Discrimination, Harassment, Sexual Misconduct, & Retaliation Grievance Process

“Admission” means selection for part-time, full-time, special, associate, transfer, exchange, or
any other enrollment, membership, or matriculation in or at an education program or activity
operated by the university.

“Business Days” Business Days are those days on which university offices are officially open
for business and classes are in session.

“Campus Security Authority (CSA)” The Clery Act (34 CFR 668.46) defines a CSA as:

1.   A campus police department or a campus security department of an institution.
2.   Any individual or individuals who have responsibility for campus security but who
     do not constitute a campus police department or a campus security department,
     such as an individual who is responsible for monitoring entrance into institutional
     property.
3.   Any individual or organization specified in an institution's statement of campus
     security policy as an individual or organization to which students and employees
   should report criminal offenses.
4.  An official of an institution who has significant responsibility for student and
     campus activities, including but not limited to student housing, student discipline,
     and campus judicial proceedings.

Pastoral and professional counselors are not considered a Campus Security Authority when
acting in their roles as a pastoral or professional counselor.

“Complainant” means:

• A student or employee who is alleged to have been subjected to conduct that could
  constitute unlawful discrimination; or
• A person other than a student or employee who is alleged to have been subjected to
  conduct that could constitute unlawful discrimination and who was participating or
  attempting to participate in the university’s education program or activity at the time of
  the alleged discrimination.
• A parent, guardian, or other authorized legal representative with the legal right to act
  on behalf of a complainant.

Note that a person is entitled to make a complaint of sex-based harassment only if they
themselves are alleged to have been subjected to the sex-based harassment, if they have a
legal right to act on behalf of such person, or if the Title IX Coordinator(s) initiates a
complaint consistent with the requirements of 34 C.F.R. § 106.44(f)(1)(v).

With respect to complaints of sex discrimination other than sex-based harassment, in
addition to the people listed above, the following persons have a right to make a complaint:

• Any student or employee of the university, or
• Any person other than a student or employee who was participating or attempting to
  participate in the university’s education program or activity at the time of the alleged
  sex discrimination.

“Complaint” means an oral or written request to the university that objectively can be
understood as a request for the university to investigate and make a determination about
alleged discrimination, harassment, or sexual misconduct.

“Confidential Employee” means an employee of a university whose communications are
privileged or confidential under Federal or State law.

• The employee’s confidential status, for purposes of this definition, is only with respect
  to information received while the employee is functioning within the scope of their
  duties to which privilege or confidentiality applies.
• An employee of a university whom the university has designated as confidential
  under this policy, for the purpose of providing services to persons related to
  discrimination, harassment or sexual misconduct.
• A confidential employee must still explain how to contact the Equity Administrator /
  Title IX Coordinator, how to make a complaint, and how the Equity Administrator /
  Title IX Coordinator may be able to offer and coordinate supportive measures as well
  as options for complaint resolution.
• If the employee also has a duty not associated with providing those services, the
  employee’s confidential status is only with respect to information received about
  sexual misconduct in connection with providing those services.
• An employee who is conducting an Institutional Review Board-approved human-
  subjects research study designed to gather information about sex discrimination—but
  the employee’s confidential status is only with respect to information received while
  conducting the study.

“Disciplinary Sanctions” means consequences imposed on a respondent following a
formal determination under this policy that the respondent violated the university’s prohibition
on unlawful discrimination, harassment and/or sexual misconduct, or retaliation.

“Employee” means any individual hired directly by the University of Central Missouri to
perform work at the direction of the University, whether hired part-time or full-time, at will or
contractual, temporary or budgeted, and whether staff, faculty, or administrator.

“Equity Administrator(s)” The individual designated by the university to respond to allegations
of discrimination or harassment based on a protected class(es) against members of the
university community. In some circumstances, this can include the Equity Administrator’s
designee. Members of the university community may contact the University or campus Equity
Administrator regarding the applicable policy and processes.

“Hostile Environment Harassment” is defined as unwelcome sex-based conduct that, based
on the totality of circumstances, is subjectively and objectively offensive and is so severe or
pervasive that it limits or denies a person’s ability to participate in or benefit from an institution’s
education program or activity (i.e., creates a hostile environment). Whether a hostile
environment has been created is a fact-specific inquiry.

“Informal Resolution” may include, but is not limited to, mediation, voluntary written
agreements, voluntary no contact orders, and other voluntary agreed upon boundaries and
expectations. Informal resolution may be pursued only after a complaint is received and, after
being informed of their options, both parties mutually and voluntarily agree to an informal
resolution. Agreement to engage in informal resolution may be withdrawn any time prior to
agreeing to a resolution.

