Article II

Main Content

Case Coordinator and Subcommittee Hearing Procedures

Section 2.01 – Definitions

  1. Advisor. A person who provides a respondent or complainant support, guidance, or advice. Respondents and complainants may be accompanied by an advisor of their choosing to any meeting with an CC or to any proceeding to which the advisee is invited.
  2. Business Day. Any weekday when university offices are open for official business.
  3. Case. A situation of which the Office for Student Conflict Resolution is aware and in which a student respondent has been alleged to have violated the Student Code.
  4. Case Coordinator (CC). A person responsible for investigating and/or deciding alleged violations of the Student Code by undergraduate and graduate students on behalf of the university. The SCSD has designated as CCs all professional staff in OSCR as well as specific professional staff in University Housing and in select colleges. In addition, the Director is empowered to designate other trained university employees as CCs as needed. For students in the College of Veterinary Medicine (who are not alleged to have violated the Sexual Misconduct Policy), the Dean of the college or their designee may serve as the CC, though this responsibility may be delegated to the Office for Student Conflict Resolution. For students in the Carle Illinois College of Medicine (who are not alleged to have violated the Sexual Misconduct Policy), the Dean or their designee may serve as the CC. Procedures for the College of Law (for cases not involving allegations of sexual misconduct) are located in Appendix C. Regardless of the student respondent’s college affiliation, however, cases involving allegations of sexual misconduct may only be assigned to CCs that the Director recognizes as having been trained, on an annual basis, on the issues related to dating violence, domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking and on how to conduct an investigation and hearing process that protects the safety of complainants and promotes accountability.
  5. Complainant. A person who claims to have been or is reported to have been a victim of sexual misconduct. Cases that are determined by the Title IX Coordinator or their designee to include allegations of Title IX Sexual Harassment in an education program or activity of the university against a person in the United States are addressed through the procedures described in Appendix D.
  6. Director (or Executive Director). The Director of the Office for Student Conflict Resolution or their designee.
  7. Evidence. Any information, including testimony, collected during an investigation that is relevant to the determination of whether the respondent has violated the Student Code. Neither information that solely addresses the character of any person nor information about any complainant’s prior sexual conduct with anyone other than the respondent (unless such information is offered to prove that someone other than the respondent is responsible for the alleged conduct) is evidence.
  8. Investigative Materials. A summary of any interviews conducted and any documents or other materials collected during an investigation that are relevant to the determination of whether the respondent has violated the Student Code.
  9. OSCR. The Office for Student Conflict Resolution.
  10. Panel. A group of members of the appropriate subcommittee on student conduct selected to decide a case. A Panel of the Subcommittee on Sexual Misconduct consists of three members. Panels of the Subcommittees on Undergraduate Student Conduct and Graduate Student Conduct consist of at least five members. All Panels must include at least one student member.
  11. Panel Chair (or Chair). The faculty or staff member designated by the Director to run a hearing.
  12. Party. Any person identified as a complainant or a respondent with respect to a given case.
  13. Respondent. A student who is alleged to have violated the Student Code.
  14. Sanction, Educational. An assignment, requirement, or task educationally related to a policy violation.
  15. Sanction, Formal. A disciplinary status imposed by the university in response to a policy violation.
  16. SCSD. The Senate Committee on Student Discipline.
  17. Subcommittee on Graduate Student Conduct. The group of faculty, staff, and graduate students responsible for adjudicating graduate student cases that do not involve allegations of sexual misconduct. This group is selected through an application process overseen by OSCR and approved by the SCSD. All members of the Subcommittee on Graduate Student Conduct are trained by OSCR staff.
  18. Subcommittee on Sexual Misconduct. The group of faculty, staff, and students responsible for adjudicating cases that include allegations of sexual misconduct. This group is selected through an application process overseen by OSCR and approved by the SCSD. All members are trained on the university’s Sexual Misconduct Policy; the scope of the university’s education program or activity; how to conduct an investigation and grievance process; how to serve impartially, including by avoiding prejudgment of the facts at issue, conflicts of interest, and bias; any technology to be used at a live hearing; issues of relevance of questions and evidence, including when questions and evidence about the complainant’s sexual predisposition or prior sexual behavior are not relevant; and other topics deemed appropriate by OSCR staff or required by state and federal law.
  19. Subcommittee on Undergraduate Student Conduct. The group of faculty, staff, and undergraduate students responsible for adjudicating undergraduate student cases that do not involve allegations of sexual misconduct. This group is selected through an application process overseen by OSCR and approved by the SCSD. All members of the Subcommittee on Undergraduate Student Conduct are trained by OSCR staff.
  20. Witness. A person who has relevant information regarding the facts of the case.

