Appendix E: Student Conduct Procedures for Allegations of Title IX Sexual Harassment

In cases that are determined by the Title IX Coordinator or their designee to include an accusation that any student (including any student enrolled in the Carle Illinois College of Medicine, the College of Law, or the College of Veterinary Medicine) has engaged in Title IX Sexual Harassment in an education program or activity of the university against a person in the United States, the following provisions shall also apply. In the event of a conflict between this Appendix and any other part of the Student Disciplinary Procedures, this Appendix shall prevail.

If the regulations implementing Title IX at 85 Fed. Reg. 30026, 30026-30579 are enjoined or invalidated by a Federal Court with jurisdiction over the university or reversed or replaced by any agency with sufficient authority, the process described in Articles II and III will immediately begin to apply to all reports and complaints of sexual misconduct, including Title IX Sexual Harassment, and this appendix will immediately be inoperative unless and until any such injunction, invalidation, reversal, or replacement is overturned.

Section 1: Definitions

Advisor of Choice. A person chosen by a Party to accompany the Party to meetings or proceedings related to the resolution process and to advise the Party on that process. The Advisor of Choice may be any person, including but not limited to a(n): friend, family member, mental health professional, certified victim’s advocate, or attorney. The Parties may select whoever they wish to serve as their Advisor of Choice as long as the Advisor is eligible and available. Parties have the right to choose not to have an Advisor of Choice accompany them to meetings or proceedings. The university will directly communicate the case to the student. The student is responsible for updating their advisor and/or forwarding any correspondence to them.
Business Day. Any weekday when university offices are open for official business.
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.
Complainant means:
1. A student who is alleged to have been subjected to conduct that could constitute Title IX Sex-Based Harassment; or
2. A person other than a student or employee who is alleged to have been subjected to conduct that could constitute sex discrimination under Title IX and who was participating or attempting to participate in a university education program or activity at the time of the alleged sex discrimination; or
3. An individual who is alleged to have been subjected to conduct that could constitute a violation of the Sexual Misconduct Policy.
Complaint. An oral or written request to the university that objectively can be understood as a request for the university to investigate and decide about alleged sex or gender-based misconduct. The following persons have a right to make a complaint of sex discrimination, including complaints of sex-based harassment, requesting that the recipient investigate and make a determination about alleged discrimination under Title IX or this part: (i) A complainant; (ii) A parent, guardian, or other authorized legal representative with the legal right to act on behalf of a complainant; (iii) The Title IX Coordinator; (iv) With respect to complaints of sex discrimination other than sex-based harassment, in addition to the persons listed above, (A) Any student or employee; or (B) Any person other than a student or employee who was participating or attempting to participate in the recipient’s education program or activity at the time of the alleged sex discrimination; or (C) Any person who alleges complaints of sex discrimination that meets the university’s jurisdiction analysis in section 1.05
Director (or Executive Director). The Director of the Office for Student Conflict Resolution or their designee.
Evidence. Any information, including testimony, collected during an investigation that is relevant to the determination of whether the respondent has violated the Student Code. Information that solely addresses the character of any person will be considered only after a finding of responsibility, but prior to any sanctioning determination.
Evidence Packet. 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.
Formal Complaint. A document filed by a complainant (and which contains the complainant’s physical or digital signature, or otherwise indicates that the complainant is the person filing the formal complaint) or signed by the Title IX Coordinator alleging Title IX Sexual Harassment against a respondent and requesting that the university investigate the allegation of Title IX Sexual Harassment. At the time of filing a formal complaint, a complainant must be participating in or attempting to participate in the education program or activity of the university with which the formal complaint is filed. A formal complaint may be filed with the Title IX Coordinator in person, by mail, or by electronic mail.
Investigative Report. A document created by the investigator that fairly summarizes the procedural steps taken in the investigation and the relevant evidence.
Investigator. A person responsible for investigating allegations of sexual misconduct on behalf of the university. All investigators 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; and on issues of relevance to create an Investigative Report that fairly summarizes relevant evidence.
OSCR. The Office for Student Conflict Resolution.
Official Communication – communication between the parties and the Office for Student Conflict Resolution will happen via email between university email accounts. Paper copies delivered to the OSCR will be accepted. Should files become too big to share over email, all parties should notify an OSCR staff member. OSCR staff will create a U of I BOX folder where the party will have the opportunity to transfer large files.
Panel. A group of three members of the Subcommittee on Sexual Misconduct appointed by the Executive Director to adjudicate a case involving sexual misconduct. A Panel includes at least one student member.
Panel Chair (or Chair). A non-voting OSCR staff member or other non-voting trained designee assigned by the Director to run a hearing. The Director may enlist a staff member or designee who has extensive experience in student disciplinary procedures and training on sexual misconduct to serve as Chair should certain circumstances arise.
Party. Any person identified as a complainant or a respondent with respect to a given formal complaint.
Remedies. Measures provided, as appropriate, to a Complainant or any other person the university identifies as having had their equal access to the university’s education program or activity limited or denied by sex discrimination. These measures are provided to restore or preserve that person’s access to the university’s education program or activity after the university determines that sex discrimination occurred.
Respondent. A student who has been reported to be the perpetrator of conduct that could constitute Title IX Sexual Harassment.
Sanction, Educational. An assignment, requirement, or task imposed by the university that is educationally related to a policy violation.
Sanction, Formal. A disciplinary status imposed by the university in response to a policy violation.
SCSD. The Senate Committee on Student Discipline. The SCSD is responsible for the student disciplinary procedures, involvement in hearing appeals for its subcommittees and the oversight of the adjudication of student discipline cases.
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.
Supportive Measures. Non-disciplinary, non-punitive individualized services offered as appropriate, as reasonably available, and without fee or charge to the complainant or respondent before or after the filing of a formal complaint. Such measures are designed to restore or preserve equal access to the university’s education program or activity without unreasonably burdening the other party, including measures designed to protect the safety of all parties or the university’s educational environment, or deter Title IX Sexual Harassment. Supportive measures include, but are not limited to, counseling, extensions of deadlines or other course-related adjustments, modifications or work or class schedules, no contact directives, changes in work or housing locations, leaves of absence, increased security and monitoring of certain areas of the campus, and other similar measures. The university will maintain as confidential any supportive measures provided to the complainant or the respondent, to the extent that maintaining such confidentiality would not impair the ability of the university to provide the supportive measures. Additional examples of supportive measures are available on the We Care website.
Title IX Sexual Harassment. Conduct on the basis of sex that falls into one or more of the following categories as defined in the university’s Sexual misconduct Policy: Quid Pro Quo Sexual Harassment, Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment, Sexual Assault, Dating Violence, Domestic Violence, or Stalking.
University-Provided Hearing Advisor. An individual of the university’s choice who is present at the live hearing, if a party does not otherwise have an advisor present at the live hearing, to conduct cross-examination, i.e., to ask the other party and any witnesses relevant questions and follow-up questions, including those challenging credibility, on behalf of the party. This will be done without fee or charge to that party. If the party is present at the hearing, their University-Appointed Hearing Advisor will relay the party’s own questions during cross-examination. The University-Appointed Hearing Advisor may, but is not required to, ask additional cross-examination questions that they deem appropriate. If the party and their advisor of choice are not present at the hearing, the University-Appointed Hearing Advisor will conduct cross-examination on behalf of that party. The university cannot guarantee equal advisory rights, meaning that if one party selects an advisor who is an attorney, but the other party does not or cannot afford an attorney, the university is not obligated to provide an attorney.
Witness. A person who has relevant information regarding the facts of the case.