“Investigator” The person designated by the Title IX Coordinator and/or Equity Administrator
responsible for gathering facts and data related to the case.

“Mandated Reporter” Any employee of the University, except as noted below*, who becomes
aware of discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation, while in the scope of their job, is a
Mandated Reporter. A mandated reporter must provide information regardless of whether the
behavior is by a student, employee, volunteer or visitor of the University.

A mandated reporter is one who either has authority to institute corrective measures on behalf
of the university, or has responsibility for administrative leadership, teaching, or advising in the
university’s programs or activities.

*Does not apply to an employee who may be a complainant (i.e. not required to self-report), or
Confidential Employees as defined by this policy.

• Applies to acting in the official capacity of employment when disclosure was made.
• After information is submitted by a mandated reporter, a mandated reporter will not be
  contacted further, or updated, by the University, unless otherwise deemed necessary by
  the University.
• A mandated reporter should not investigate. Only report the information.
• If the situation is an emergency or requires an immediate response, please contact the
  appropriate authorities before submitting a report.
• A mandated reporter is required to report themselves, and not rely on anyone else to do
  so, even if other mandated reporters are also present.
• A mandated reporter may not remain anonymous or confidential.
• Failure to Report: As a mandated reporter, it is a violation of this policy to fail to report
  matters of discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation, no matter the
  circumstances. Failure to report may result in disciplinary action, up to or including
  termination.

“Party” means a complainant or respondent.

“Peer retaliation” means retaliation, as previously defined, by a student against another
student.

“Pregnancy or related conditions” means:

• Pregnancy, childbirth, termination of pregnancy, or lactation.
• Medical conditions related to pregnancy, childbirth, termination of pregnancy, or
  lactation.
• Recovery from pregnancy, childbirth, termination of pregnancy, lactation, or related
  medical conditions.

“Program or activity” means any operation of the university, including: (1) locations, events, or
circumstances where the university exercised substantial control over both the Respondent and
the context in which the unlawful harassment occurs; and (2) any building owned or controlled
by the university or a student organization officially recognized by the university.

“Recipient” means the institution, or organization, or other entity, or any person, to whom
Federal financial assistance is extended directly or through another university and which
operates an education program or activity which receives such assistance, including any
subunit, successor, assignee, or transferee thereof. For purposes of this policy, “recipient”
means the University of Central Missouri.

“Relevant” means related to the allegations of discrimination, harassment or sexual
misconduct under investigation as part of the grievance procedures. Questions are relevant
when they seek evidence that may aid in showing whether the allegations occurred, and
evidence is relevant when it may aid a decisionmaker in determining whether the alleged
unlawful discrimination, harassment or sexual misconduct occurred.

“Remedies” means 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 discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation, to restore or
preserve that person’s access to the university’s education program or activity.

“Respondent” is an individual who is alleged to have violated the university’s prohibition on
discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation.

“Student” is a person who has gained admission to the University of Central Missouri.

“University” means the University of Central Missouri.

 

 “Consent” is permission and willingness to engage in sexual activity, must be knowing and

voluntary, and is a continuous and voluntary agreement to engage in the sexual activity.
Consent, lack of consent, and withdrawal of consent can be given by word or action, at any
time. Consent to one form of sexual activity cannot be automatically taken as consent to any
other form of sexual activity. Further, consent to engage in sexual activity with one person or in
one instance does not imply consent to engage in sexual activity with another person or at
another time. Silence or lack of resistance does not equate to consent. Someone who is
incapacitated cannot give consent, and consent does not exist when the respondent knew or
should have known of the other individual’s incapacitation. Consent cannot be given by
someone who has not met the legal age of consent or someone who does not have knowledge
of the nature of the act or the ability to make a reasonable judgment concerning the nature of
the act. Coercion, force, or intimidation, or the threat of any of these, invalidates consent.

“Dating violence” means violence committed by a person:

● Who is or has been in a social relationship of a romantic or intimate nature with the
victim; and
● Where the existence of such a relationship shall be determined based on a
consideration of the following factors:

1. The length of the relationship;
2. The type of relationship; and
3. The frequency of interaction between the persons involved in the relationship.

“Domestic violence” means felony or misdemeanor crimes committed by a person who:

● Is a current or former spouse or intimate partner of the victim under the family or
domestic violence laws of the jurisdiction of the university, or a person similarly
situated to a spouse of the victim;
● Is cohabitating, or has cohabitated, with the victim as a spouse or intimate partner;
● Shares a child in common with the victim; or

● Commits acts against a youth or adult victim who is protected from those acts under
the family or domestic violence laws of the jurisdiction.

