rape, she must be identified because military personnel have a duty to report any crime they are aware of and because confidentiality impairs unit cohesion.

Fortunately, the Pentagon is moving beyond this outdated mind-set and developing a confidentiality provision for sexual assault cases. “We have learned that providing confidentiality to victims will actually increase the probability that cases will be reported,” said David Chu, deputy undersecretary of defense for personnel.

That it took so long for the military to come to this realization highlights Congress’ second challenge: improving the quality of military leaders and their attitudes.

In a recently released report, the Pentagon’s inspector general wrote, “Many leaders in positions of authority could have been better role models, could have been more vigilant in inspecting those placed under their command, failed to guard against and suppress sexual misconduct between and among cadets … and failed to hold cadets accountable for such misconduct.”

The inspector general’s report found “a problematic cadet subculture” including “negative male attitudes and actions toward women” and, most damning, a level of order and discipline “below the level expected at a premier military institution funded at taxpayer expense.” At the academy, female cadets felt pressured not to report rapes and assault for fear of being ostracized or punished, not only by their classmates, but also by their commanders.

What is missing from Gen. Joseph Schmitz’s report, aside from disciplinary action, which may not be warranted at this point, is recommendations for ensuring that such leadership failures are rectified in the current administration of the academy and Air Force generally.

Responding to the report, Air Force Vice Chief of Staff Gen. T. Michael Moseley said “true cultural change takes time.” In this case, the service, and the women trained at its academy do not have the luxury of time.

As Sen. Susan Collins, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said when the investigation began in 2003, nominating students to the service academies is one of her happiest duties. She was angry to discover that she has been nominating young women to attend an academy where they may be in danger.

Removing a sign at an academy entrance that said “Bring Me Men” is a start, but only that.