Section 2: Parties’ (Respondent and Complainant) Rights

Advisor. All parties may bring an advisor with them to any meeting with the investigator or any disciplinary proceeding to which they are invited. This individual may communicate nondisruptively with their student during such proceedings but may not speak for their student or otherwise directly participate. An advisor who fails to follow these instructions or behaves disruptively may be asked to leave. The university will directly communicate the case to the student. The student is responsible for updating their advisor and/or forwarding any correspondence to them. If someone other than the advisor is approved to participate for one party, the other party (ies) should have the same opportunity.
Appeal. All parties may appeal the investigator’s decision to dismiss the complaint or any allegation therein or the Panel’s decision to the SCSD. This process is described in §9 below.
Disability Accommodations. A qualifying party has the right to reasonable accommodations during any disciplinary process or proceeding in accordance with §1-110 of the Student Code.
Evidence Review. All parties will have the opportunity to inspect and review all evidence obtained as part of the investigation that is directly related to the allegations raised in the complaint, including the evidence which will not be relied upon in reaching a determination regarding responsibility and inculpatory or exculpatory evidence whether obtained from a party or other source, so that each party can meaningfully respond to the evidence prior to the conclusion of the investigation.
Interpreter. Either party may also bring an interpreter with them to any meeting with the investigator or any disciplinary proceeding to which they are invited, provided that this individual is also not a witness in the investigation. An interpreter who behaves disruptively may be asked to leave. The use of an interpreter does not preclude the party’s ability to have an advisor present.
Notice. All parties will receive written notification of the allegations and of any meetings or proceedings they are expected to attend. Notice is deemed given immediately when hand delivered or sent to the parties’ university email address, or on the following business day when mailed.
Objectivity. All disciplinary decisions will be based on an objective evaluation of evidence, including both inculpatory and exculpatory evidence not otherwise impermissible. 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.
Participation. All parties will have an opportunity to identify and present witnesses, including expert witnesses; to provide information directly related to the allegations, including inculpatory and exculpatory evidence; and to participate in any scheduled formal hearing. In addition, the respondent may refuse to provide a requested statement or to answer a question posed to them.
Supportive Measures. All parties has the right to request supportive measures. The Title IX Coordinator or their designee is responsible for coordinating the effective implementation of supportive measures, but the respondent may directly request that the investigator issue a no contact directive.
Timely Investigation and Decision. Any investigation of a complaint will begin promptly and proceed in a timely manner. The parties will receive a timely written decision following a formal hearing or appellate review.