○ Missouri defines "Domestic violence" as abuse or stalking committed by a
family or household member, as such terms are defined in this section
○ Missouri defines "Family" or "household member" as spouses, former
spouses, any person related by blood or marriage, persons who are presently
residing together or have resided together in the past, any person who is or
has been in a continuing social relationship of a romantic or intimate nature
with the victim, and anyone who has a child in common regardless of whether
they have been married or have resided together at any time.

Note: If a roommate conflict arises and is not sex-based, the matter will be addressed
through University Housing.

“Incapacitation” is a state where someone cannot make rational, purposeful decisions
because they lack the capacity to give knowing consent (e.g., they lack the ability to understand
the "who, what, when, where, why, or how" of their sexual interaction). This definition also
covers a person whose incapacity results from mental disability, sleep, illness, involuntary
physical restraint, or from the effect of drugs.

Relevant factors may include, but are not limited to, the following: lack of awareness of
circumstances or surroundings, inability to communicate coherently, lack of control over
physical movements. The use of alcohol and other drugs never makes someone at fault for
being sexually assaulted. The use of alcohol or other drugs will not function as a defense to a
violation of the sexual misconduct policy.

“Sex-based harassment” is a form of sex discrimination and is harassment on the basis of
sex, including on the basis of sex stereotypes, sex characteristics, pregnancy or related
conditions, sexual orientation, and gender identity, and falls into one of three categories:

1. Quid pro quo harassment. An employee, agent, or other person authorized by the
university to provide an aid, benefit, or service under the university’s education program
or activity explicitly or impliedly conditioning the provision of such an aid, benefit, or
service on a person’s participation in unwelcome sexual conduct; or

2. Hostile environment harassment. Unwelcome sex-based conduct that, based on the
totality of the circumstances, is subjectively and objectively offensive and is so severe or
pervasive that it limits or denies a person’s ability to participate in or benefit from the
university’s education program or activity (i.e., creates a hostile environment).

Whether a hostile environment has been created is a fact-specific inquiry that includes
consideration of the following:

a. The degree to which the conduct affected the complainant’s ability to access the
university’s education program or activity;
b. The type, frequency, and duration of the conduct;
c. The parties’ ages, roles within the university’s education program or activity,
previous interactions, and other factors about each party that may be relevant to
evaluating the effects of the conduct;
d. The location of the conduct and the context in which the conduct occurred; and
e. Other sex-based harassment in the university’s education program or activity; or

3. Specific offenses (Clery Crimes).

i. Sexual assault
ii. Dating violence

iii. Domestic violence
iv. Stalking

“Sexual Assault” means an offense classified as a forcible or nonforcible sex offense under
the Uniform Crime Reporting system (UCR) of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Sex
offenses are defined as any sexual act directed against another person, without the consent of
the victim, Sexual Assault can include:

● Rape: Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or
object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, or by a sex-related object
without the consent of the victim. This definition also includes instances in which the
victim is incapable of giving consent because of temporary or permanent mental or
physical incapacity (including due to the influence of drugs or alcohol) or because of
age. Physical resistance is not required on the part of the victim to demonstrate lack of
consent.

○ Sodomy: Oral or anal sexual intercourse with another person, without the
consent of the victim, including instances where the victim is unable to give
consent because of his/her age or because of his/her temporary or permanent
mental or physical incapacity.
○ Sexual Assault With An Object: To use an object or instrument to unlawfully
penetrate, however slightly, the genital or anal opening of the body of another
person, without the consent of the victim, including instances where the victim is
unable to give consent because of his/her age or because of his/her temporary or
permanent mental or physical incapacity.
○ An “object” or “instrument” is anything used by the offender other than the
offender’s genitalia, (e.g., a finger, bottle, weapon)

● Fondling (non-consensual sexual contact): The touching of the private body parts of
another person for the purpose of sexual gratification, without the consent of the victim,
including instances where the victim is unable to give consent because of his/her age or
because of his/her temporary or permanent mental or physical incapacity.
● Incest: Nonforcible sexual intercourse between persons who are related to each other
within the degrees wherein marriage is prohibited by law.
● Statutory Rape: Nonforcible sexual intercourse with a person who is under the statutory
age of consent. There is no force or coercion used in Statutory Rape; the act is not an
attack.

