Article IV: Miscellaneous

Section 4.01: Subcommittee Member Selection and Removal

Goal. In order to staff the graduate and undergraduate disciplinary subcommittees, students, staff, and faculty are encouraged to apply for this opportunity. Information is sent to the Registered Student Organization office, department heads within Student Affairs and various campus offices requesting that they encourage interested students to serve. The membership of the subcommittees should strive to be representative of the diverse make-up of the university community. The Board of Fraternity Affairs, Board of Sorority Affairs, Veterinary Medicine and Law School subcommittee selection processes are noted in the appendices of this document.
Minimum qualifications of student members. Minimum qualifications of student members are:
1. A student enrolled full-time at the UIUC campus.
2. Approximately two full semesters are still required for the degree.
3. Good academic standing with at least a 2.5 grade point average.
4. Note: The selection committee may consider information about applicants currently subject to any disciplinary sanction or pending disciplinary action.
Minimum qualifications of faculty members. Minimum qualifications of faculty members are:
1. A faculty member with a faculty appointment.
2. Primary appointment to the UIUC campus.
3. Demonstrated experience teaching, advising, and/or developing students.
Minimum qualifications of staff members. Minimum qualifications of staff members are:
1. A staff member with an academic professional or civil service appointment at the UIUC campus.
2. Demonstrated experience working with students.
3. At least one year on the UIUC campus.
Solicitation Process. A Search Committee will be appointed by the Senate Committee on Student Discipline generally no later than the first week of class of the Spring Semester. It will consist of the Chair of the Senate Committee on Student Discipline, or their designee, as Chair of the Search Committee, one faculty member and one undergraduate student member of the Senate Committee on Student Discipline, and one faculty member and one undergraduate student member of the subcommittee on Undergraduate Student Conduct.
Appointment. The Search Committee will submit a slate of nominees to the Senate Committee on Student Discipline generally no later than May 1. The Senate Committee on Student Discipline shall appoint the members of its subcommittee(s) on Student Conduct. Appointments will be effective on the first day of classes of the succeeding fall semester. The appointment term is for one (1) year. Appointment for an additional term may occur upon recommendation by the Senate Committee on Student Discipline.
Emergency Appointments. Emergency, one-time appointments to a subcommittee may be made by the Executive Director if that appointee has been previously trained on the disciplinary procedures.
Interim Appointments. Interim appointments beyond one week shall be appointed by the Senate Committee on Student Discipline and must be appropriately trained on the disciplinary procedures before engaging in the process.
Chair. The subcommittee Chair must be a member of the faculty or staff.
Removal. A subcommittee member may voluntarily terminate their appointment at any time. A member may be involuntarily removed from service for cause. Examples of removal for cause are:
1. Failure to attend two (2) hearings without prior notice;
2. Breach of confidence;
3. Poor performance;
4. Disruptive behavior; or
5. Acting in a manner that is not in the best interest of the university.
Removal Process. Requests to involuntarily remove a member for cause shall be brought to the attention of the Executive Director. The Executive Director shall submit valid requests for removal to the Chair of the SCSD. The SCSD shall have ultimate authority to consider or refuse to consider a request for removal.