Section 3: Evidence

An objective evaluation of all evidence that is relevant, and not otherwise impermissible, including both inculpatory and exculpatory evidence, is required.
As defined above and for the purposes of this appendix, evidence is any information, including testimony, that is directly related to the allegations raised in the complaint. The investigator and the Panel have the right to reject or disregard information that is not relevant or is otherwise impermissible when compiling the Evidence Packet, creating the Investigative Report, dismissing the complaint, or reaching a determination regarding responsibility.
During cross-examination, as described in §7 below, the Chair will only allow relevant questions, where a relevant question is one that seeks relevant evidence.
The following types of evidence will be excluded, and questions seeking these types of evidence are impermissible (i.e., must not be accessed or considered, except by OSCR to determine whether an exception below applies, must not be disclosed, and must not otherwise be used), regardless of whether they are relevant:
1. Evidence that is protected under a privilege as 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;
2. 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 recipient obtains that party’s or witness’s voluntary, written consent for use in this procedure; and
3. 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 or gender-based misconduct. 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 sexual misconduct or preclude determination that sexual misconduct occurred.

Section 4: Investigation of a Formal Complaint

Intake and Review. OSCR will oversee investigations of complaints against student respondents. Upon receipt of a complaint, the Director will assign a primary investigator (or investigator) to conduct the investigation. The investigator may be assisted by a secondary investigator (or secondary) as necessary. The investigator will first attempt to interview the complainant to determine the precise nature of the allegations.
Consolidation of Complaints. OSCR may consolidate complaints as to allegations against more than one respondent, or by more than one complainant against one or more respondents, or by one party against the other party, where the allegations arise out of the same facts or circumstances. When a case involves more than one complainant or more than one respondent, references in this appendix to the singular “party,” “complainant,” or “respondent” include the plural, as applicable.
Dismissal of the Formal Complaint or Any Allegations Therein.
1. OSCR will dismiss a formal complaint or any allegations therein if, at any time during the investigation or hearing, it is determined that:
  1. The conduct alleged in the formal complaint would not constitute Title IX Sexual Harassment as defined in the Sexual misconduct Policy, even if proved; and/or
  2. The conduct did not occur in an education program or activity of the university as defined in the Sexual misconduct Policy; and/or
  3. The conduct did not occur against a person in the United States; and/or
  4. At the time of filing a formal complaint, the complainant was not participating in or attempting to participate in the education program or activity of the university.
2. OSCR may dismiss a formal complaint or any allegations therein if, at any time during the investigation or hearing, it is determined that:
  1. A complainant notifies the Title IX Coordinator in writing that the complainant would like to withdraw the formal complaint or any allegations therein; or
  2. The respondent is no longer enrolled in or employed by the university; or
  3. Specific circumstances prevent OSCR from gathering evidence sufficient to reach a determination as to the formal complaint or allegations therein.
3. Upon any such dismissal, OSCR staff will promptly send written notification of the dismissal and the rationale for the dismissal simultaneously to the respondent and the complainant.
4. The dismissal of a formal complaint or any allegations therein may be appealed by either party to the SCSD in accordance with §8 below.
5. At OSCR’s discretion, allegations dismissed under this section may be investigated and/or adjudicated through the process described in Articles II and III of the Student Disciplinary Procedures.
Allegation Notice. As soon as is practicable after interviewing the complainant (or after unsuccessfully attempting to interview the complainant), the investigator will issue a written allegation notice (to each party’s university email address, if they have one) that informs the respondent and the complainant of 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. 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 this process.
6. A statement that the parties may have an advisor of their choice, who may be, but is not required to be, an attorney.
7. A statement that the parties may inspect and review evidence in accordance with §6 below.
8. An instruction for the respondent to call within five business days to schedule a meeting with the investigator. This meeting should occur within ten business days of the allegation notice, unless a conflict between the investigator’s availability and the respondent’s academic schedule requires the meeting to be delayed further.
9. A statement that the Student Code prohibits retaliation (under §1-302(b)(6) of the Student Code) and knowingly making false statements or knowingly submitting false information during the resolution of a formal complaint (under both §1-302(g) and §1-302(o) of the Student Code).
10. Notification that parties and advisors are prohibited from disclosing information obtained by OSCR through this process, to the extent that information is the work product of OSCR (meaning it has been produced, compiled, or written by OSCR for purposes of its investigation and resolution of a Complaint), without authorization.
Respondent Interview. The investigator will attempt to interview the respondent in a timely manner (as described above). If the respondent fails to respond to the allegation notice or refuses to meet with the investigator, the investigation will continue.
Evidence Collection and Witness Interviews. Both parties will be given the opportunity to provide supporting information and documentation and to identify witnesses. The investigator will review all submitted materials and will attempt to interview all witnesses (other than expert witnesses). The investigator may also seek additional information, documentation, and witnesses from other sources.
Follow-up Interviews. The investigator may request additional meetings with the respondent and any complainant to discuss any information gathered during the investigation.
Privilege. The investigator and the Panel will not require, allow, rely upon, or otherwise use questions or evidence that constitute, or seek disclosure of, information protected under a legally recognized privilege, unless the person holding such privilege has waived the privilege.
Updates. As deemed appropriate by the investigator, OSCR staff will provide both the respondent and the complainant with periodic status updates during the investigation, the review process, and the appeal process.
Ongoing Notice. If, during an investigation, the investigator decides to investigate allegations not included in the original allegation notice, they will issue a new allegation notice in accordance with §5(d) above.
Cooperation with Law Enforcement. If the incident under investigation has also been reported to the police, the investigator 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 investigator may delay interviewing specific individuals for short periods of time at the discretion of the Executive 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.
Reasonable Delay of Notice. The university may reasonably delay providing the notice of allegations to address reasonable concerns for the safety of any person as a result of issuing the notice of allegations. Reasonable concerns will be based on an individualized safety and risk analysis which evaluates the severity and imminence of a threat to the safety of any person arising from the allegations of sex or gender-based misconduct.
Recordings. Interviews cannot be recorded without express written consent by all individuals involved, and no unauthorized recording is permitted by anyone participating in the investigative interviews. Parties and witnesses may take notes during investigation meetings. Requests for recording of an interview must be submitted with the rationale for consideration to the Director or their designee at conflictresolution@illinois.edu.
Investigator Review of Evidence. The investigator will review all evidence gathered through the investigation and determine what evidence is relevant and what evidence is impermissible regardless of relevance.