Sexual assault also includes, but not limited to:

● Knowingly causing another person to engage in a sexual act by using force against that
    other person or by threatening or placing that other person in fear.
● Engaging in a sexual act with another person after knowingly rendering that person
    unconscious.
● Administering to another person by force or threat of force, or without the knowledge or
    permission of that person, a drug, intoxicant, or other similar substance and thereby
   substantially impairing the ability of that other person to appraise or control sexual
   conduct.
● Knowingly engaging in a sexual act with another person if that other person is incapable
    of appraising the nature of the conduct or is physically incapable of declining
   participation in or communicating unwillingness to engage in that sexual act.
● Knowingly engaging in sexual contact with another person without the other person’s
    permission (consent).
● The federal statute proscribes any attempts to commit any of these acts.

“Sexual exploitation” is the abuse of a person’s vulnerability, power, or trust for sexual
purposes. Sexual exploitation occurs when one person takes non-consensual or abusive sexual

advantage of another person for one’s own advantage or benefit or for the advantage or benefit
of anyone other than the person being exploited, and this behavior does not constitute any other
form of sexual misconduct. Examples of sexual exploitation include, but are not limited to, the
following activities done without the consent of all participants:

● Invasion of sexual privacy;
● Prostituting another person;
● Taping or recording of sexual activity;
● Going beyond the boundaries of consent to sexual activity (e.g., letting your friends hide
to watch you engaging in sexual activity);
● Engaging in voyeurism;
● Knowingly transmitting an STI, STD, venereal disease, or HIV to another person;
● Inducing another to expose their genitals;
● Distribution of intimate images;
● Pornography
● Use or distribution of drugs or alcohol with intent to facilitate sexual contact without
consent (i.e., predatory drugs or alcohol);
● Extortion/Blackmail

“Stalking” means engaging in a course of conduct directed at a specific person that would
cause a reasonable person to:

● Fear for the person’s safety or the safety of others; or
● Suffer substantial emotional distress.

Missouri defines “Emotional Distress” as something markedly greater than the level of
uneasiness, nervousness, unhappiness, or the like, which are commonly experienced in day-to-
day living.

“Title IX” means Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Pub. L. 92-318; 20 U.S.C.
1681, 1682, 1683, 1685, 1686, 1687, 1688, 1689), as amended.

“Title IX Coordinator(s)”: The individual designated by the university to respond to allegations
of sexual misconduct involving members of the university community. This also includes Deputy
Title IX Coordinators, and in some circumstances, this can include a designee. Members of the
university community may contact the Title IX Coordinator or Deputy Coordinator(s) regarding
the applicable policy and processes.

An appeal regarding supportive measures is a formal request made by an individual (either the complainant or the respondent) involved in a complaint of Discrimination, Harassment, Sexual Misconduct or Retaliation. This appeal can be made when an individual believes that the supportive measures provided are insufficient, inappropriate, or have been unfairly denied, modified, or terminated. This process ensures that all individuals involved in a grievance process have the opportunity to have their concerns addressed and to seek a fair and equitable resolution.

Appeal link:

https://cm.maxient.com/reportingform.php?UnivofCentralMissouri&layout_id=21

Possible Outcomes:

• Modification of Supportive Measures: The Appellate Officer may modify the supportive measures to better meet the individual's needs without unreasonably burdening the other party.
• Continuation or Termination: Based on the appeal's findings, the supportive measures may be continued, modified, or terminated.

The University is committed to the safety and welfare of our University community members and seeks to facilitate access and remove barriers to those reporting and to those participating in the discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct and retaliation grievance process.  Sometimes persons are reluctant to report instances of discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation or may be reluctant to participate in a process because they fear being charged with policy violations, such as underage alcohol consumption or drug usage. 

To encourage reporting and facilitate access to supportive measures, individuals with an incident of discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation investigations will not be charged with alcohol, drug and most other policy violations under the student code of conduct related to their efforts to seek medical assistance or provide information about the alleged conduct. They may, however, be asked to discuss these choices in an educational context and supportive measures can be offered. This may not apply to university employees.

All members of the University community are expected to be honest and straightforward in their dealings with University processes, policies, activities, and personnel. Dishonesty or being disruptive to this grievance process (whether by a complainant, respondent, witness, advisor, or other participant) is grounds for disciplinary action. Choosing to not provide a statement or answer questions is not considered dishonesty or disruptive behavior under this procedure, but parties, witnesses, and other participants are asked to keep the Equity Administrator / Title IX Coordinator, investigator, and/or hearing officer informed of their willingness to participate in the various aspects of this process. However, UCM Employees may be compelled to participate as a witness in, or otherwise assist with, an investigation, proceeding, or hearing. 

After a report is filed, a complainant may wish to proceed to a complaint against a respondent or the university may independently choose to proceed with a complaint against the respondent. Filing a complaint of discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation is a formal process. To initiate this grievance process, a complainant must prepare and sign a formal complaint submitted to the Equity Administrator / Title IX Coordinator or designee.