Table of Contents »

Section 2.02 – Complainant Rights (Sexual Misconduct Cases Only)

  1. Advisor. The complainant may bring an advisor with them to any meeting with the CC or any disciplinary proceeding to which they are invited. This individual may communicate nondisruptively with the complainant during such proceedings but may not speak for the complainant or otherwise directly participate. An advisor who fails to follow these instructions or behaves disruptively may be asked to leave. Upon request, OSCR staff will connect a complainant to a trained confidential advisor (see https://wecare.illinois.edu/policies/terms/#advisor).
  2. Appeal. The complainant may appeal the decision in their case to the appropriate appeal body. This process is described in Article III.
  3. Disability Accommodations. A qualifying complainant has the right to reasonable accommodations during any disciplinary process or proceeding in accordance with §1-110 of the Student Code.
  4. Interpreter. The complainant may also bring an interpreter with them to any meeting with the CC or any disciplinary proceeding to which they are invited, provided that this individual is not also a witness in the investigation. An interpreter who behaves disruptively may be asked to leave. The use of an interpreter does not preclude the complainant’s ability to have an advisor present.
  5. Notice. The complainant will receive timely written notification of any meetings or proceedings they are expected to attend. Notice is deemed given immediately when hand delivered or sent to the complainant’s email address, or on the following business day when mailed.
  6. Objectivity. All disciplinary decisions will be based on an objective evaluation of evidence. No disciplinary decisions, including credibility determinations, will be based on a person’s status as a complainant, respondent, or witness or on a person’s membership in a protected class as listed in the university’s Nondiscrimination Policy.
  7. Participation. The complainant will have an opportunity to identify and present witnesses, to provide relevant information regarding the allegations, and to participate in an administrative hearing (if applicable). In addition, the complainant may refuse to provide a requested statement or to answer a question posed to them.
  8. Timely Investigation and Decision. Any investigation into the respondent’s behavior will begin promptly and proceed in a timely manner. The complainant will receive a timely written decision following any case coordinator decision, administrative hearing, or appellate review.

Table of Contents »

Section 2.03 – Respondent Rights

  1. Advisor. The respondent may bring an advisor with them to any meeting with the CC or any disciplinary proceeding to which they are invited. This individual may communicate nondisruptively with the respondent during such proceedings but may not speak for the respondent or otherwise directly participate. An advisor who fails to follow these instructions or behaves disruptively may be asked to leave.
  2. Appeal. The respondent may appeal the decision in their case to the appropriate appeal body. This process is described in Article III.
  3. Disability Accommodations. A qualifying respondent has the right to reasonable accommodations during any disciplinary process or proceeding in accordance with §1-110 of the Student Code.
  4. Interpreter. The respondent may also bring an interpreter with them to any meeting with a case coordinator or any disciplinary proceeding to which they are invited, provided that this individual is not also a witness in the investigation. An interpreter who behaves disruptively may be asked to leave. The use of an interpreter does not preclude the respondent’s ability to have an advisor present.
  5. Notice. The respondent will receive timely written notification of the allegations against them and of any meetings or proceedings they are expected to attend. Notice is deemed given immediately when hand delivered or sent to the respondent’s email address, or on the following business day when mailed.
  6. Objectivity. All disciplinary decisions will be based on an objective evaluation of evidence. No disciplinary decisions, including credibility determinations, will be based on a person’s status as a complainant, respondent, or witness or on a person’s membership in a protected class as listed in the university’s Nondiscrimination Policy.
  7. Participation. The respondent will have an opportunity to identify and present witnesses, to provide relevant information regarding the allegations, and to participate in an administrative hearing (if applicable). In addition, the respondent may refuse to provide a requested statement or to answer a question posed to them.
  8. Timely Investigation and Decision. Any investigation into the respondent’s behavior will begin promptly and proceed in a timely manner. The respondent will receive a timely written decision following any case coordinator decision, administrative hearing, or appellate review.