Section 5: Review of Evidence

Review of Evidence by the Parties. At the conclusion of the investigation but prior to the completion of the Investigative Report, the investigator will compile all evidence into an Evidence Packet and send this packet (in either electronic or hard copy format, at the investigator’s discretion) to each party and the party’s advisor, if any.
The Evidence Packet will be available at the hearing to give each party an equal opportunity to refer to the evidence during the hearing, including for purposes of cross-examination. The parties will have five business days from the initial release to review and respond to the evidence packet.
Written Responses to the Evidence Packet. The parties will have ten business days to review the Evidence Packet and to submit a written response. The investigator is not required to accept documentary evidence submitted after this deadline or fact witnesses identified after this deadline.
Parties must submit all written, tangible, or documentary evidence and identify all fact witnesses during the investigation and no later than the conclusion of evidence review, provided such information was available to the submitting 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 party should also document why this new information should be included after the documented deadline. The Chair will then determine whether to provide the information to the other party and their advisor, providing them with sufficient time for review, or to send the complaint back to the investigator 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 investigator.

Section 6: Investigative Report

Investigative Report Creation. As soon as is practicable after the evidence review period, the investigator will create an Investigative Report that fairly summarizes the procedural steps taken in the investigation and the relevant evidence. If any party has submitted a timely written response to the Evidence Packet, the investigator will consider that response before completing the Investigative Report.
Investigative Report Distribution and Review. The investigator will provide an electronic copy of the Investigative Report to both the respondent and the complainant and their advisors, if any, and notify them that they may submit a written response to the report no later than five business days after the report has been sent.

