Home / Articles / A New Report on a Michigan Boarding Scho
Survivor Rights Center · 2026-07-30 · 6 min read

Reviewed by Survivor Rights Center · Updated 2026-07-30

Key takeaways

  • A 97-page independent investigation into Interlochen Center for the Arts, a Michigan boarding school and summer arts program, documents alleged misconduct described by former students, with accounts spanning the 1950s through the 2010s.
  • Michigan's current civil statute of limitations lets most survivors sue only until age 28, a cutoff set in 2018 that was not written to apply retroactively to older claims.
  • State lawmakers are backing a five-bill package that would open a one-year revival window for expired claims and raise the ongoing civil filing cutoff to age 48.
  • The report itself changes no law. Advocates are using its findings to press legislators who have not yet scheduled a vote on the pending package.
RENEWED MI PUSH
Michigan's Statute of Limitations Fight, By the Numbers
97 pages
Length of the independent investigation into a Michigan boarding school and summer arts program
1950s-2010s
Decades covered by alumni accounts described in the report
28
Current age cutoff for most civil childhood sexual abuse claims in Michigan
48
Proposed age cutoff under the pending Justice for Survivors package
1 year
Length of the proposed revival window for previously expired claims

Figures drawn from the July 2026 investigation into Interlochen Center for the Arts and coverage of Michigan's pending civil statute of limitations legislation.

What the new investigation found

An outside investigator collected accounts from dozens of former students of Interlochen Center for the Arts, a well known boarding school and summer camp in northern Michigan, describing conduct ranging from inappropriate remarks to sexual assault. The resulting 97-page report covers a period stretching from the 1950s into the 2010s and involves multiple adults who worked at or were otherwise connected to the school over that stretch of decades.

The school's president responded publicly to the findings, calling them "heartbreaking" and acknowledging the harm described by former students. The report does not function as a legal filing or a court judgment. It is an independent review commissioned in response to alumni complaints, and its conclusions are now being cited by lawmakers and survivor advocates rather than by prosecutors or civil courts.

Why so many of these accounts cannot become lawsuits today

Michigan raised its civil filing deadline for childhood sexual abuse claims in 2018, in the aftermath of the Larry Nassar case, extending the cutoff to a survivor's 28th birthday. That change moved the deadline forward for future claims, but it did not reopen claims that had already expired under the shorter cutoff that applied before 2018. Anyone whose window had already closed by the time the new law took effect remains barred from filing, regardless of when the underlying conduct is documented.

Advocates for changing this point to a pattern seen across the country: survivors frequently do not disclose childhood sexual abuse until well into adulthood, often decades after the abuse occurred and long after any current filing deadline has passed. That gap between when abuse happens and when a survivor is ready to come forward is the central argument lawmakers are making for extending, rather than merely maintaining, Michigan's current cutoff.

What the pending legislative package would change

A state House member and a state Senate member are backing a package of bills often referred to as the Justice for Survivors package. As proposed, it would create a temporary one-year window allowing survivors whose civil claims have already expired to file them, and would separately raise the ongoing civil filing cutoff from 28 to 48 for future claims going forward.

The package has not yet received a floor vote in either chamber. Advocates say the renewed attention from the Interlochen report is meant to push leadership to schedule hearings and votes rather than leaving the bills to stall, as similar proposals have in past sessions. Nothing in the package would alter Michigan's separate criminal statute of limitations, which follows its own, different set of rules.

What this means if you or someone you know attended a similar institution

Civil filing deadlines for childhood sexual abuse vary considerably from state to state, and even within a single state they can change from year to year as legislatures act. A claim that looks time-barred today could become viable if a revival window opens, and a claim that is currently viable could close if a deadline is not extended in time, which is why timing matters even before any lawsuit is filed.

This article is educational and is not legal advice. Anyone considering whether a past experience at a boarding school, camp, or any other institution might still be eligible to file a claim should confirm the current rules with a licensed attorney in the relevant state. The National Sexual Assault Hotline (RAINN), at 800-656-4673, is free, confidential, and available 24/7, whether or not a legal deadline has already passed.

What a Civil Revival Window Usually Includes

States that adopt a temporary civil window for childhood sexual abuse claims tend to build them around a similar set of features. Here is what to look for when trying to understand whether one might eventually apply to a past experience.

  1. A limited filing period: Revival windows are almost always temporary, often lasting one to two years, rather than a permanent repeal of the filing deadline.
  2. An extended age cutoff going forward: Many legislative packages pair the temporary window with a higher standard age cutoff for claims going forward, not just for past conduct.
  3. Coverage of institutions, not only individuals: These laws typically let a survivor sue the school, camp, or organization that employed or supervised the person accused, not only that person directly.
  4. No change to criminal deadlines: A civil revival window affects lawsuits for damages. On its own, it does not reopen the door to criminal prosecution, which follows a separate set of rules.
  5. A defined start and end date: Once a revival window closes, claims that were not filed during the open period generally return to being time-barred under existing law.
  6. State-specific eligibility rules: Age at the time of the abuse, when a claim would otherwise have expired, and which institutions are covered can all vary significantly from state to state.

Frequently asked questions

No. The report is an independent investigation, not legislation. It has renewed public and legislative attention on Michigan's civil statute of limitations, but any change would still require the Legislature to pass, and the governor to sign, a new bill.

Under the law adopted in 2018, most survivors can currently file a civil claim until their 28th birthday. That change was not retroactive, so survivors whose claims had already expired under the older, shorter cutoff generally cannot use it to revive them.

As proposed, the package would open a one-year window allowing certain previously expired claims to be filed, and would separately raise the ongoing civil age cutoff to 48 for future claims.

The National Sexual Assault Hotline (RAINN), at 800-656-4673, is free, confidential, and available 24/7, regardless of whether a legal filing deadline has already passed.

This article is general educational information, not legal advice. Confirm specifics with a licensed attorney in your state — most consult for free. If you need support now, the RAINN hotline is 800-656-4673, 24/7.

Talk to Someone Who Can Help

Free and confidential. Tell us only what you’re comfortable sharing and we’ll connect you with the right support.

This is not legal advice and submitting it creates no attorney–client relationship.

Message received

Someone will reach out within one business day. If you need help now, call RAINN at 800-656-4673.