Table of Contents »

Section 2.04 – Initial Investigation

  1. Intake and Review. Upon receipt of a report that student may have engaged in misconduct, the Director will evaluate that report to determine whether the allegations, if substantiated, would constitute a violation of the Student Code. If not, the Director will close the case. If the report does describe a possible policy violation, the Director will assign the case to a CC, who will proceed according to subsection (b) below. If a complainant or witness provided the report directly to a CC during a scheduled appointment, the Director will typically assign the case to that CC.
  2. Charge Notice. The CC will issue a written charge notice to the respondent (to their university email address) that includes the following:
    1. A detailed description, including the date (if known) and location (if known), of the alleged incident(s);
    2. The identity (if known) of any complainants involved in the incident(s);
    3. The section(s) of the Student Code that the respondent has been accused of violating;
    4. A link to these procedures or an attached copy of these procedures;
    5. An instruction for the respondent to call within five business days to schedule a meeting with the CC (This meeting should occur within seven business days of the charge notice, unless a conflict between the CC’s availability and the respondent’s academic schedule require the meeting to be delayed further.); and
    6. A statement that the university prohibits retaliation, knowingly making false statements to university officials, and knowingly submitting false information to university officials.
  3. Failure to Respond. If the respondent fails to respond to the charge notice or refuses to meet with the CC, the investigation will continue, and OSCR may apply a registration hold.
  4. Administrative Appointment/Meeting. At the initial meeting with the respondent, the CC will summarize the allegations, explain the process, and discuss with the respondent the incident(s) under investigation. Based on this discussion, the CC will determine whether the case must be decided by the CC or by the appropriate subcommittee on student conduct. The procedures for CC cases continue in §2.05. The procedures for subcommittee cases continue in §2.06.

Table of Contents »

Section 2.05 – Case Coordinator (CC) Decision Procedures

  1. Case Coordinator Authority. With the exception of cases in which the allegations, if true, would likely result in suspension or dismissal from the university (as determined by the Director after a reasonable application of the sanctioning guidance issued by the SCSD), the CC has the authority to find facts and determine whether it is more likely than not that the respondent has violated the Student Code.
  2. Additional Investigation with Contested Charges. If the respondent does not admit to the allegations and charges, the CC will proceed with a prompt, fair, and impartial investigation.
    1. Written Response. If the respondent does not admit to the allegations and charges, the respondent may provide a written response to the allegations within three business days of their first meeting with the CC, unless the CC agrees to grant them additional time. The respondent should include in this response any information, including supporting documentation, they want the CC to consider and the names and contact information for any witnesses they want the CC to interview.
    2. Evidence Collection and Witness Interviews. After reviewing this response, the CC will attempt to interview relevant witnesses and may seek additional information, documentation, and witnesses from other sources (including any complainants).
    3. Updates. As appropriate, the CC will provide both the respondent (and any complainants) with periodic status updates during the investigation and any subsequent proceedings.
    4. Ongoing Notice. If, during an investigation, the CC decides to investigate allegations not included in the original charge notice, they will issue a new charge notice in accordance with §2.04(b) above.
    5. Follow-up Interviews. The CC may request additional meetings with the respondent (and any complainants) to discuss any information gathered during the investigation.
    6. Investigation Timeline. Any additional investigation will be completed promptly. The anticipated duration of an investigation that does not involve allegations of sexual misconduct is approximately 20 business days following the charge notice. The anticipated duration of a sexual misconduct investigation is approximately 40 business days following the charge notice. The actual duration of each investigation, however, may vary depending on the complexity of the investigation, the severity and extent of the allegations, the number of witnesses, the need for language assistance or accommodation of disabilities, and the possibility of interruption by break periods. If the duration of an investigation will substantially exceed these estimates, the CC will notify, in writing, both the respondent and any complainants of the delay and the reason for the delay.
    7. Cooperation with Law Enforcement. If the incident under investigation has also been reported to the police, the CC will contact the police for any information they are willing to share and may interview officers, detectives, etc. as part of the OSCR investigation. At the request of law enforcement and so as not to interfere with active police investigations, the CC may delay interviewing specific individuals for short periods of time at the discretion of the Director. However, the OSCR and police investigations are separate processes. As such, they follow different procedures, rules, and regulations, and the outcome of one does not determine the outcome in the other.
    8. Failure to Participate. If the respondent fails to respond to communications from OSCR or to participate in the investigation, the CC is empowered to decide the case on the basis of the information collected.
    9. Evidence Review. Prior to deciding the case, the CC will provide the respondent and any complainants with timely and equal access to the investigative materials and give all parties an opportunity to submit a written response. In cases that do not involve allegations of sexual misconduct, the CC will set a reasonable amount of time for evidence review and response, typically between two and five business days. In cases involving allegations of sexual misconduct, the parties will have five business days to review and respond to the investigative materials. However, the CC may allow the parties additional time to review and respond based on the amount of information included in the investigative materials.
  3. Decision. At the conclusion of the investigation or upon admission of responsibility by the respondent, the CC will apply the preponderance of the evidence standard to find facts and to determine responsibility for any charges. If the respondent has violated the Student Code, the CC will also issue formal sanctions (other than suspension or dismissal) and educational sanctions as appropriate. The CC will communicate this decision, along with information about the appeal process, to the respondent and simultaneously to any complainants in writing (to their university email address, if possible). For any cases involving allegations of sexual misconduct, the CC will also include a rationale for the decision and for any issued sanctions.

