Note: The information on this page is intended to be a summary. For a complete statement of our Policy Prohibiting Discrimination, Harassment, Sexual Misconduct, and Retaliation (August 2020), please click here. In the event of any inconsistencies, the Policy controls.
The University uses investigations to resolve sexual discrimination, sexual harassment, sexual misconduct, and related retaliation complaints. Investigations are used to determine: (1) whether or not the conduct occurred, and (2) if the conduct occurred, what actions the University will take, which includes imposing disciplinary consequences on the respondent and providing remedies to the complainant.
A "Complainant" is an individual who is the focus of the conduct prohibited by the University’s Policy Prohibiting Discrimination, Harassment, Sexual Misconduct, and Retaliation or who experiences the negative effects of prohibited conduct. A Complainant may or may not be the person who initially makes a report of prohibited conduct.
A "Respondent" is an individual who is alleged to have engaged in conduct prohibited by the University’s Policy Prohibiting Discrimination, Harassment, Sexual Misconduct, and Retaliation.
All individuals leading the Title IX response from the initial investigation to the completion of the process (i.e., investigation, decision, appeal), have received relevant training on how to conduct an investigation and hearing process that protects the safety of individuals and promotes accountability. The proceedings will be conducted by individuals who do not have an undisclosed conflict of interest or bias for or against the complainant or the respondent. If the complainant or respondent believes any individual in the proceeding is not suited to perform their role because of bias or conflict of interest, they must notify the Title IX Coordinator upon learning the identity of the individual and their role.
Please click the link below to view the Title IX Process Flowchart.
Standard of Evidence
The standard of evidence used in the investigation of sexual harassment, stalking, and sexual violence complaints, including domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking, will be the “preponderance of the evidence” standard, wherein the investigators are to determine whether it is more likely than not that the behavior in question occurred and constituted a violation of University policy.
To encourage and support the reporting of incidents of sexual misconduct, students who participate as witnesses or complainants in sexual misconduct investigations will not be held accountable (limited immunity) for violations of the Student Code of Conduct that may have occurred at the time of or as a result of the incident in question (for example, being under the influence of alcohol, marijuana or other controlled substances), unless the University determines that the violation was egregious. Egregious violations include, but are not limited to, actions that places the health or safety of another other person at risk.
The University will investigate when it receives a report of discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct, or retaliation, unless a request for alternative resolution is made. In most cases, the University will assign two individuals to act as investigators. The investigators will interview the complainant, respondent, and pertinent witnesses, and review any relevant written or other documentary evidence.
Investigator(s) prepare Investigation Report which include investigation finding and recommended sanctions. Investigator(s) review their Investigation Report with complainants and respondents prior to finalization.
Review of Investigation Report
At the conclusion of the investigation the investigator(s) will submit an Investigation Report to the Title IX Coordinator. The Investigation Report will contain the investigation findings and rationale for the findings and recommended sanctions. Shortly after receiving the Investigation Report, the Title IX Coordinator will meet, separately, with the complainant and the respondent to review the Investigation Report. By that point, each party will have had an opportunity to review (with the investigator(s)) investigation materials/notes/etc. In other words, the Investigation Report is unlikely to contain any surprises. The Title IX Coordinator will begin to prepare both parties for the Hearing.
Selection of Hearing Panel and Hearing Process
After review of the Investigation report a Hearing Panel will be appointed. Hearing Panel consist of a three-member hearing panel of faculty and staff members as well as a non-voting Hearing Chair. The Title IX Office will do its best to diversify each Panel—both in terms of social identities and affiliations within the University. Complainant(s) and respondent(s) will be provided a list of all potential panel members prior to the Hearing Panel and will be given the opportunity to express concern about any potential panel member’s ability to act impartially in hearing their case. Decisions related to panel members’ participation in their hearing will be made by the Title IX Office. The Chair may remove any individual who impedes the hearing process. The Chair will act to promote a civil and respectful proceedings.
During a hearing the complainant(s) and respondent(s) will have the following rights:
Outline of Hearing Procedures:
The complainant and respondent each have a right to appeal the Decision. If an appeal is made, it must be in writing and it must be received by the Title IX Coordinator no later than seven (7) calendar days after the Decision is received. The Title IX Coordinator does not decide on the appeal, but will appoint a senior administrator at the University to render a decision.
Appeals are not for the purpose of having a second investigation or a second review of all facts. The only proper bases for appeal include: (1) evidence not previously available to, and not withheld by the appealing party from, the investigators (or Hearing Panel) that could influence the outcome; (2) material defects in the process leading to the decision; or (3) consideration of whether the sanction is disproportionate to the findings.
If any party submits a timely first appeal, the opposing party(ies) will be notified of the appeal and provided a copy of the written appeal. The opposing party(ies) will have five (5) calendar days to submit to the Title IX Coordinator a response to the appeal; a response to the appeal is not required. The senior administrator who hears the appeal will have seven (7) calendar days from the date that all appeal materials have been submitted to provide a written decision.
During the investigation (and any following proceedings), a complainant and a respondent are entitled to be accompanied by an Advisor. An “Advisor” is any person chosen by a Complainant or Respondent to assist the party in navigating the procedures called for in this policy. Commonly, an Advisor is a professor or other University employee, a parent/relative, a friend, or an attorney). Any costs for an Advisor (e.g., an attorney’s fee or travel for a member of the family) are at the Complainant’s or Respondent’s own expense. Advisors do not directly participate in proceedings under this policy (except for conducting cross-examinations during hearings pursuant to Section III(C)(3)) but provide emotional support and behind-the-scenes guidance. An individual who has a conflict of interest cannot simultaneously serve as an Advisor. For example, a friend who is a witness in a matter cannot serve as an Advisor for that matter. Advisors who do not abide by these restrictions, who are disruptive, or who otherwise fail to abide by reasonable directions provided by individuals authorized to conduct investigations or proceedings under the Policy, will be removed and a substitute Advisor may be selected.
Proceedings will ordinarily be completed within the time frame, as set forth in the University’s Policy. However, with good cause, reasonable extensions of the time for completion of the proceedings will be permitted. In such cases, the complainant and respondent will be provided with written notice, by the appropriate university official, of the extension and the reason for the extension.