So that the University has sufficient information, the complainant should complete a formal complaint form which will require disclosure of: (1) the date(s) and time(s) of the alleged conduct; (2) the names of all person(s) involved in the alleged conduct, including possible witnesses; (3) all details outlining what happened; and (4) contact information for the complainant so that the University may follow up appropriately.

In cases where the complainant is unwilling or unavailable to file a complaint, is not participating or attempting to participate in a program or activity, or otherwise does not meet the legal requirements of filing a complaint, the Equity Administrator / Title IX Coordinator may sign a complaint on behalf of the complainant.

• The Equity Administrator / Title IX Coordinator or designee will take into account the wishes of a complainant and only initiates a grievance process against the complainant’s wishes if doing so is deemed required by law or needed to protect the University community.
• The Equity Administrator / Title IX Coordinator or designee will document their reasons why each response to allegations of discrimination, harassment or sexual misconduct was not deliberately indifferent

The Equity Administrator / Title IX Coordinator or designee will consider a range of factors, including any potential risk that the respondent will commit additional acts of discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation, such as:

• Whether there have been or may be other discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation complaints about the same respondent;
• Whether the respondent has a history of arrests or records from a prior school indicating a history of violence, if available;
• Whether the respondent threatened further discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation against the complainant or others;
• Whether the discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation was committed by multiple respondents;
• Whether the discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation was perpetrated with a weapon;
• Whether the complainant is a minor;
• Whether the University possesses other means to obtain relevant evidence of discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation (e.g., security cameras or personnel, physical evidence);
• Whether the complainant's report reveals a pattern of perpetration (e.g., via illicit use of drugs or alcohol) at a given location or by a particular group.

When weighing the decision to initiate a complaint without permission from the complainant, the Equity Administrator / Title IX Coordinator may consult with UCM's Threat Assessment Team or other confidential advisors. This does not constitute a violation of confidentiality for any involved parties. 

The University will initiate a grievance process upon receipt of an oral or written complaint, or an Equity Administrator / Title IX Coordinator or designee initiates a grievance process. The only University official who is authorized to initiate a grievance process against a respondent is the Equity Administrator / Title IX Coordinator or their designee by signing a complaint.

In the absence of a complaint by either the complainant(s) or the Equity Administrator / Title IX Coordinator or designee, the University will not pursue disciplinary action or informal resolution under the discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation policy, but may proceed under other policies, if appropriate.  

The University will take reasonable steps to keep confidential the identity of any individual who has made a report or complaint of discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation, including any individual who has made a report or filed a complaint, any complainant, any individual who has been reported to be the perpetrator of discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation, any respondent, and any witness, except as may be permitted by, or as required by, law, including the provision of supportive measures and the conduct of any investigation or hearing. 

The University may consolidate complaints as to allegations of sexual misconduct, discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation, 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 of sexual misconduct, discrimination, harassment or retaliation arise out of the same facts or circumstances.

Where a grievance process involves more than one complainant or more than one respondent, references in this policy to the singular “party”, “complainant”, or “respondent” include the plural, as applicable.

UCM will respond promptly to discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct and retaliation under this policy in a manner that is not deliberately indifferent, which means that UCM’s response is not clearly unreasonable in light of the known circumstances. The University cannot guarantee that discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct and retaliation or other conduct prohibited by this policy will never occur in education programs or activities, but the University will respond to alleged misconduct in ways designed to ensure complainants and respondents equal access to education programs and activities without depriving any party of educational access without due process or fundamental fairness.

In implementing this policy, UCM will not restrict rights protected under the U.S. Constitution, including the First Amendment, Fifth Amendment, and Fourteenth Amendment.

 

In all cases, the grievance process begins with the receipt of an oral or written complaint, the University will provide a written notice to the parties. The notice will inform the parties of the University’s grievance process and informal resolution process.  Notice may be delayed due to safety concerns or law enforcement activity.

Emergency Removal. An emergency removal may be necessary if the university determines that an imminent and serious threat to the health or safety of a complainant or any students, employees, or other persons arising from the allegations of sex discrimination justifies removal. If a removal is determined necessary on an emergency basis, the university will have determined so through an individualized safety and risk analysis. The university will provide the respondent with notice of the emergency removal and an opportunity to appeal the decision immediately following the removal.  

Administrative Leave. An employee respondent may be placed on administrative leave from employment responsibilities during the pendency of the recipient’s grievance procedures. 