Section 4.02: Student Petitions

Petitions to the Appropriate Subcommittee on Student Conduct
1. Persons who have been dismissed from the university for disciplinary reasons may petition for permission to re-enter the university.
2. A petitioner is not a member of the university community. Petitioners must demonstrate that they are fit to return to the academic community, not simply that they have completed all listed sanctions in the dismissal letter.
3. For a petition to be considered:
  1. The petition must be filed before November 1 for fall petition requests and before March 15 for spring petitions;
  2. The petitioner must provide documentation that all educational requirements and conditions have been fully and completely satisfied.
4. This petition should minimally include:
  1. A description of the incident(s) for which the sanction was assigned and the responsibility the student had in the violation.
  2. A description of the behavioral changes the petitioner has made since the incident(s) and completion of the sanction(s).
  3. The petitioner’s anticipated graduation date and the career and/or additional education plans they have following graduation.
5. The petitioner will be invited to address the appropriate subcommittee to discuss the petition in a statement of ten or fewer minutes in duration. The petitioner may invite an advisor to the petition, but this advisor may not actively participate in the petition hearing.
6. If (1) the final decision in the case for which the petitioner was dismissed included a finding that the petitioner caused bodily harm to a student victim or otherwise engaged in sex-based misconduct directed at a student victim, and (2) the victim indicated to OSCR staff at the time of the original decision that they would like to participate in any future petition hearings (or later indicated to OSCR staff that they would like to participate in any future petition hearings), then the victim will be invited (by email) to participate in the petition hearing. If the victim chooses to participate, they may submit a written statement or present an oral statement of ten or fewer minutes in duration to the subcommittee prior to the petitioner’s statement. Neither the petitioner nor the victim will be present while the other is addressing the subcommittee.
7. A university CC will participate as an advisor to the subcommittee during the petition hearing but may not vote. If the CC originally assigned to the case for which the petitioner was dismissed is available and if, in the judgment of the Director, this individual’s participation would not interfere with the operations of the Office for Student Conflict Resolution, then this individual will serve as the subcommittee’s advisor.
8. Petitions to the subcommittee may not be appealed by the petitioner and are therefore not audio recorded. However, the Dean of Students may appeal a petition decision that is manifestly unfair to the university or the petitioner.
9. The decision of the Subcommittee will be made by a simple majority vote of members present, including the Chair. In the event of a tie vote, the petition will be denied.
10. The subcommittee may:
  1. Deny the petition and assign a new date and new requirements for the next consideration of the petition;
  2. Grant the petition and allow the petitioner to pursue the readmission process for a specified Fall or Spring semester. Petitioners will not be allowed to register for Summer or Winter courses that are offered prior to the specified Fall or Spring semester.
11. Student petitioners granted permission to pursue readmission are assigned the formal sanction of Conduct Probation until Graduation. A subcommittee may assign a lesser formal sanction if strong mitigating factors warrant such action.
12. The subcommittee’s decision to grant the petitioner the right to pursue the readmission process does not abrogate the right of any college to deny readmission on the basis of scholarship.

Section 4.03: Procedures in Cases of Interim Suspension by the Chancellor

In General. The Chancellor's power of interim suspension exists independently of the jurisdiction of the Senate Committee on Student Discipline. The Chancellor will develop and implement procedures to assure both effective disposition and due process. Should the Chancellor choose to refer the matter, the Senate Committee on Student Discipline will conduct a preliminary hearing to assure that the interim suspension pending a formal hearing remains necessary.
Procedures for the Preliminary Hearing.
1. A special subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Student Discipline shall be appointed by the Chair of the SCSD to conduct a preliminary hearing. The special subcommittee shall review the circumstances of the suspension within 24 hours of referral of the matter. The preliminary hearing may be held later upon request of the Administration or of the respondent(s) if good cause is shown, or upon the initiative of the subcommittee if it appears that a hearing could not reasonably be conducted within this time period.
2. The special subcommittee shall be composed of three members of the Senate Committee on Student Discipline who shall be two faculty members and one student. The Executive Director shall be an ex-officio member.
3. The Preliminary Hearing shall be limited to the question of whether continuation of the suspension is necessary to avoid an obvious danger to the university community.
4. The Chancellor or designee shall present to the special subcommittee information relating to (a) the reason(s) for invoking suspension; (b) the reason(s) for seeking continuation of the suspension; (c) the prior disciplinary record of the respondent; (d) and any other information considered by the Chancellor in making their decision.
5. The respondent(s) shall be invited to attend the Preliminary Hearing of the subcommittee and shall be permitted to present information relating to the incident, their background, and academic record which may be relevant to the subcommittee’s decision.
6. Depending upon the class status of the respondent(s), the Dean of Students for undergraduate students, the Dean of the College of Law for law students, the Dean of the College of Veterinary Medicine for veterinary medicine students, or the Dean of the Graduate College for graduate students, or their respective delegates, may be invited to participate in the Preliminary Hearing.
7. Respondent(s) shall be permitted to invite an advisor to the Preliminary Hearing, but this advisor may not actively participate in the process.
8. The subcommittee shall meet in executive session and may (a) continue the suspension, (b) remove the suspension, or (c) remove the suspension upon condition(s).
9. If the suspension is continued, the matter shall be referred directly to the appropriate subcommittee on student conduct or to an appointed CC for consideration as a matter of immediate priority. If removed, the matter will be referred directly to the appropriate subcommittee on student conduct or to an appointed CC for consideration in due course.
10. If the interim suspension is removed or ultimately the student is allowed to resume classes after a full hearing, the Chancellor’s office shall communicate with the respondent’s course instructors to facilitate make-up exams and assignments.
11. The interim suspension shall not be reflected on the respondent's transcript.
12. If the final hearing decision is appealed to SCSD, the three members of the special subcommittee may not be present at the appeal.
13. The respondent may waive their right to a preliminary hearing, in which case the matter will be referred to the appropriate subcommittee on student conduct.

