Phone-snatch fund transfer near 1147 South Wabash

To check this alert, SuperGrok Heavy 4.5 (an AI) read it in full 25 separate times, independently. Each read decided whether the message answers each of the six questions and gave a short reason. A final reviewer then weighed all 25 and wrote the plain-English verdict you see when you open a row. The score (for example 22/25) is how many reads agreed; the 25 individual reads are tucked underneath if you want to check them.

• Sourcepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree the college names itself and police/Campus Security are named agencies.

  Who is sending the alert and who is responding. People act faster on a message from a clearly identifiable, credible sender, such as a named department, the police, or a branded alert system, than on an anonymous notice. A branded signature counts.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and cites Chicago Police Department and Campus Security as agencies.
  2. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  3. present: The message names Columbia College Chicago and cites the Chicago Police Department and Campus Security.
  4. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department plus Campus Security are named agencies.
  5. present: The message addresses the Columbia College Chicago Community and names Campus Security and the Chicago Police Department.
  6. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  7. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself, and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  8. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  9. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and cites the Chicago Police Department and Campus Security.
  10. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department plus Campus Security are identified as agencies.
  11. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  12. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department plus Campus Security are named agencies.
  13. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  14. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  15. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department plus Campus Security are named agencies.
  16. present: The alert addresses the Columbia College Chicago Community and names the Chicago Police Department and Campus Security.
  17. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  18. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and cites Chicago Police Department and Campus Security as agencies.
  19. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  20. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  21. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and cites Chicago Police Department and Campus Security as agencies.
  22. present: University names itself as Columbia College Chicago and cites Chicago Police Department and Campus Security.
  23. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are identified as agencies.
  24. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are named agencies.
  25. present: Columbia College Chicago names itself, and Chicago Police Department and Campus Security are identified as agencies.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree taking a phone and transferring funds without consent names a specific theft.

  What the threat actually is. A complete warning names the specific danger, such as a shooter, a fire, a tornado, or a gas leak, rather than a vague emergency, because people decide what to do based on what they are facing.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: The alert describes a specific theft and unauthorized fund transfer rather than a generic incident.
  2. present: The alert specifies a theft scam in which offenders took a phone and transferred funds without consent.
  3. present: The text specifies a mobile phone theft and unauthorized funds transfer rather than a generic incident.
  4. present: Offenders taking a mobile phone and transferring funds without consent specify a theft or fraud rather than a generic incident.
  5. present: The alert describes a specific theft and unauthorized fund transfer from the victim's phone rather than a generic incident.
  6. present: Taking the victim's mobile phone and transferring funds without consent specifies a theft, not a generic incident.
  7. present: Obtaining the victim's phone and transferring funds without consent specifies a theft rather than a generic incident.
  8. present: Offenders taking the victim's phone and transferring funds without consent specifies a theft and fraud rather than a generic incident.
  9. present: Offenders took the victim's phone and transferred funds without consent, specifying theft and fraud rather than a generic incident.
  10. present: The alert describes offenders taking a mobile phone and transferring funds without consent, a specific theft or fraud threat.
  11. present: Offenders took the victim's mobile phone and transferred funds without consent, a specific theft or fraud.
  12. present: The alert specifies theft of a mobile phone and unauthorized transfer of funds, a specific threat rather than a generic incident.
  13. present: Obtaining the victim's mobile phone and transferring funds without consent specifies a theft rather than a generic incident.
  14. present: Offenders taking a phone and transferring funds without consent is a specific theft or fraud rather than a generic incident.
  15. present: The alert specifies a phone theft and unauthorized fund transfer rather than a generic incident.
  16. present: Offenders taking the victim's phone and transferring funds without consent is a specific theft and fraud threat, not a generic incident.
  17. present: Offenders taking the victim's phone and transferring funds without consent is a specific theft and fraud threat.
  18. present: Offenders taking a phone and transferring funds without consent is a specific theft and fraud, not a generic incident.
  19. present: Offenders taking a mobile phone and transferring funds without consent specify theft and fraud rather than a generic incident.
  20. present: Taking the victim's mobile phone and transferring funds without consent is a specific theft or fraud, not a generic incident.
  21. present: Offenders taking a mobile phone and transferring funds without consent is a specific theft threat, not a generic incident.
  22. present: The alert describes a specific theft and fraud in which offenders took a phone and transferred funds without consent.
  23. present: Offenders taking a mobile phone and transferring funds without consent specify a theft and fraud, not a generic incident.
  24. present: Offenders taking the victim's phone and transferring funds without consent specify a theft or fraud, not a generic incident.
  25. present: Offenders taking the victim's phone and transferring funds without consent specify a theft and fraud, not a generic incident.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree 1147 South Wabash Avenue is a location.