The notice will include the allegations potentially constituting discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation, including sufficient details known at the time, and will provide the parties sufficient time to prepare a response before any initial interview. Sufficient details include the identities of the parties alleged to be involved in the incident, if known, the conduct allegedly constituting discrimination, harassment, and/or sexual misconduct, and the date and location of the alleged incident, if known.

The written notice will also include:

• A statement that the respondent is presumed not responsible for the alleged conduct and that a determination regarding responsibility is made at the conclusion of the grievance process. 
• Notice that the parties may have an advisor of their choice, who may be, but is not required to be, an attorney, 
• Notice that the parties will have the opportunity to inspect and review evidence.
• Notice informing the parties of any provision in the University’s code of conduct that prohibits knowingly making false statements or knowingly submitting false information during the grievance process.
• If, in the course of an investigation, the University decides to investigate allegations about the complainant or respondent that are not included in the notice, the University will provide notice of the additional allegations to the parties whose identities are known.
• Any interim measures, such as no contact orders or location restrictions, if appropriate. 

Involved parties may pursue the voluntary use of an informal resolution process at any time prior to a final determination regarding responsibility.  An informal resolution process does not involve a full investigation and adjudication.  If an informal resolution process is pursued, the Investigator will make no attempt to determine whether sexual misconduct, discrimination, harassment or retaliation has occurred. Informal resolution will not be facilitated by the Investigator assigned to the complaint, and the investigation is put on hold pending attempts at informal resolution. Informal resolutions will be assigned to a Community Standards and Support team member.

Informal resolution may include, but is not limited to:

• Mediation
• Voluntary written agreements with or without in-person contact between the respondent and complainant, which may include:
• no contact orders,
• voluntary location restrictions and,
• voluntary relocation of residence.
• Other voluntarily agreed upon boundaries and expectations.

Prior to the initiation of an informal resolution process, the University will provide the parties with a written notice of the allegations and also describe the parameters of the informal resolution process. Initiation of this process requires the parties’ voluntary consent to commence and participate in the informal resolution process. 

If both parties request an informal resolution, the Equity Administrator / Title IX Coordinator determines if an informal resolution is appropriate and may deny the request if warranted. 

If an informal resolution is pursued the parties will receive a written notice disclosing: 

• the allegations, 
• the requirements of the informal resolution process including the circumstances under which it precludes the parties from resuming an investigative process arising from the same allegations, 
• at any time prior to agreeing to a resolution, any party has the right to withdraw from the informal resolution process and resume the investigation process with respect to the complaint, 
• parameters of resolution, including the resolution is binding only on the parties 
• any consequences resulting from participating in the informal resolution process, including the records that will be maintained or could be shared.

Involved parties may not re-initiate the investigation process after parties have voluntarily agreed to the outcome of the informal resolution. However, if prior to a final outcome the informal process fails or the Equity Administrator / Title IX Coordinator determines it inappropriate to continue, the formal grievance process will resume.

 

The Title IX Coordinator may seek the assistance of a third party to facilitate an informal resolution, where appropriate.

Once an oral or written complaint is received, the Investigator will commence an investigation as soon as practicable.  The purpose of the investigation is to gather and review all directly related evidence from involved parties, determine if the objectionable behavior potentially constitutes a violation of policy and provide all evidence relevant to that determination in an investigative report.

The investigator may receive counsel from University administrators, the University’s attorneys, or other parties as needed.

In general, the University does not investigate matters that do not take place on property not owned or controlled by the University or matters outside the context of the University’s academic programs and activities. However, the University will address hostile environments on campus or within its programs or activities, even if the conduct contributing to the hostile environment occurred outside the program or activity or outside the United States. The University will enforce this procedure when a situation occurs in locations, events, or circumstances over which the University exercised substantial control over both the respondent and the context in which the alleged misconduct occurs, including any building owned or controlled by a student organization that is officially recognized by the University.