Section 4.04: Criminal/Disciplinary History Review Committee

Consistent with university and system policies and procedures, the multidisciplinary Criminal/Disciplinary History Review Committee, which is chaired by the Director, reviews criminal and disciplinary history disclosures from undergraduate and graduate applicants to the university. The Senate Committee on Student Discipline authorizes this review committee to issue formal and educational sanctions (see §2.09) to students who accept admission but who have disclosed incidents that are concerning to the review committee. Disciplinary officers and the subcommittees on student conduct may consider any such sanction an aggravating factor if the student is subsequently found to have violated university policy while subject to the Student Code.

Section 4.05: Access to Records and Record Retention

Access. Respondents and complainants are permitted to view disciplinary records and files. Hard copies will not be provided unless a failure to provide copies would prevent an eligible party from accessing the necessary information.
Record Retention and Release. Disciplinary records will be retained for a minimum of seven years. Disciplinary records are subject to release according to the retention policies dictated by the controlling formal sanction as outlined in §2.09 above. For students who have been sanctioned for more than one case, the most serious formal sanction is the controlling one. For students who have been issued their most serious formal sanction on more than one occasion, the most recent one is controlling.

Section 4.06: No Contact Directives

Authority. University CCs are among those responsible for the enforcement of student behavioral standards and, when possible, the prevention of violations of the Student Code. In addition, students are expected to comply with the reasonable directions of university officials acting in the performance of their duties. For these reasons, the Senate Committee on Student Discipline recognizes the right of CCs to direct an individual subject to student discipline, as described in §1-301(c) of the Student Code, to have no contact with one or more other persons.
Expectations of Recipients. A university no contact directive prohibits all contact between the identified parties ("Contact" includes physical contact with the other party as well as written, verbal, electronic, and third-party communications to them. Contact does not include an exercise of the right to free speech, freedom of the press, or right to assembly that is otherwise lawful. Contact does not include inadvertent contact or merely being in the physical presence of the other party in a public location but does include intentional conduct directed at the other party that a reasonable person under the circumstances would conclude is intended to intimidate or harass, whether such conduct occurs in public or in private.
Violations. If a No Contact Directive recipient fails to comply with the directive, they will face disciplinary action for violating §1-302(g) of the Student Code. The Senate Committee on Student Discipline recommends dismissal from the university in such cases. Please note that students who request No Contact Directives against other students thereby agree to be held to the same stipulations and will also face disciplinary action for initiating contact with the other party.
Procedures.
1. Notice. If, based upon a report received or a direct request from a member of the university community, a CC believes that a No Contact Directive is warranted, the CC will notify all recipients in writing, typically by email. The directive will be effective when the notification is sent and will last until further notice if no end date is specified. The University of Illinois Police Department is also notified of all No Contact Directives for informational purposes only.
2. Meeting. The issuing CC will attempt to meet with all recipients. At this meeting, the CC will explain their expectations in detail as well as the consequences for noncompliance. The recipient will also be given an opportunity to explain to the issuing CC why the No Contact Directive should not be continued.
3. Modifications. If the issuing CC decides that modifications or exceptions to the No Contact Directive are necessary, they will communicate these changes to all parties in writing, typically by email.
4. Rescission. A No Contact Directive may only be rescinded by the issuing CC, the issuing CC’s supervisor, the Director, or, if the directive has been issued as part of an investigation, by the hearing body responsible for deciding the case.
Status of Record. Unless issued as a sanction in a disciplinary case, a No Contact Directive does not, on its own, constitute a disciplinary finding against the student and is not part of the student’s official disciplinary record. As such, it would not be reported as part of a routine disciplinary background check. A No Contact Directive issued as a sanction in a disciplinary case is subject to release according to the retention policies dictated by the controlling formal sanction as outlined in §2.09 above.