Table of Contents »

Section 2.06 – Subcommittee Decision Procedures

  1. Subcommittee Authority. The subcommittees have the authority to decide cases in which the allegations, if true, would likely result in the respondent’s suspension or dismissal from the university (as determined by the Director after a reasonable application of the sanctioning guidance issued by the SCSD). For more information about each subcommittee, see the definitions in §2.01 above.
  2. Additional Investigation with Contested Charges. If the respondent does not admit to the allegations and charges, the CC will proceed with a prompt, fair, and impartial investigation.
    1. Evidence Collection and Witness Interviews. The respondent (and any complainants) will be given the opportunity to provide supporting information and documentation and to identify witnesses. The CC will review all submitted materials and will attempt to interview all relevant witnesses. The CC may also seek additional information, documentation, and witnesses from other sources.
    2. Updates. As appropriate, the CC will provide both the respondent (and any complainants) with periodic status updates during the investigation and any subsequent proceedings.
    3. Ongoing Notice. If, during an investigation, the CC decides to investigate allegations not included in the original charge notice, they will issue a new charge notice in accordance with §2.04(b) above.
    4. Follow-up Interviews. The CC may request additional meetings with the respondent (and any complainants) to discuss any information gathered during the investigation.
    5. Investigation Timeline. Any additional investigation will be completed promptly. The anticipated duration of an investigation that does not involve allegations of sexual misconduct is approximately 30 business days following the charge notice. The anticipated duration of a sexual misconduct investigation is approximately 40 business days following the charge notice. The actual duration of each investigation, however, may vary depending on the complexity of the investigation, the severity and extent of the allegations, the number of witnesses, the need for language assistance or accommodation of disabilities, and the possibility of interruption by break periods. If the duration of an investigation will substantially exceed these estimates, the CC will notify both the respondent and the complainant of the delay and the reason for the delay.
    6. Cooperation with Law Enforcement. If the incident under investigation has also been reported to the police, the CC will contact the police for any information they are willing to share and may interview officers, detectives, etc. as part of the OSCR investigation. At the request of law enforcement and so as not to interfere with active police investigations, the CC may delay interviewing specific individuals for short periods of time at the discretion of the Director. However, the OSCR and police investigations are separate processes. As such, they follow different procedures, rules, and regulations, and the outcome of one does not determine the outcome in the other.
    7. Failure to Participate. If the respondent (or any complainant) fails to respond to communications from OSCR or to participate in the investigation, OSCR is empowered to proceed with the investigation and/or to schedule a hearing.
    8. Evidence Review. Prior to any hearing, the CC will provide the respondent and any complainants with timely and equal access to the investigative materials. In a typical case, the parties will have five business days to review the investigative materials. However, the CC may allow the parties additional time to review based on the amount of information included in the investigative materials.
    9. Administrative Closure. If, during the course of the investigation, the CC and the Director agree that no reasonable panel of decision-makers could, on the basis of the evidence available, find the respondent in violation of any of the Student Code sections identified in the allegation notice, the CC will notify the respondent (and any complainants) that the process has concluded, that all charges have been dropped, that no disciplinary action will be taken against the respondent at that time, and that the matter may be reopened if new substantial evidence is brought to the attention of OSCR from any source. In cases involving allegations of sexual misconduct, either the complainant or the respondent may request that the Title IX Coordinator (titleixcoordinator@illinois.edu) review OSCR’s decision to conclude the investigation. If the Title IX Coordinator disagrees with OSCR’s evaluation of the evidence, they may instruct OSCR staff to reopen the investigation. This decision lies in the sole discretion of the Title IX Coordinator, and the request is usually only granted in extraordinary circumstances. Other appeal options do not apply.
  3. Uncontested Charges. If the respondent admits to the allegations and charges, then the CC will offer the respondent an Expedited Case Disposition (described below). If the Expedited Case Disposition is not agreed to by all relevant parties or is not ratified by the appropriate subcommittee, then the CC will offer the respondent a Sanction-Only Hearing (described below). If the respondent does not agree to a Sanction-Only Hearing, then the CC will proceed as though the charges are contested and conduct a full investigation as described in §2.06(b).