Section 7: Formal Hearing

Appointment of Panel. The Director will appoint a Panel of three members, including at least one student member, of the Subcommittee on Sexual Misconduct (according to their availability and the frequency of their participation) and designate a faculty or staff member to serve as the Chair. Before the membership of this Panel is finalized, OSCR will provide both the respondent and the complainant with a list of all members of the Subcommittee on Sexual Misconduct. At this point, the parties may challenge the objectivity of any person on this list. 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 consider these challenges when making a final decision regarding Panel membership.
Panel Review of Materials. OSCR staff will provide the members of the Panel with electronic access to the Investigative Report, Evidence Packet, and any written responses from the parties and give them sufficient time to review these materials thoroughly.
Scheduling of the Hearing. OSCR staff will schedule a formal hearing before the Panel to take place at least ten business days after the Investigative Report was sent to the parties. At the Director’s discretion, OSCR may arrange for the hearing to take place virtually using technology that enables the participants to see and hear each other simultaneously.
Notice of the Hearing. OSCR staff will notify both the respondent and the complainant by email of the date, time, location (or, for a virtual hearing, appropriate access information), participants (including invited witnesses), and purpose of the hearing at least seven business days in advance.
Presumption of No Violation. The respondent is presumed not to be responsible for the alleged conduct until a final determination regarding responsibility has been made at the conclusion of this process.
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, the complainant, any advisor (subject to subsection (4) below)), or any witness fails to appear, provided the parties have been notified in accordance with §7(d) above.
4. The respondent and the complainant must each have an advisor (or university-provided hearing advisor) present at the hearing to conduct cross-examination. If a party chooses not to attend the hearing, then their chosen advisor may attend the hearing to conduct cross-examination on their behalf. If a party does not bring an advisor to the hearing or if neither the party nor their chosen advisor chooses to attend the hearing, then OSCR will assign a university-provided hearing advisor to conduct cross-examination on their behalf.
5. The Evidence Packet will be available at the hearing to give each party equal opportunity to refer to the evidence during the hearing, including for purposes of cross-examination.
6. Parties must submit all written, tangible, or documentary evidence and identify all fact witnesses during the investigation and no later than the date of distribution of the Investigative Report, 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 date of distribution of the Investigative Report 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 provide the information to the other party and their advisor, providing them with sufficient time for review, or to send the complaint back to the investigator 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 investigator.
7. Persons who have no relevant evidence to provide may not participate as witnesses.
8. Any witness who is not also serving as an advisor may only participate in the hearing while providing evidence or answering questions.
9. Both parties may identify expert witnesses to provide testimony at the hearing, but to do so, the party must submit in writing to the investigator the name and contact information for the expert witness by the Investigative Report response deadline described in §7(b) above. Also by this deadline, the expert witness must submit to the investigator a written report describing their credentials and detailing their intended testimony. This information will be provided to the other party in a timely manner, and they will have an opportunity to challenge the witness’s expertise. The Chair will determine whether the expert witness will be allowed to participate based on the relevance of their testimony.
10. 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 audio recorded. Any party may review this recording at any time during the seven years following its creation (subject to any procedures or limitations OSCR has in place at the time the review is requested).
11. The investigator will attend the hearing but will leave the hearing prior to deliberation.
12. 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.
13. Neither the complainant nor the respondent will be allowed to cross-examine, or otherwise address, each other or any witness directly. Instead, when provided for by the hearing procedures, each party’s advisor of choice (or university-provided hearing advisor) will be allowed to cross-examine the investigator, the other party (or parties), and the witnesses. All questions asked during cross-examination must be relevant.
14. The Chair may instruct a complainant, respondent, or witness not to answer a question asked during cross-examination (or at any other time) if that question has already been answered or is irrelevant, provided the Chair explains their decision. Prior to deciding on a question’s relevance, the Chair may ask the questioner to explain the question’s relevance. The Chair may also instruct the questioner to reword a relevant question that is asked in a manner that, in the Chair’s opinion, is intended to disparage, intimidate, or otherwise harass the individual being questioned.
15. The Panel may consider statements made by parties or witnesses that are otherwise permitted under these procedures in reaching a determination regarding responsibility even if those parties or witnesses do not participate in cross-examination at the hearing. Furthermore, the Panel may not draw any inference about the determination regarding responsibility based solely on a party’s or witness’s absence from the hearing or refusal to answer questions.
16. At the request of the respondent or the complainant, OSCR staff will make arrangements for the parties to participate in the hearing while in different locations using technology enabling the Panel members and the parties to simultaneously see and hear any person who is answering questions.
17. The Chair will identify at least one break of no fewer than ten minutes for every two hours of the hearing. The respondent and the 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.
18. 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. Both parties must be notified of the date, time, and location at least seven business days in advance, but prior notification of possible continuance dates will satisfy this requirement.
19. The Chair may set additional rules for the hearing as needed, provided that none conflict with any provision of this appendix.
Hearing Procedures: Fact Finding
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 investigator to make a statement (if they choose) regarding the investigation, and Panel members may question the investigator. The respondent’s advisor and the complainant’s advisor will then have an opportunity to question the investigator.
4. The Chair will invite the complainant 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 complainant, after which the respondent’s advisor will have an opportunity to cross-examine 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’s advisor will have an opportunity to cross-examine the respondent.
6. The Panel Chair will invite each participating witness into the room, one at a time, to answer questions from Panel members. For each witness, the respondent’s advisor and the complainant’s advisor will have an opportunity to as cross-examination questions.
7. Panel members will have a final opportunity to question the complainant, the respondent, and the investigator regarding the allegations.
8. The complainant’s advisor will have a final opportunity to cross-examine the respondent. And the respondent’s advisor will have a final opportunity to cross-examine the complainant.
9. The Chair will invite the complainant to make a closing statement regarding the allegations. Each statement should last no longer than five minutes.
10. The Chair will invite the respondent to make a closing statement regarding the allegations. This statement should last no longer than five minutes.
11. The Chair will excuse the respondent, the complainant, and the investigator from the hearing, and the Panel will enter into closed deliberation to find facts and make a determination regarding responsibility. The Panel will make its decisions by simple majority vote and will apply the preponderance of the evidence standard.
Hearing Procedures: Deliberation
1. If the respondent(s) is found not responsible, the deliberation is complete.
2. If a responsibility finding is made, the Director or designee will provide any written statement of desired outcome, character statements, or impact statements. If a student has disciplinary history that was not deemed relevant to the allegations, that will also be shared after a responsibility finding is made. The Panel will determine an appropriate formal sanction (see §2.09(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 §2.09(c) of the Student Disciplinary Procedures.
Notice of Action Taken. OSCR staff will provide simultaneous email notification of the Panel’s decision to the respondent and the complainant within five business days. This notification will also include:
1. A statement of the allegations considered by the Panel, including any allegations of Title IX Sexual Harassment;
2. A description of the procedural steps taken from the receipt of the formal complaint through the determination, including any notifications to the parties, interviews with parties and witnesses, site visits, methods used to gather other evidence, and hearings held;
3. Findings of fact supporting the determination regarding responsibility;
4. Conclusions regarding the application of the Student Code and other relevant policies to the facts;
5. A statement of, and rationale for, the result as to each allegation, including a determination regarding responsibility;
6. A list of any formal sanctions, educational sanctions, or behavioral restrictions imposed;
7. A statement regarding whether remedies designed to restore or preserve equal access to the university’s education program or activity will be provided to the complainant; and
8. Information regarding the parties’ right to appeal the Panel’s decision.
9. If there are reasonable concerns to the safety of any person as a result of providing this notice of action taken, OSCR may reasonably delay providing written notice of allegation or outcome to address the safety concern appropriately. Reasonable concerns must be based on an individualized safety and risk analysis.

