Vigilance against sexual assault, abuse and harassment in the workplace is a constant battle — and a particularly fraught one if the setting is the military, with its own unique culture of insular channels and command.

That’s why any attempt to improve processes should be lauded, but also closely watched, to ensure that those being victimized get the support that’s promised.

This month, the U.S. Army renewed its promise to help soldiers against sex crimes and misconduct, in the form of a one-year pilot program at seven military installations, including Oahu’s Schofield Barracks, to provide more resources and support.

The planned redesign of its Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention Program (SHARP) aims to create a “fusion directorate” at each post that will co-locate victim advocates, investigators and medical and legal teams all in one building.

The fervent hope is that this pilot will bring real and lasting improvements. SHARP itself is a program that dates back at leasta dozen years, when U.S. Army leadership decided to focus prevention efforts on behaviors that create environments conducive to sex assault and harassment. In Hawaii, in fact, it was seven years ago this weekend that Army brass opened the multidisciplinary SHARP Resource Center at Schofield.

But today’s nationwide SHARP revamp — at Schofield and sites such as Oklahoma’s Fort Sill, California’s Fort Irwin and North Carolina’s Fort Bragg — comes amid controversy that the program has fallen woefully short. The redesign was sparked by last year’s slaying of Spc. Vanessa Guillen at Fort Hood, Texas: killed by a fellow soldier, it was later alleged that Guillen had reported being sexually harassed and retaliated against at Fort Hood, but little was done about it. Her tragic case has refocused needed attention on sexual misconduct in the military, as well as on flawed chain-of-command protocols that muzzle reporting, and investigation, of cases for fear of retaliation.

It is estimated that some 20,000 U.S. military members are sexually assaulted annually. But of the 6,200-plus sex-assault reports made in fiscal year 2020, only 50 — 0.8% — ended in sex-offense convictions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

A post-Guillen investigation into Fort Hood’s SHARP program found recurring failure to protect soldiers going as far back as 2013. Testifying before Congress in March, investigators cited SHARP as a failed system, along with the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command. A disturbing key revelation: skeletal crews staffing these programs, often assigned as secondary duty and inexperienced to handle such complex cases.

All this serves as a necessary wake-up call to combat festering sex assault and harassment conditions. Gathering more personnel under one roof to ostensibly help victims is one thing — but they must be well-trained to support and to go after misconduct. True military justice comes with rooting out heinous crimes and perpetrators — for the good of the troops and an honorable institution.