    1. Expedited Case Disposition. If the respondent admits to the allegations and charges, the CC may offer the respondent an Expedited Case Disposition (ECD), which will include a description of the behavior, a waiver of the right to a formal hearing, a waiver of the right to appeal, specific responsibility determinations, and a set of sanctions and/or behavioral restrictions. If the respondent accepts and signs the offer, the CC will also share the offer with any complainants. If they also accept and sign the offer, the CC will present the ECD to a Panel of the appropriate subcommittee. If the Panel ratifies the ECD by simple majority vote, OSCR staff will notify the signatories, and the decision described in the ECD will be final. If the Panel does not ratify the ECD, the case will proceed according to the investigation and hearing procedures described above.
    2. Sanction-Only Hearing (One-Phase Hearing). If the respondent admits to the allegations and charges, the CC may offer the option of participating in a Sanction-Only Hearing. In a Sanction-Only Hearing, the proceeding will move immediately to Phase Two (see §2.06(i) below). The Chair will confirm, on the record, that the respondent is accepting responsibility. If the respondent so confirms, the Chair will proceed accordingly.
  4. Appointment of Panel. The Director will appoint a Panel composed of at least one student and at least one faculty or staff member of the appropriate committee and will designate one faculty or staff member to serve as the Chair. If the respondent is a graduate student, the Panel will include a representative of the Graduate College as a non-voting member.
  5. Challenges to Panel Membership. The respondent (and any complainants) will be given an opportunity to challenge the objectivity of any Panel member. Such a challenge must be based on an identified bias (e.g., a prior relationship between the party and the member) or an identified conflict of interest. The Director will decide whether this opportunity is provided prior to the appointment of the Panel or during the hearing itself. If provided prior to the appointment of the Panel, the Director will consider these challenges when making a final decision regarding Panel membership. If provided during the hearing, the Chair (or the Director in the case of a challenge directed at the Chair) will determine whether to excuse the challenged Panel member from the hearing.
  6. Notice of the Hearing. OSCR staff will notify the respondent (and any complainants) by email of the date and time of the hearing and any instructions for participating at least five business days in advance. At the Director’s discretion, OSCR may arrange for the hearing to take place virtually using video conference or other similar technology.
  7. Hearing Rules
    1. The hearing will be closed to the public.
    2. The Chair may exclude from the hearing any person who disrupts the orderly process of the hearing but will do so only after first issuing a warning. The Chair need not consider this cause to reschedule the hearing or continue the hearing on a later date.
    3. The hearing may proceed (at the Chair’s discretion) even if the respondent, any complainant, any advisor, or any witness fails to appear, provided the parties have been notified in accordance with §2.06(f).
    4. Parties must submit all written, tangible, or documentary evidence and identify all witnesses during the investigation and no later than the conclusion of Evidence Review (see §2.06(b)(viii)), provided such information was available to the party. If written, tangible, or documentary evidence or a witness’s identity that was not available to a party prior to the conclusion of Evidence Review becomes available prior to, or on the day of, the hearing, the party should immediately submit this information to OSCR staff. The Chair will then determine whether to proceed with the hearing (giving any other party sufficient time to review the information) or send the case back to the CC for further investigation. The Panel will assign appropriate weight to testimonial evidence that is provided at the hearing but was not previously provided to the CC.
    5. Persons who have no relevant evidence regarding the facts of the case may not participate as witnesses. This includes character references or witnesses to irrelevant incidents.
    6. Any witness who is not also serving as an advisor may only participate in the hearing while providing evidence or answering questions.
    7. The hearing will be audio recorded by OSCR staff. In order to protect the confidentiality of the process and the privacy of individuals involved, no other participants are permitted to record the hearing. The Panel’s deliberation is not recorded.
    8. The Director or their designee will advise the Panel and may participate in questioning and deliberation, but they may not vote.
    9. The CC may participate in questioning and deliberation, but they may not vote.
    10. No respondent or complainant will be allowed to question, or otherwise address, any other respondent, complainant, or witness directly. Instead, when provided for by the hearing procedures, they may suggest questions to be posed by the Chair. The Chair may choose not to ask a question if it has already been answered, is irrelevant, or is inappropriate. The Chair may also reword a relevant question that is asked in a manner that, in the Chair’s opinion, is confusing or is intended to disparage, intimidate, or otherwise harass the individual being questioned.
    11. The Chair will identify at least one break of no fewer than ten minutes for every two hours of the hearing. The respondent and any participating complainant may also request additional breaks as needed, provided the number of requests is not disruptive to the orderly conduct of the hearing. The Chair will decide whether to grant any such requests.
