Formal Resolution Procedures for Title IX Prohibited Offenses involving Employee Respondents  

Formal Resolution Procedures for Title IX Prohibited Offenses involving Employee Respondents  

These Procedures apply to all campuses in the US and Canada.


These Procedures outlines the steps in the investigation of cases involving allegations of Title IX Prohibited Offenses through a Formal Resolution Procedure where employees are Respondents under the university’s Policy on Sexual and Gender-Based Harassment and Title IX (the “Policy”). Capitalized terms used and not otherwise defined in these Procedures are defined in the Policy. The Policy and these Procedures may address aspects of the same topic, with the Policy stating the university’s general policy and the Procedures providing more specific information concerning university processes. These Procedures must therefore be read in conjunction with the Policy. 

At all times, the university reserves the right to determine which policies and procedures apply and which actions may be taken. Except as otherwise noted, proceedings under these Procedures do not preclude separate and additional proceedings under one or more other university policies or procedures. 

1. As soon as is practicable after receiving a report of conduct that may constitute a Prohibited Offense, an Investigator from the OUEC will contact the Complainant identified in the report to schedule an initial meeting to refer them to the Policy and review rights and support options, including: 

  • options for filing a Formal Complaint;  
  • the steps involved in both the Informal and Formal Resolution Procedures under the Policy; 
  • confidentiality of university resolution procedures; 
  • referrals to law enforcement, counseling, medical, academic, or other resources, as appropriate; and 
  • supportive, remedial and protective measures that can be provided during the pendency of a resolution procedure, as appropriate. 

If the Complainant agrees to disclose information regarding the allegation, including the identity of the Respondent, the date, location, if known, and the general nature of the alleged violation of Policy and agrees to file a Formal Complaint, the Complainant will complete and sign their Rights Form.  

2. The Title IX Coordinator will, in collaboration with appropriate university departments, assess the safety and well-being of the parties involved, as well as potential threats to the university community, and will determine the need for any immediate action, interim measures or Emergency Removal. 

3. The Title IX Coordinator will determine whether the complaint states a potential violation of the Policies. 

  • If the Title IX Coordinator determines that the Complainant’s allegations, if true, do not constitute a potential violation of the Policy, or that OUEC has no jurisdiction in the matter, OUEC staff will provide appropriate referrals to both on and off-campus resources. If new information is subsequently provided to OUEC, OUEC may reevaluate whether the allegations constitute a potential violation of the Policy and/or whether OUEC has jurisdiction to investigate. 
  • If the Title IX Coordinator determines that the Complainant’s allegations, if true, constitute a potential violation of the Policy, and a Formal Complaint is made, the Title IX Coordinator will assign an Investigator who will initiate the Formal Resolution procedure into the allegations. 

4. We Care Case Managers will be assigned to students who are Complainants under this process. Case Managers will serve as the students’ main point of contact to provide interim measures and support resources (see Policy, Section III.C). 

5. Notice of Allegations: Upon initiation of the investigation, the Investigator will notify the Respondent of the investigation in writing via their university email account. 

The notice will: 

  • provide a summary of the alleged Prohibited Offense including the identity of the Complainant, the date, time and location, if known; 
  • identify potential Policy violation(s) and the link to the Policy; 
  • explain the prohibition against Retaliation;  
  • explain that the parties are entitled to equal opportunity to access the relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence or an accurate description of this evidence. 
  • provide an explanation of the investigation process as described herein;  
  • provide a statement informing the parties that the Policy prohibits knowingly making false statements, including knowingly submitting false information during the Resolution Process; 
  • detail how a party may request disability accommodations during the Resolution Process; 
  • include a statement that the Respondent is presumed not responsible for the alleged conduct and that a determination regarding responsibility is made at the conclusion of the Formal Resolution process; and 
  • Offer available support resources.  

6. During the investigation, the parties will have an equal opportunity provide information and participate in the Formal Resolution Procedure. The Investigator will request to meet separately with the Complainant and the Respondent for an interview.  

  • Either party and any witnesses may choose to participate or decline to participate in the investigation. The Investigator may continue to investigate the alleged Prohibited Offense and produce an Investigative Report based on the available information.  
  • Both the Complainant and the Respondent will be asked to provide relevant documentary evidence, including electronic or other records of communications between the parties or witnesses (e.g., photographs, text messages, emails, phone records, messages through social media sites, receipts, etc.) and the names of any and all relevant witnesses with information about the alleged Prohibited Offense. Witnesses cannot participate solely to speak about an individual’s character. 
    • Medical and counseling records are privileged records that Parties are not required to disclose in an investigation under the Policy. However, if a Party believes these records may contain relevant and material information, a Party may voluntarily choose to share such records with the Investigator only after waiving the privilege in writing. Any records provided by a Party become part of the investigative record and are available for review by the other Party. 
  • Both the Complainant and the Respondent will have the opportunity to suggest questions to the with the Investigator to ask of another Party and/or witnesses.  
  • Parties involved in the investigation may, under limited and extenuating circumstances, request to submit a written statement instead of participating in an interview with the Investigator. 
  • The Investigator may also review any documentation, reports, video or other items the Investigator deems relevant to the allegation.  