  Where the threat is. Saying whether danger is in a specific building, a part of campus, or area-wide lets people judge their own proximity and choose a safe direction. Without a where, a warning is hard to act on precisely.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: The incident is located near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  2. present: The incident is placed near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  3. present: The incident is placed near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  4. present: The incident is located near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  5. present: The incident is located near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  6. present: The incident is placed near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  7. present: The incident occurred near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  8. present: The incident occurred near 1147 South Wabash Avenue, a street address.
  9. present: The incident is placed near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  10. present: The incident is placed near 1147 South Wabash Avenue, a street address.
  11. present: The incident occurred near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  12. present: The incident is placed near 1147 South Wabash Avenue, a street address.
  13. present: The incident is placed near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  14. present: The incident is located near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  15. present: The incident is placed near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  16. present: The incident is placed near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  17. present: The incident is placed near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  18. present: The incident is located near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  19. present: The incident is placed near 1147 South Wabash Avenue, a street address.
  20. present: The incident is located near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  21. present: The incident is located near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  22. present: The incident is placed near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  23. present: The incident is located near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  24. present: The incident is placed near 1147 South Wabash Avenue.
  25. present: The incident occurred near 1147 South Wabash Avenue, a street address.
• Guidanceabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads find only a request for tips, which is not protective guidance.

  The protective action to take. A clear, specific instruction, such as shelter in place, evacuate, avoid the area, or run-hide-fight, drives faster and more correct protective behavior than describing the threat alone.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. absent: Recipients are only asked to provide tips to Campus Security and Chicago Police, which is not protective guidance.
  2. absent: The only ask is to contact Campus Security and CPD detectives with tips, which is not protective guidance.
  3. absent: Recipients are only asked to contact Campus Security or police with tips, which is not protective guidance.
  4. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security or detectives is a tips request, not protective guidance.
  5. absent: The only request is to contact Campus Security or police with information, which is asking for tips and not a protective action.
  6. absent: Asking anyone with additional information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tips request, not protective action.
  7. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tips request, not protective action.
  8. absent: Asking anyone with additional information to contact Campus Security and CPD is a request for tips, not protective guidance.
  9. absent: Asking people to contact Campus Security and detectives with tips is not a protective action.
  10. absent: The only request is to contact Campus Security or CPD Detectives with tips, which is not protective guidance.
  11. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security or CPD detectives is a tips request, not protective guidance.
  12. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and CPD detectives is a request for tips, not protective guidance.
  13. absent: Asking anyone with additional information to contact Campus Security is not a protective action instruction.
  14. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tips request, not protective action.
  15. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tip request, not protective action.
  16. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and Chicago Police is a request for tips, not protective guidance.
  17. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tip request, not protective action.
  18. absent: Asking people with information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tips request, not protective guidance.
  19. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tips request, not protective action.
  20. absent: Asking anyone with additional information to contact Campus Security or detectives is a tips request, not protective action.
  21. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and CPD detectives is a tips request, not protective guidance.
  22. absent: The only ask is to contact Campus Security and CPD with tips, which is not protective guidance.
  23. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tips request, not protective action.
  24. absent: Asking anyone with information to contact Campus Security and detectives is a tips request, not protective action.
  25. absent: Contacting Campus Security and detectives with information is a tips request, not a protective action for recipients.
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree April 7, 2026 at approximately 2:00 p.m. is a time cue.