    12. The Chair may set a reasonable time frame for the hearing and reasonable time limits for each step of the hearing but may allow deviations, provided such allowances are fair and equitable. After consultation with the other Panel members, the Chair may also decide to continue the hearing to another day for good cause. Acceptable reasons include, but are not limited to, the need for additional investigation, the need to seek out additional witness testimony, or the inability to complete all required steps of the hearing process within a reasonable time frame. All parties must be notified of the date, time, and location at least five business days in advance, but prior notification of possible continuance dates will satisfy this requirement.
    13. The Director may schedule a single hearing for multiple respondents when the allegations against those respondents arise out of the same facts or circumstances. Any Phase Two proceedings in such a hearing, however, would be conducted individually for each respondent.
    14. At the Chair’s discretion, an employee of the Office of the Dean of Students may attend the hearing and the deliberation to provide administrative support to the Panel. This person will not participate in questioning or offer any opinions during deliberation.
    15. The Chair may set additional rules for the hearing as needed, provided that none conflict with any provision of this Article.
  8. Hearing Procedures: Phase One
    1. Under the direction of the Chair, all Panel members and participants will introduce themselves by name and role.
    2. The Chair will briefly describe the order of the hearing.
    3. The Chair will invite the CC to make a statement (if they choose) regarding the investigation, and Panel members may question the CC. The respondent and any participating complainants will then have an opportunity to suggest questions for the CC.
    4. The Chair will invite each participating complainant (if applicable) to make an opening statement regarding the allegations. These statements should last no longer than ten minutes unless the Chair approves a greater duration. The Panel members will then question the complainant, after which the respondent will have an opportunity to suggest questions to be posed to the complainant.
    5. The Chair will invite the respondent to make an opening statement regarding the allegations. This statement should last no longer than ten minutes unless the Chair approves a greater duration. The Panel members will then question the respondent, after which the complainant will have an opportunity to suggest questions to be posed to the respondent.
    6. The Chair will invite each participating witness into the hearing, one at a time, to answer questions from Panel members. For each witness, both the respondent and any participating complainants will have an opportunity to suggest questions to be posed by the Chair.
    7. Panel members will have a final opportunity to question any participating complainants, the respondent, and the CC regarding the allegations.
    8. If applicable, participating complainants will be given a final opportunity to suggest questions to be posed to the respondent, and the respondent will be given a final opportunity to suggest questions to be posed to participating complainants.
    9. The Chair will invite any participating complainant to make a closing statement regarding the allegations. This statement should last no longer than ten minutes.
    10. The Chair will invite the respondent to make a closing statement regarding the allegations. This statement should last no longer than ten minutes.
    11. The Chair will excuse the respondent and any participating complainants from the hearing, and the Panel will enter into closed deliberation to find facts and determine responsibility. The Panel will make its decisions by simple majority vote and will apply the preponderance standard.
    12. When the Panel has finished deliberating, the respondent and any participating complainants will be invited back into the hearing, and the Chair will read the Panel’s decision. If the Panel has not found the respondent in violation of any sections of the Student Code, the Chair will adjourn the hearing. If the Panel has found the respondent in violation of at least one section of the Student Code, the hearing will proceed into Phase Two.
  9. Hearing Procedures: Phase Two
    1. If the Panel has not found the respondent responsible for engaging in sexual misconduct with respect to a participating complainant, the Chair will excuse that complainant from the hearing. Otherwise, the Chair will invite any participating complainant to make a statement to the committee regarding the impact of the respondent’s behavior relating to the violation(s) of the Student Code for which the respondent was found responsible and to submit any supporting documentation. The Panel may then question the complainant, and once this questioning is complete, the Chair will excuse the complainant from the hearing.
    2. The Director or designee will then share with the Panel information regarding the respondent’s disciplinary history that was not deemed relevant to allegations.
    3. The Chair will invite the respondent to share any documentation that they would like the Panel to consider when determining sanctions, and the Panel may question the respondent.
    4. The Chair will excuse the respondent from the hearing, and the Panel will enter into closed deliberation to determine an appropriate formal sanction (see §2.10(b) of the Student Disciplinary Procedures) for the respondent. The Panel may also issue educational sanctions and apply additional conditions or restrictions set forth in §2.10(c) of the Student Disciplinary Procedures.
  10. Notice of Action Taken. OSCR staff will communicate the Panel’s decision, along with information about the appeal process, to the respondent and simultaneously to any complainants in writing (to their university email address, if possible). For any cases involving allegations of sexual misconduct, this communication will also include a rationale for the decision and for any issued sanctions.