7. The Investigator, in consultation with the Title IX Coordinator, has discretion to determine the relevance of any witness or evidence and may exclude irrelevant, immaterial or unduly prejudicial information in preparing the Investigative Report.  

The following types of evidence, and questions seeking that evidence, are impermissible regardless of whether they are relevant:  

  • Evidence that is protected under a privilege recognized by Federal or State law or evidence provided to a confidential employee, unless the person to whom the privilege or confidentiality is owed has voluntarily waived the privilege or confidentiality;  
  • A party’s or witness’s records that are made or maintained by a physician, psychologist, or other recognized professional or paraprofessional in connection with the provision of treatment to the party or witness, unless the university obtains that party’s or witness’s voluntary, written consent for use in its resolution procedures; and  
  • Evidence that relates to the complainant’s sexual interests or prior sexual conduct, unless evidence about the complainant’s prior sexual conduct is offered to prove that someone other than the respondent committed the alleged conduct or is evidence about specific incidents of the complainant’s prior sexual conduct with the respondent that is offered to prove consent to the alleged sex-based harassment. The fact of prior consensual sexual conduct between the Complainant and Respondent does not by itself demonstrate or imply the complainant’s consent to the alleged sex-based harassment or preclude determination that sex-based harassment occurred. 

8. The Investigator will provide each interviewed party a written Interview Summary for review via their university email account. The interviewed party will review the summary and, within two (2) business days of receipt, will confirm the summary’s accuracy or provide a written response. Failure to respond within two (2) business days will be considered confirmation of the accuracy of the Interview Summary. The Investigator will review any written response by an interviewed party and will incorporate information into the Investigative Report deemed relevant in the discretion of the Investigator.  

9. At the conclusion of the initial investigative phase, the Investigator will share a Draft Summary of Facts gathered during the investigation with Complainant, Respondent and their respective advisors for their review and response. The Draft Summary includes all of the relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence or an accurate description of this evidence, that will be used in determining a finding. The identities of individuals named in the report may be redacted as deemed necessary in the sole discretion of the investigator. The parties may choose to submit a written response to the Draft Summary of Facts to the investigator(s) within ten (10) business days to: 

  • clarify information;  
  • provide an additional explanation; 
  • submit additional questions for the investigator(s) to ask of other parties or witnesses; or 
  • identify any other relevant information for the Investigator to consider.  

The Investigator will then incorporate any new, relevant evidence and information obtained through the Parties’ review of the Draft Summary of Facts, and follow-up meetings into an Investigative Report. Thereafter, the Investigator will determine if additional investigation is required. Any further investigation will follow the steps above. If no further investigation is needed, the investigator(s) will finalize the Investigative Report. 

10. The Investigator will submit the Investigative Report to the Title IX Coordinator for their review to assess its thoroughness, reliability and impartiality. The Title IX Coordinator may request more information or additional investigation. 

  • If the Title IX Coordinator determines that the Investigative Report contains insufficient information to constitute a potential violation of the Policy, the case will be closed and the decision will be simultaneously communicated to the Complainant and the Respondent by the Title IX Coordinator or designee in writing. There is no appeal of this decision. 
    • Facts established as part of an investigation that reveal conduct that may violate other university policies, procedures or commonly accepted norms of conduct will be referred to the appropriate office for review. 
  • If the Title IX Coordinator determines that the Investigative Report contains sufficient information to constitute a potential violation of the Policy, the case will be referred by the Title IX Coordinator to an Administrative Hearing. 

11. The Title IX Coordinator will send a pre-hearing meeting notice to the university email account of the Complainant and the Respondent. The pre-hearing meeting, which will take place at least ten (10) days prior to a hearing, will be conducted as separate meetings between the party, their advisor and the Title IX Coordinator to:  

  • Review the Investigative Report that forms the basis of the complaint;  
  • Explain the charges of the Policy violation filed against the Respondent; 
  • Explain the process for resolving the case; 
  • Explain that the Title IX Coordinator will appoint a Decision Maker to conduct the Administrative Hearing; and 
  • Review the process for challenging participation by the Decision Maker for perceived bias or conflict of interest. 

If a Complainant or Respondent does not schedule their pre-hearing meeting within five (5) business days of receiving their notice, the party forfeits their right to participate in a pre-hearing meeting and the Title IX Coordinator may move forward and schedule the hearing without the party’s input. 

12. The Complainant and the Respondent will each have the option to present a written or oral statement to the Decision Maker.  