Section 8: Appeal Procedures

Right to Appeal. Both parties have the right to appeal the Panel’s decision or the decision of the investigator to dismiss a formal complaint or any allegations therein.
Grounds for Appeal. The appellant must base the appeal exclusively on one or more of the following grounds:
1. Procedural irregularity that would change the outcome of the matter.
2. New evidence that would change the outcome and that was not reasonably available when the determination whether sexual misconduct occurred or dismissal was made.
3. The Title IX Coordinator, investigator(s), or Panel members had a conflict of interest or bias for or against complainants or respondents generally or any individual complainant or respondent that would change the outcome of the matter.
4. Any sanctions imposed by the Panel were not appropriate for the violation(s) for which the respondent was found responsible.
Notice of Appeal. The appellant must submit a Notice of Appeal and all supporting documentation to the Office for Student Conflict Resolution within five business days of the date of notice of the Panel’s decision (or of the investigator’s decision to dismiss the formal complaint or any allegations therein).
Content of Notice of Appeal. The Notice of Appeal must contain at least the following: (1) specific grounds for appeal; (2) specific outcome requested; and (3) the appellant's reasons in support of the grounds identified and the outcome requested. The appellant must submit the Notice of Appeal in writing, and the appellant must either sign the Notice of Appeal or submit it by email to OSCR from their university email address (if applicable). Oral appeals are not accepted. If only one party submits a Notice of Appeal, OSCR will notify the other party of the submission and grant the other party access to all submitted documentation. The other party will have five business days from the date of notification to submit a written response to be considered as part of the appeal. If both parties submit a Notice of Appeal, both parties will be informed, granted access to all submitted documentation, and given five business days to submit a written response.
Sanctions Held in Abeyance Pending Appeal. Any formal or educational sanctions imposed will be held in abeyance automatically during the period in which the appeal may be filed and, once an appeal is filed, until the committee reaches a decision on the appeal. Behavioral restrictions such as no contact directives, however, remain in place pending the appeal.
Appellate Review.
1. The Chair of the SCSD or their designee will identify three SCSD members, of which one must be a faculty member and one a student, to decide the appeal. These individuals will constitute the Appeal Committee. Before the membership of this Appeal Committee is finalized, OSCR will provide both the respondent and the complainant with a list of all members of the SCSD. At this point, the parties may challenge the objectivity of any person on this list. 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 Chair of the SCSD or their designee will consider these challenges when making a final decision regarding Appeal Committee membership. If the Chair of the SCSD does not serve on the Appeal Committee, they or their designee will select a faculty member to chair the Appeal Committee.
2. The Appeal Committee will review all materials that were provided to the Panel, the recording of the hearing, the Notice(s) of Appeal, any documentation provided in support of the Notice(s) of Appeal, and any responses to the Notice(s) of Appeal.
3. The Appeal Committee will meet to consider the appeal and will be advised by an OSCR staff member who did not serve as an investigator; this OSCR staff member will not be allowed to vote. Neither the respondent nor the complainant will be allowed to attend the deliberations of the Appeal Committee.
Deliberations. The Appeal Committee will decide by simple majority vote whether the appellant has met any of the grounds for appeal. The decision of the Appeal Committee is final and binding on all parties.
Authority of the Appeal Committee. If the Appeal Committee determines that one (or more) of the grounds for appeal has been met, the Appeal Committee may:
1. Affirm the decision;
2. Modify the decision;
3. Remand the case to the original investigator or Panel (with instruction) or to a new investigator or Panel (with or without instruction) for a new decision; and/or
4. Modify any sanctions or restrictions imposed.
Notice of Decision. OSCR staff will provide simultaneous email notification of the Appeal Committee’s decision, including a rationale, to the parties within five business days of that decision.