Table of Contents »

Section 2.07 – Privacy

  1. Any proceeding, meeting, or hearing held as part of the process described in this appendix will protect the privacy of the participating parties and witnesses in accordance with applicable law.
  2. The university will not disclose the identity of the respondent, any complainants, or any witnesses except as necessary to implement supportive measures and accommodations, investigate the allegations, conduct any hearing or judicial proceeding, or when provided by state or federal law.

Table of Contents »

Section 2.08 – Conflicts of Interest and Bias

  1. Any OSCR staff member, CC, Panel member, or SCSD member who has a conflict of interest with respect to a specific case must recuse themselves from any role in that case.
  2. Any OSCR staff member, CC, Panel member, or SCSD member who has a bias for or against the respondent or complainant or for or against complainants or respondents generally must recuse themselves from any role in that case.

Table of Contents »

Section 2.09 – Complaints against CCs

  1. Any respondent or complainant who believes that a CC assigned to their case has a conflict of interest with respect to the case or that they have acted inappropriately or demonstrated bias at any point during the process described in this document should report this immediately to the Director (contact information for whom is available on the OSCR website).
  2. Any respondent or complainant who has a complaint about the Director should report their concerns to the Dean of Students (contact information for whom is available on the Office of the Dean of Students website). In some cases, the Dean of Students may refer the complaining party to the Title IX Coordinator.

Table of Contents »