  When the message applies. A timestamp, the word now or immediately, or a phrase like until further notice tells the reader whether the danger is current and how quickly to act.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: The alert gives the date April 7, 2026 and the clock time of approximately 2:00 p.m.
  2. present: The date April 7, 2026 and clock time of approximately 2:00 p.m. are given.
  3. present: The advisory gives the date April 7, 2026 and approximately 2:00 p.m.
  4. present: The alert gives the date April 7, 2026 and approximately 2:00 p.m.
  5. present: The alert gives the date April 7, 2026 and the clock time of approximately 2:00 p.m.
  6. present: The incident is dated April 7, 2026, at approximately 2:00 p.m.
  7. present: The text dates the incident to April 7, 2026 at approximately 2:00 p.m.
  8. present: The alert gives the date April 7, 2026 and the clock time approximately 2:00 p.m.
  9. present: The incident is dated April 7, 2026 at approximately 2:00 p.m.
  10. present: The incident is dated April 7, 2026 at approximately 2:00 p.m.
  11. present: The alert gives April 7, 2026 and approximately 2:00 p.m.
  12. present: The message gives the date April 7, 2026 and the clock time approximately 2:00 p.m.
  13. present: The alert gives April 7, 2026 and approximately 2:00 p.m.
  14. present: The alert gives the date April 7, 2026 and approximately 2:00 p.m.
  15. present: The alert gives the date April 7, 2026 and the clock time of approximately 2:00 p.m.
  16. present: The incident is given as April 7, 2026 at approximately 2:00 p.m.
  17. present: The alert gives the date April 7, 2026 and the clock time of approximately 2:00 p.m.
  18. present: The alert gives the date April 7, 2026 and the clock time of approximately 2:00 p.m.
  19. present: The incident is dated April 7, 2026 at approximately 2:00 p.m.
  20. present: The alert dates the incident April 7, 2026 at approximately 2:00 p.m.
  21. present: The alert gives the date April 7, 2026 and the clock time of approximately 2:00 p.m.
  22. present: The alert gives the date April 7, 2026 and a clock time of approximately 2:00 p.m.
  23. present: The incident is dated April 7, 2026 at approximately 2:00 p.m.
  24. present: The incident occurred on April 7, 2026 at approximately 2:00 p.m.
  25. present: The crime is dated April 7, 2026 at approximately 2:00 p.m.
• Impactabsent0/25

  Final assessment

  A majority find no stated consequence beyond naming the theft and transfer.

  What the hazard could do to the people in its path. Beyond naming the threat, a complete warning conveys its potential consequences or severity, such as that a tornado can level buildings or that a leak could be explosive, so recipients grasp how much danger they are in. Research on warning message content finds that a concrete impact statement helps people personalize their risk and act sooner.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. absent: The phone theft and fund transfer name the crime itself and do not add consequences or severity.
  2. absent: The unauthorized fund transfer names the crime itself rather than consequences or severity.
  3. absent: The message describes the crime itself but states no consequences or severity beyond naming the theft.
  4. absent: Unauthorized fund transfer restates the crime itself and does not describe separate consequences or severity.
  5. absent: Loss of the phone and funds describes the crime itself and does not state separate consequences or severity for recipients.
  6. absent: Unauthorized fund transfer names the crime itself and states no further consequence or severity.
  7. absent: Taking the phone and transferring funds names the crime itself and states no extra consequence or severity.
  8. absent: Phone theft and unauthorized fund transfer name the crime itself and state no further consequences or severity.
  9. absent: Unauthorized fund transfer is the crime itself, with no separate consequence or severity stated.
  10. absent: Funds transferred without consent restates the crime itself and does not describe broader consequences or severity.
  11. absent: The fund transfer restates the crime itself and does not convey separate consequences or severity.
  12. absent: Phone theft and fund transfer describe the hazard itself and do not state broader consequences or severity.
  13. absent: The phone theft and fund transfer describe the crime itself without separate consequence or severity language.
  14. absent: Unauthorized fund transfer is the crime itself and no extra consequence or severity is stated.
  15. absent: Describing the phone theft and fund transfer names the crime itself and does not add consequences or severity.
  16. absent: The message describes the crime itself and does not state consequences or severity beyond naming the hazard.
  17. absent: The phone theft and fund transfer name the hazard itself and do not add consequences or severity.
  18. absent: The phone theft and unauthorized fund transfer name the crime itself, with no added consequence or severity.
  19. absent: Unauthorized fund transfer restates the crime itself and does not add consequence or severity beyond the hazard.
  20. absent: Unauthorized fund transfer restates the crime itself and does not add separate consequences or severity.
  21. absent: The phone theft and unauthorized fund transfer name the crime itself and add no separate consequences or severity.
  22. absent: Funds transferred without consent names the crime itself and does not state separate consequences or severity.
  23. absent: The phone theft and fund transfer name the crime itself with no extra consequence or severity stated.
  24. absent: Taking the phone and transferring funds describes the crime itself without extra severity language.
  25. absent: Unauthorized fund transfer and phone possession describe the crime itself, with no added consequence or severity.