Complaint Investigative Process

When a formal complaint is filed, the AVP-Title IX Officer will meet with the Complainant to discuss process options and procedures and answer any questions they may have.

After meeting with the Complainant, the AVP-Title IX Officer will issue a Notice of Charge letter to the Respondent and schedule a meeting with them to discuss process options and procedures and answer any questions they may have.

Both parties are permitted to have an advisor of their choice present throughout the complaint investigation process. Parties may choose their own advisor, who may be an attorney the party has retained, or parties may select an advisor from the list provided by the AVP-Title IX Officer of trained faculty and staff who volunteer to serve in this role at the University.

After the AVP-Title IX Officer meets with both parties and it is determined that there will be an investigation, the AVP-Title IX Officer will send a letter to both parties identifying the Investigative Team assigned to their case.

The Investigative Team will send outreach to the parties and any witnesses to schedule their respective interview. The Investigative Team will prepare a summary of each person’s interview and will provide it to them to review for accuracy. Both parties and witnesses will also have the opportunity to submit relevant evidence to be reviewed by the Investigative Team.

After completing the interviews and reviewing the evidence, the Investigative Team will prepare a Draft Investigative Report which will be provided to the parties. This draft report will include the Investigative Team’s recommended factual findings, analysis, determination, and, if applicable, recommended sanctions, as well as the interview summaries and relevant evidence gathered during the investigation. The parties will have 10 business days to review the material and provide written feedback to the Investigative Team.

• The Investigative Team will review any feedback to the Draft Investigative Report submitted by the parties and may conduct additional investigation as needed. The Investigative Team will update the Draft Investigative Report and issue a Final Report to the parties. The Final Report will include any feedback submitted to the Draft Investigative Report by the parties.
• Within 10 business days of the issuance of the Final Report, the parties must inform the Investigative Team whether they (1) accept the recommendations of the Investigative Team, (2) request a hearing, or (3) have reached a mutually agreeable resolution between the parties. Either party may request a hearing.
• If at least one party requests a hearing, the process will move to the hearing stage. If neither party requests a hearing, the recommendations of the Investigative Team will be made final and will be enforced by the University.

• Once a hearing is requested, the case will be referred by the AVP-Title IX Officer to the DHO and all communication about the hearing should be directed to the DHO.
• The DHO will identify a mixed-gender Hearing Panel of three trained faculty members and will provide the parties with 10 days’ advance notice of the hearing date. Hearings may be held in person or virtually.

• In preparation for the hearing, the Panel will review the Investigative Team’s final report and related materials including the summaries of the statements of the parties and witnesses, the parties’ feedback, if any, to the Draft and Final Reports, and the relevant evidence gathered during the investigation.
• Both parties and their advisor will have access to the final report and related materials in preparation for the hearing. Participation remains voluntary; parties decide whether and to what extent they wish to participate in the hearing.

At the beginning of the hearing, the parties will have an opportunity to give an opening statement to the Hearing Panel. The opening statement should not exceed 15 minutes.

The Hearing Panel may ask questions of the parties. Following the Hearing Panel’s questions, the Advisor for each party may ask questions of the other party, subject to determinations of relevancy and other appropriate considerations by the Panel. During the hearing there is no direct communication or contact between the parties.

The Hearing Panel may ask questions of witnesses, including the assigned Investigative Officer. Following the Hearing Panel’s questions, the Advisor for each party may ask questions of the witnesses, subject to determinations of relevancy and other appropriate considerations by the Panel.

Before the conclusion of the hearing, both parties will have an opportunity to give a closing statement to the Hearing Panel. The closing statement should not exceed 15 minutes.

• After the hearing has concluded, the Hearing Panel will deliberate in private to decide whether the evidence shows, by a preponderance, that the Respondent’s behavior violated the University’s Sexual Misconduct Policy. A finding of responsibility requires a majority vote from the panel.
• The Panel will issue a written decision to the parties with respect to responsibility and, if applicable, sanctions. Either party can appeal the Panel’s decision to the Disciplinary Appellate Officer (DAO).

Either party may submit a written appeal of the Panel’s decision within 10 business days of the issuance of the Panel’s decision. A copy of the written appeal will be provided to the Disciplinary Appellate Officer (DAO). The request for an appeal will be shared with the other party, and they will have the opportunity to provide a written response to the DAO within 10 business days. Any written response to the appeal will be shared with the other party.

Letters of appeal should specifically state whether the objection is to the judgment of responsibility, the sanction, or both, and explain in detail the grounds for appeal, which include:

• That the process was not consistent with University policy and the result was arbitrary or capricious;
• That there were procedural irregularities;
• That there was demonstrated bias or conflict of interest on the part of any fact-finder; and
• That new evidence has been brought forward that would alter the outcome of the hearing.

The DAO will review the Investigative Team’s report and supporting evidence, the audio record from the Panel Hearing, the panel’s written decision, the appeal and any response, and any other materials the DAO deems relevant.

The DAO will issue their decision in writing and will provide copies to the DHO, the Provost, the Senior Vice President for Institutional Affairs and Chief Diversity Officer, the Complainant, the Respondent, and any other appropriate parties.