Section 2.10 – Actions Possible in Individual Student Discipline Cases

  1. When determining whether a respondent has violated a university policy, CCs and Panels have the following options:
    1. Finding of No Violation. This action can occur at any stage of the procedure. If a finding of no violation occurs, the student has no disciplinary history. This information will not be considered in future proceedings.
    2. Charge(s) Dropped. This action shall be taken when the CC or the Panel determines that the student cannot be found in violation of the university's regulations governing student conduct. The behavior may have been unrelated to the rules of conduct, or evidence may be unobtainable or insufficient, etc. A dropped charge may be reinstated at the discretion of the Director if substantial new information should become available. If a charge is reinstated, the respondent will be sent a charge notice. If a charge is dropped, the student will have no disciplinary history related to it.
    3. Finding of Violation. This action occurs when the disciplinary body has established that a policy of the Student Code has been violated based on a preponderance of the evidence.
  2. Formal Sanction Options:
    1. University Reprimand. A University Reprimand indicates that the student’s behavior is inappropriate for a member of the academic community. A University Reprimand is a reportable entry in the student’s disciplinary record for one year and would serve as a basis for further sanctioning should subsequent violations occur during that period. A University Reprimand will not appear on the academic transcript.
    2. University Censure. A University Censure is an official communication that a student’s behavior is inappropriate for a member of the academic community. A University Censure is a reportable entry in the student’s disciplinary until the student graduates and would serve as a basis for further sanctioning should subsequent violations occur during that period. A University Censure will not appear on the academic transcript.
    3. Conduct Probation. Conduct Probation is a strong communication that a student is no longer in good disciplinary standing with the academic community, and that, if the student fails to comply with any assigned sanctions or otherwise violates the Student Code while on probation, they should expect to be suspended or dismissed from the university. A record of Conduct Probation is maintained in the office for seven years and is copied to the Dean of the Student’s College. Conduct Probation will not appear on the academic transcript and shall be terminated automatically upon graduation.
    4. Suspension. Suspension shall be imposed upon a student when the appropriate subcommittee of the SCSD determines that the student's relationship with the university must be suspended from the university for a definite period of time. While suspended, a student may not enroll in, or attend, any courses at the university and may not be awarded a degree from the university. Although a suspended student is not required to petition a subcommittee for permission to return, it is the responsibility of the student to communicate with their college prior to returning and to follow any applicable academic procedures. A copy of the suspension notice will be forwarded to the Dean of the student’s college and to the Recorder for a notation on the transcript. Suspension records are maintained indefinitely, but the suspension transcript notation is removed after the period of suspension has expired. At the end of a suspension period, the student is placed on Conduct Probation until graduation, unless mitigating circumstances warrant a different sanction.
    5. Dismissal. Dismissal shall be imposed upon a student when the appropriate subcommittee or the SCSD determines that the student's relationship with the university must be terminated. While dismissed, a student may not enroll in, or attend, any courses at the university and may not be awarded a degree from the university. After a specified period of time, the dismissed student may petition the appropriate subcommittee for permission to pursue readmission to the university (or, if applicable, the release of their degree). A copy of the dismissal notice will be forwarded to the Dean of the student’s college and to the Recorder for a notation on the transcript. Dismissal records are maintained indefinitely, but the dismissal transcript notation is removed once the student successfully petitions. A successful petition before the subcommittee does not abrogate the right of any dean or director to deny readmission on the basis of scholarship. At such time as the student is readmitted to the university, the student is placed on Conduct Probation until graduation, unless mitigating circumstances warrant a different sanction.
    6. Dismissal Held in Abeyance. In rare cases, the SCSD or the appropriate subcommittee may determine that, while dismissal would be a justifiable formal sanction for the respondent, strong mitigating circumstances warrant holding the dismissal in abeyance for a defined period of time. During this time period, the student may continue their enrollment provided they complete any educational sanctions on time, comply with any behavioral restrictions, and avoid any further violations of the Student Code. If, following a determination by a university case coordinator that the student has not completed an educational sanction on time or has not complied with a behavioral restriction, the student will be dismissed immediately with the ability to petition during the following Fall or Spring semester and with petitioning requirements set by the Office for Student Conflict Resolution. If, following a determination by the appropriate subcommittee that the student has otherwise violated the Student Code, the subcommittee will dismiss the student for at least the current semester and the following semester and will impose petitioning requirements as appropriate. The student may appeal any imposed dismissal to the SCSD in accordance with § 3.03.
  3. Other Sanctions or Restrictions
    1. Educational Sanctions. Educational sanctions are assignments, requirements, or tasks that the CC or Panel determine are warranted by their findings. They include, but are not limited to, community service, educational programs (including programs on substance use or violence prevention), research and reflective essays, presentations, restitution, and letters of apology.
    2. Behavioral Restrictions. The student is restricted from certain activities on campus (e.g. participation in certain registered student organizations, intramural or varsity athletics; contact with specific people or physical locations; or other restrictions deemed just and appropriate).
    3. Deferral of the Degree. The SCSD, Panel, or the Director may withhold the conferral of the degree until the disciplinary action has been resolved.
    4. Revocation of a Degree. A degree awarded by the institution may be revoked for fraud, misrepresentation, or other violation of the university standards in obtaining a degree, or for other serious violations committed by a student prior to graduation.
  4. The SCSD may authorize any other sanctions it deems to be just and appropriate.

Table of Contents »

Top