Such statements, or the decision to give an oral statement, should be provided to the Title IX Coordinator at least five (5) business days prior to the Hearing. However, the Administrative Hearing is not a forum for the parties to present new facts, information or witnesses. The Parties are expected to provide all relevant facts, information and witnesses to the Investigator during the investigation. Evidence offered after that time will be evaluated by the Decision Maker for relevance. Any new relevant evidence will be admitted to the record if: 

  • all Parties and the Decision Maker agree to the new evidence being included in the hearing without remanding the Complaint back to the investigator, and 
  • the evidence is not duplicative of evidence already in the record, and 
  • it is not impermissible, and 
  • the new evidence was not reasonably available prior to the conclusion of the Final Investigation Report. 

If the above criteria are not met, but the evidence is deemed materially relevant and not duplicative, the Decision Maker may, at their discretion, engage in any of the following actions:  

  • Delay the hearing; 
  • Provide the Parties with at least five (5) business days to review the relevant evidence. 
  • Refer the case back to the Investigator for further investigation or analysis. 

Any Party or witness scheduled to participate in the Administrative Hearing, must have first participated in the investigation process. 

13. The Decision Maker will permit each party’s Advisor to ask the other party and any witnesses all relevant questions and follow-up questions, including those challenging credibility. Such cross-examination at the live hearing must be conducted directly, orally, and in real time by the party’s Advisor of choice and never by a party personally.  

Only relevant cross-examination and other questions may be asked of a Party or witness. Before a Complainant, Respondent, or witness answers a cross-examination or other question, the Decision Maker must first determine whether the question is relevant and explain any decision to exclude a question as not relevant. 

If a Party or witness does not submit to cross-examination at the live hearing, the Decision Maker cannot draw an inference about the determination regarding responsibility based solely on a party’s or witness’s absence from the live hearing or refusal to answer cross-examination or other questions. 

The Decision Maker may choose to pose additional questions to the Parties or a witness at the hearing. To the extent credibility is in dispute and relevant to one or more of the allegations, the Decision Maker may question them in order to assess their credibility.  

However, the Decision Maker may direct a re-opening of the investigation if they have unanswered questions or at their discretion. 

14. Following the Administrative Hearing, the Decision Maker will deliberate and render a decision, utilizing the information articulated in the Investigative Report and information learned at the Administrative Hearing to determine whether a preponderance of the evidence establishes that a Policy violation occurred. 

Thereafter, the Decision Maker will provide both the Complainant and the Respondent written Notice of the Decision Maker’s finding, including a description of the procedural steps taken by the university from the receipt of the Formal Complaint through the Decision Maker’s finding and the rationale for why a Policy violation was or was not found.  

As appropriate, a copy of the Notice will also be forwarded to the administrative official immediately responsible for supervision of the Respondent and the appropriate Vice President, Dean, or Director for the unit in which the Respondent works for their review and determination of disciplinary action. The Decision Maker may, as appropriate, provide these offices with recommended action. 

The Decision Maker will also explain the appeals process to both parties through the Notice. 

15. The Complainant and Respondent may notify the Title IX Coordinator of their request to appeal the findings of Policy violations within five (5) business days of receiving written Notice of the Decision Maker’s finding.  

The written appeal will be provided to the non-appealing party, who may, but is not required to provide a response within two (2) business days. The Title IX Coordinator will appoint an Appeal Officer to review the written appeal to determine whether it meets any of the following grounds for appeal: 

  • new, relevant information not reasonably available by the completion of the investigation;  
  • procedural error that prevented the appealing party from a fair opportunity to present information and/or witnesses.  
  • the Title IX Coordinator, Investigator, or Decision Maker had a conflict of interest or bias for or against complainants or respondents generally or the individual complainant or respondent that affected the outcome of the matter. 

Once the appeal materials are submitted, the non-appealing party and the Investigator will be notified of the appeal and given an opportunity to provide a response within two (2) business days.  

  1. If an appeal is granted, the university will take appropriate steps as follows:  
  • If an appeal is granted on the basis of new information, the Appeal Officer will refer the matter back to the Title IX Coordinator to determine if the new information alters their original decision. The Appeal Officer, the parties, and if required witnesses, may be reconvened to review only the new information. The Appeal Officer will render a decision based on all the relevant information provided. 
  • If an appeal is granted for procedural error, the process will reset to the point at which the procedural error occurred and proceed from that point. 
  • If an appeal is granted based on bias from the Title IX Coordinator, Investigator or Decision Maker, the Appeal Officer will notify the Title IX Coordinator to determine next steps. 

17. At the conclusion of the appeal, both the Complainant and Respondent will be notified, in writing, of the outcome by the Appeal Officer, and the Investigative Report will be forwarded to the appropriate office for consideration of the findings of fact. Any disciplinary action taken based upon the Investigative Report is governed and controlled by other applicable university policy.