• The primary investigator will:
  • Interview the complainant, respondent, and witnesses.
  • Gather all directly related exculpatory and inculpatory evidence, as available.
  • Communicate with all involved parties throughout the investigation.
  • Provide time for review of all directly related evidence and statements by complainants and respondents.
  • Objectively evaluate all directly related evidence, including both inculpatory and exculpatory evidence, and include all relevant evidence in the investigative report, and will create a log of all evidence deemed not directly related.
  • Address credibility. Credibility determinations will not be based on a person’s status as a complainant, respondent, or witness.
    Prepare a preliminary investigative report for review.
  • Finalize and submit the investigative report to the hearing officer.
• During the grievance process:
  • The burden of gathering evidence and the burden of proof will remain on the University, not on the parties.
  • The University will not restrict the ability of the parties to discuss the allegations or present evidence.
  • The university will take reasonable steps to prevent and address parties’ unauthorized disclosure of evidence obtained solely through grievance procedures. 
  • Parties will have the same opportunity to select an advisor of the party’s choice who may be, but does not need to be, an attorney.
• Parties may be accompanied by an advisor to any related meeting or proceeding.
  • The University will not limit the choice or presences of an advisor for either the complainant or respondent in any meeting or grievance proceeding; unless such advisor is or could be a party or witness to the complaint. The advisor may only advise and not participate in the proceedings except as specified.  Restrictions apply equally to all advisors.  Parties may bring a different advisor to different meetings or hearings but may be accompanied by only one advisor at a time.  If a party does not bring an advisor to the hearing, the university will provide and assign them an advisor for the hearing, but for no other meetings.
  • Throughout the investigation stage, an advisor may serve as a support person only and must sign a support person agreement acknowledging and agreeing to the role.
• The University will send written notice of any investigative interviews, meetings, or hearings in which a party is invited to attend.
  • The notice will include date, time, location, participants, and purpose of all hearings, investigative interviews, or other meetings, with sufficient time for the party to prepare to participate.
• If, in the course of an investigation, the University decides to investigate allegations about the complainant or respondent that are not included in the original notices provided, the University will provide notice of the additional allegations to the parties whose identities are known.
• Both the complainant and the respondent will be provided periodic updates regarding the status of the investigation.
• At a time or times scheduled by the university, the University will provide both parties an opportunity to inspect and review any evidence obtained as part of the investigation that is directly related to the allegations raised in a complaint.  This review also includes the evidence the University does not intend to rely upon when reaching a determination of responsibility, and inculpatory or exculpatory evidence whether obtained from a party or other source.  This provides each party an opportunity to meaningfully respond to the evidence prior to conclusion of the investigation and/or at hearing.
• The University will send a preliminary investigation report to the parties, and their advisors, in electronic format or hard copy, with at least ten (10) days for the parties to inspect, review, and provide any preferred response to the Investigator regarding the evidence.
• The Investigator will create a finalized investigative report that accurately summarizes relevant evidence and provide the complainant and respondent with the finalized report.
  • The report will be provided at least ten (10) days prior to a hearing (if a hearing is required or otherwise provided) in an electronic format or a hard copy, for their review prior to a scheduled hearing.
• The finalized report will be presented to a hearing officer to conduct a hearing as designated in this policy.
• Investigations or proceedings 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.
  • The question(s) or evidence have material significance where the respondent is proving consent where consent is a defense to the alleged conduct; or
  • Such information is evidence of the immediate surrounding circumstances of the alleged conduct and could prove an alternative explanation or someone other than the respondent is responsible for the alleged conduct.
  • The University will not access or use such records unless the University obtains the party’s voluntary, written consent to do so.
  • Questions and evidence about a complainant’s prior sexual behavior are irrelevant, pursuant to Missouri’s rape-shield law.  The limited exceptions to this under this policy are:
  • The University will protect the confidentiality of a party’s medical, psychological, and similar treatment records.

If the investigation determines that the charges may constitute discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation under the policy, then the investigative report will be forwarded to a hearing officer for a hearing.

If the investigation determines that the charges do not rise to the level of implicate discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation under the policy, but may constitute other forms of misconduct or policy violation, then the investigative report may be forwarded to a hearing officer or other department for appropriate action under grievance, employee conduct, or student conduct processes.

The University may dismiss the complaint when the conduct alleged in the complaint would not constitute discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation as defined in this policy, did not occur in the University’s education program or activity, or did not occur against a person in the United States. 

The University may dismiss the complaint or any allegations therein, if at any time during the investigation or hearing:

• Evidence collected during the course of the investigation indicates the complaint, if proven accurate, would not constitute a violation of this policy. Prior to dismissing the complaint, UCM will make reasonable efforts to clarify the allegations made by the complainant.
• The complainant notifies the Equity Administrator and/or Title IX Coordinator in writing that the complainant would like to withdraw the complaint or any allegations therein.
• The respondent is no longer enrolled or employed by the University.
• Specific circumstances prevent the University from gathering evidence sufficient to reach a determination as to the complaint or allegations therein.

Upon dismissal of a complaint, the University will send written notice of the dismissal and reason(s) for the dismissal simultaneously to both parties. Such a dismissal does not preclude action under another provision of the University’s code of conduct, including employee discipline for matters found to have violated Title VII as described above.

If no violation of this policy is found, it does not necessarily mean that the complainant’s allegations were false or unfounded, or that no other policy was violated.