Section 4.07: Informal Resolution Options

Informal Resolution Meeting Process.
1. Once a report of alleged misconduct is received by the Office for Student Conflict Resolution, the Director will evaluate whether the resulting case should be handled through the Informal Resolution Meeting Process (IRMP). The Director will apply the following principles when conducting this evaluation:
  1. If the report includes allegations of violence and/or sex-based misconduct, the case is not appropriate for the IRMP.
  2. If the report includes allegations of misconduct directed at another student, the case is not appropriate for the IRMP.
  3. If the report includes allegations of noncompliance with emergency directives (including those associated with public health emergencies), directives from the Threat Assessment Team or any other university entity tasked with threat assessment and management, or any other directives intended to protect the university community or any individual member thereof, the case is not appropriate for the IRMP.
  4. If the report includes allegations that, either on their own or in combination with the student’s disciplinary history, would render the student subject to suspension or dismissal, the case is not appropriate for the IRMP.
  5. If the student subject of the report has no disciplinary history (and has not participated in the IRMP before) and none of the above rules exclude the case from consideration for the IRMP, then the case should strongly be considered for the IRMP.
  6. If the student subject of the report has some disciplinary history (or has participated in the IRMP before) and none of the above rules exclude the case from consideration, then the Director may still determine that the case is appropriate for the IRMP, but only after carefully assessing the nature of both the past incidents and the new report.
2. If the Director determines that a case is appropriate for the IRMP, then:
  1. The Director will assign the case to a Case Coordinator (CC).
  2. The CC will send a notice to the student informing them that (a) a report has been received; (b) no formal investigation has been opened or formal accusation has been made; (c) the student is required to meet with the CC and engage in the conversation; (d) if the student cooperates, the case will be closed without disciplinary action; (e) if the student does not cooperate, the case will be charged and investigated under Article II of the Student Disciplinary Procedures.
  3. The CC will meet with the student and broadly discuss the report and the student’s experiences.
  4. Based on the meeting, the CC may refer the student to other campus or community resources, but the student will not be required to follow through.
  5. The CC will retain a record of the meeting and any referrals, but the record will not be considered part of the student’s official disciplinary record.
Sex-Based Misconduct Informal Resolution Process.
1. Applicability. At the discretion of the Director and in accordance with the rules in subsection (ii) below, the Sex-based Misconduct Informal Resolution Process (SMIRP) may be used to resolve any case involving allegations of prohibited conduct.
2. Rules.
  1. Participation in SMIRP is voluntary. Neither party is required to participate in this process. SMIRP will be initiated only if both the complainant and the respondent voluntarily consent, in writing, to participate. Consent to the SMIRP process does not waive the right to an investigation and determination of a complaint or the exercise of any other right.
  2. SMIRP may be initiated at any time prior to a determination.
  3. Any party may withdraw from SMIRP at any time prior to conclusion of the process and continue with the applicable formal procedures for investigation and adjudication.
  4. SMIRP may not be offered to any cases where the complainant is a minor.
  5. All SMIRP facilitators need to take appropriate prompt and effective steps to ensure that sex discrimination does not continue or recur in the education program or activity
3. Procedures.
  1. To initiate SMIRP, a respondent or complainant must submit their request, in writing, to their assigned CC (or investigator).