Section 9: Procedural Time Frames

The anticipated duration of the investigation and hearing process, from the receipt of the formal complainant to the written notification of the Panel’s decision, is no more than 60 business days, but the investigator may extend this timeframe in increments of 10 business days for good cause provided the investigator or their designee notifies both parties in writing of the delay and the reason for the delay. Acceptable reasons include, but are not limited to, the complexity of the investigation, the number of witnesses, the need for language assistance or accommodation of disabilities, and the possibility of interruption by break periods.
The anticipated duration of the appeal process, from the written notification of the Panel’s decision to the notification of the Appeal Committee’s decision, is no more than 25 business days, but the Director may extend this timeframe in increments of 10 business days for good cause provided the Director or their designee notifies both parties in writing of the delay and the reason for the delay.
Any request for a reasonable extension of timeframes provided with rationale will be made to the Director of OSCR by submission to conflictresolution@illinois.edu. Any request will be judged on a case by-case basis for good cause with notice to the parties that includes the reason for the delay.

Section 10: Petitions to the Subcommittee on Sexual Misconduct

Persons who have been dismissed from the university for sexual misconduct may petition the Subcommittee on Sexual Misconduct for permission to re-enter the university in accordance with the procedures described in Article IV, Section 4.02.

If the complainant is still affiliated with the university, they will be offered the opportunity to participate in the petition hearing. Any participating complainant will meet with the petitioning panel prior to the respondent entering the hearing.

Section 11: Additional Responsibilities of the Title IX Coordinator in the Student Discipline System