  2. The Director, in consultation with the Title IX Coordinator, will evaluate the case to determine if SMIRP is appropriate. The Parties’ preferences are considered, but whether SMIRP is appropriate and can be utilized in response to a report or complaint is ultimately the Director’s decision. Among the factors the Director may consider when determining whether SMIRP is appropriate are the following:
    1. The nature and severity of the alleged behavior
    2. The civility of the parties
    3. The complexity of the complaint or the skill of the facilitator with this type of report or complaint
    4. Whether the alleged conduct would present a future risk of harm to others
    5. The results of any safety and risk assessment or ongoing risk analysis
    6. The respondent’s disciplinary history
    7. Any power dynamics between the parties
    8. Whether the process would conflict with Federal, State, or local law
  3. If SMIRP is not appropriate, OSCR staff will notify the requestor in writing.
  4. If it is determined that a case is appropriate for SMIRP, then the Director will assign a staff member with mediation skills training to serve as the facilitator for SMIRP (“facilitator”).
    1. The facilitator must not be the same person as the investigator, Chair, or have any role in the decision making in Appendix D or E.
    2. Any facilitator designated to facilitate SMIRP must not have a conflict of interest or bias for or against complainants or respondents generally or an individual complainant or respondent. Any person facilitating SMIRP must receive annual training in compliance with federal and state laws and regulations.
  5. OSCR will obtain voluntary, written confirmation that all Parties wish to resolve the matter through informal resolution before proceeding and will not pressure the Parties to participate.
  6. Before initiation of the SMIRP process, the facilitator will provide to the parties notice that explains:
    1. The allegations;
    2. The requirements of SMIRP;
    3. That, prior to agreeing to a resolution, any party has the right to withdraw from SMIRP and initiate or resume the disciplinary procedures in Appendix D or E;
    4. That the parties’ agreement to a resolution at the conclusion of SMIRP would preclude the parties from initiating or resuming disciplinary procedures arising from the same allegations;
    5. The potential terms that may be requested or offered in an informal resolution agreement, including notice that an informal resolution agreement is binding only on the parties; and
    6. What information the university will maintain and whether and how the university could disclose such information for use in disciplinary procedures under Appendix D or E, if disciplinary procedures are initiated or resumed.
  7. Once initiated, the assigned facilitator will meet with the parties to understand their desires regarding process and resolution and to discuss next steps.
  8. The facilitator will then work with the parties to draft a resolution agreement. Once signed by the parties, this agreement will be reviewed by the Director in consultation with the Title IX Coordinator. If the Director determines that the agreement is reasonably enforceable and in the interest of the university, the Director will sign the agreement, at which point it will become final and binding.
  9. Once a resolution agreement is finalized, the formal complaint is thereby resolved and may not be refiled unless the Director determines that the respondent has failed to abide by the terms of the agreement. Additionally, the failure by any party to abide by the terms of the final resolution agreement may result in disciplinary action.
  10. If the parties are not able to reach an agreement within a reasonable amount of time (as determined by the Director) or the Director determines that the agreement is not both reasonably enforceable and in the interest of the university, SMIRP will conclude without resolution.
4. Supportive measures are available to both parties to restore or preserve that person’s access to the university education program or activity or to provide support during SMIRP. The Title IX Office can facilitate available supportive measures for the parties. For more information, including the range of supportive measures, visit Non-Exclusive List of Potential Supportive Measures and Corrective Action Remedies.
5. Records. The Office for Student Conflict Resolution will maintain SMIRP records documenting the process for a period of no fewer than seven years.