Advisory Role of the Title IX Coordinator. The Director and the investigators may seek advice from the Title IX Coordinator or their designee regarding investigations, supportive measures, corrective action remedies, training, and compliance with Title IX and other federal, state, or local laws and regulations.
Title IX Coordinator Determination of Complaint Initiation. In the absence of a complaint or the withdrawal of any or all of the allegations in a complaint, and in the absence or termination of the informal resolution process, the Title IX Coordinator determines whether to initiate a complaint of sex discrimination, including sex-based harassment, under these procedures.
1. The Title IX Coordinator will consider several factors in determining whether to move forward with a complaint, including:
  1. Whether the allegations, as described, could constitute sex discrimination or sex-based harassment under the Sexual misconduct Policy;
  2. The complainant’s request not to proceed with the initiation of a complaint;
  3. The complainant’s reasonable safety concerns regarding initiation of a complaint;
  4. The risk that additional acts of sex discrimination would occur if a complaint is not initiated;
  5. The severity of the alleged sex discrimination, including whether the discrimination, if established, would require the removal of a respondent from campus or imposition of another disciplinary sanction to end the discrimination and prevent its recurrence;
  6. The age and relationship of the parties, including whether the respondent is an employee of the university;
  7. The scope of the alleged sex discrimination, including information suggesting a pattern, ongoing sex discrimination, or sex discrimination alleged to have impacted multiple individuals;
  8. The availability of evidence to assist a decisionmaker in determining whether sex discrimination occurred; and
  9. Whether the recipient could end the alleged sex discrimination and prevent its recurrence without initiating these procedures.
2. If a complaint is initiated, the complainant will be notified prior to doing so and the Title IX Coordinator or designee will appropriately address any reasonable concerns about the complainant’s safety or the safety of others, including by providing supportive measures.
Ensure No Continuation or Recurrence of Sex Discrimination. Regardless of whether a complaint is initiated or dismissed, The Title IX Coordinator or designee may take other appropriate prompt and effective steps to ensure that sex discrimination does not continue or recur within the university’s education program or activity.
Supportive Measures. The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign will offer and implement appropriate and reasonable supportive measures to the Parties upon a Report or a Complaint of prohibited conduct under the Sexual misconduct Policy.
1. The Title IX Coordinator or designee promptly makes supportive measures available to the Parties upon receiving a Report or a Complaint. At the time that supportive measures are offered, if a Complaint has not been filed, the university will inform the Complainant, in writing, that they may file a Complaint with the university either at that time or in the future. The Title IX Coordinator or designee will work with a party to ensure that their wishes are considered with respect to any planned and implemented supportive measures.
2. The university will maintain the confidentiality of the supportive measures, provided that confidentiality does not impair the university’s ability to provide those supportive measures. The university will act to ensure as minimal an academic/occupational impact on the Parties as possible. The university will implement measures in a way that does not unreasonably burden any party.
3. The range of supportive measures, as well as the process to request review of supportive measures, is available at Non-Exclusive List of Potential Supportive Measures and Corrective Action Remedies.
4. Violations of no contact orders or other restrictions may be referred to appropriate student or employee disciplinary/grievance processes for enforcement or added as collateral misconduct allegations to an ongoing Complaint under the Sexual misconduct Policy.
5. If the complainant or respondent is a postsecondary student with a disability, the Title IX Coordinator may consult, as appropriate, with DRES to determine how to comply with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. 794, in the implementation of supportive measures.
6. If the complainant or respondent is an elementary or secondary student with a disability, the Title IX Coordinator or their designee must consult with one or more members, as appropriate, of the student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP) team, 34 CFR 300.321, if any, or one or more members, as appropriate, of the group of persons responsible for the student’s placement decision under 34 CFR 104.35(c), if any, to determine how to comply with the requirements of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq., and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. 794, in the implementation of supportive measures.
Remedies or Other Actions. Following the conclusion of the disciplinary process, if there is a determination that sex discrimination, sex-based harassment, or retaliation occurred, in addition to any sanctions implemented through the disciplinary process, the Title IX Coordinator or their designee may implement additional remedies or actions with respect to the Complainant and/or other persons identified as having had equal access to the university’s education program or activity limited or denied by sex discrimination. Remedies or actions help ensure that sex discrimination does not continue or recur within the university’s education program or activity.
1. These remedies/actions may include, but are not limited to:
  1. Referral to counseling and health services
  2. Referral to the Employee Assistance Program or Faculty Staff Assistance and Well-Being Services
  3. Course and registration adjustments, such as retroactive withdrawals
  4. Education to the individual and/or the community
  5. Permanent alteration of housing assignments
  6. Permanent alteration of work arrangements for employees
  7. SafeWalks
  8. Climate surveys
  9. Policy modification and/or training
  10. Implementation of long-term contact limitations between the Parties
  11. Implementation of adjustments to academic deadlines, course schedules, etc.
2. At the discretion of the Title IX Coordinator or their designee, certain supportive measures may also be provided to the Parties even if no Policy violation is found.

Section 12: Privacy

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.
The university will not disclose the identity of the respondent, the complainant, or 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.
Notification that parties and advisors are prohibited from disclosing information obtained by OSCR through this process, to the extent that information is the work product of OSCR (meaning it has been produced, compiled, or written by OSCR for purposes of its investigation and resolution of a Complaint), without authorization. Parties and advisors are prohibited from publicly disclosing institutional work products that contain a party or witness’s personally identifiable information without authorization or consent. Doing so can be subject to discipline under the University of Illinois Code of Conduct or the University of Illinois Student Code.²

² Disclosures of such information and evidence for purposes of administrative proceedings or litigation related to the complaint of Sex Discrimination or Sex-Based Harassment is authorized.

Section 13: Required Training and Conflicts of Interest and Bias

All investigators, Panel members, SCSD members, the Title IX Coordinator and their designees, and any other individual responsible for implementing this Procedure for Allegations of Sexual misconduct (“procedure”) must receive annual training in compliance with federal and state laws and regulations.
Any individual materially involved in the administration of this procedure, including the Title IX Coordinator, Investigator, OSCR staff member, Panel member, or SCSD member, may neither have nor demonstrate a conflict of interest or bias for a Party generally, or specifically.
Any individual materially involved in the administration of this procedure who has a conflict of interest with respect to a specific case or party, or complainants or respondents generally, must recuse themselves from any role in that case.

Section 14: Record-Keeping

OSCR will maintain for a period of at least seven years records of the following:
1. The investigation, including any determinations regarding responsibility and any sanctions or behavioral restrictions imposed;
2. The recording of the formal hearing; and
3. Any appeal and the result therefrom.
4. Any remedies provided to the complainant unless records of such remedies are maintained elsewhere, as in the Title IX Office.