• Such determinations may be referred to other University offices for action under other University policies or codes of conduct.
• If findings of fact were made by the hearing officer, disciplinary actions on such matters under other policies should be based on the facts established during the hearing and additional fact finding may not be needed.
• Even where no violation of the discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct and retaliation policy is found, the University may continue supportive measures for either party, as appropriate, at the discretion of the Equity Administrator / Title IX Coordinator or their designee.  

The University will provide a process that enables the hearing officer to question parties and witnesses to adequately assess a party’s or witness’s credibility to the extent credibility is both in dispute and relevant to evaluating one or more allegations of, discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation.

The role of the hearing officer is to review the content of the investigation and determine whether it is more likely than not that the alleged behavior occurred and, if so, whether it constitutes discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation under the policy. 

• The hearing officer will facilitate an administrative hearing. The hearing officer may meet with the involved parties at their sole discretion or rely solely upon the investigative report to make their decision. 
• The hearing officer will objectively evaluate all relevant evidence, inculpatory and exculpatory, and will avoid basing credibility determinations on a person’s status as a complainant, respondent, or witness.
• Notice of hearings will be sent even if a party chose not to participate in previous steps of the grievance process.
• A hearing officer may choose to place less or no weight upon statements by a party or witness who refuses to respond to questions deemed relevant and not impermissible.  The hearing officer will not draw an inference about whether sex-based harassment occurred based solely on a party’s or witness’s refusal to respond to such questions.

Before, during, and after the hearing, the Hearing Officer may consult with the Equity Administrator and/or Title IX Coordinator, University administrators, the University's attorneys, or other parties as needed.

The University’s process for proposing and asking relevant and not otherwise impermissible questions and follow-up questions of parties and witnesses, including questions challenging credibility, will:

• Allow the Investigator or hearing officer to ask such questions during individual meetings with a party or witness; 
• Allow each party to propose such questions that the party wants asked of any party or witness and have those questions asked by the Investigator or hearing officer during one or more individual meetings, including follow-up meetings, with a party or witness, subject to the procedures for evaluating and limiting questions discussed below; and
• Provide each party with an audio or audiovisual recording or transcript with enough time for the party to have a reasonable opportunity to propose follow-up questions. 
• Follow-up interviews then must occur where the appropriate follow-up questions are asked. 

Procedures for the hearing officer to evaluate the questions and limitations on questions:

The hearing officer will determine whether a proposed question is relevant and not otherwise impermissible before the question is posed and will explain any decision to exclude a question as not relevant or otherwise impermissible. Questions that are unclear or harassing of the party or witness being questioned will not be permitted. The hearing officer will give a party an opportunity to clarify or revise a question that the hearing officer determines is unclear or harassing. If the party sufficiently clarifies or revises the question, the question will be asked.

Refusal to respond to questions, and inferences based on refusal to respond to questions:

The hearing officer may choose to place less or no weight upon statements by a party or witness who refuses to respond to questions deemed relevant and not impermissible. The hearing officer will not draw an inference about whether the alleged behavior  occurred based solely on a party’s or witness’s refusal to respond to such questions.

Following an investigation and evaluation of all relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence, the University will:

• Use the preponderance of the evidence standard of proof to determine whether sexual misconduct, discrimination, harassment or retaliation occurred. The standard of proof requires the hearing officer to evaluate relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence for its persuasiveness. If the hearing officer is not persuaded under the applicable standard by the evidence that discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation occurred, whatever the quantity of the evidence is, the hearing officer will not determine that discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation occurred.
• Notify the parties simultaneously in writing of the determination whether discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation occurred including: 
  • A description of the alleged discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation;
  • Information about the policies and procedures that the University used to evaluate the allegations;
  • The hearing officer’s evaluation of the relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence and determination whether sexual misconduct, discrimination, harassment or retaliation occurred;
  • When the hearing officer finds that discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation occurred, any disciplinary sanctions the University will impose on the respondent, whether remedies other than the imposition of disciplinary sanctions will be provided by the University to the complainant, and, to the extent appropriate, other students identified by the University to be experiencing the effects of the discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation; and
  • The University’s procedures and permissible bases for the complainant and respondent to appeal.
  • The University will not impose discipline on a respondent for discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation prohibited by this policy unless there is a determination at the conclusion of the grievance procedures that the respondent engaged in prohibited conduct.
  • If there is a determination that discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation occurred, as appropriate, the Equity Administrator / Title IX Coordinator will:
    • Coordinate the provision and implementation of remedies to a complainant and other people the University identifies as having had equal access to the University’s education program or activity limited or denied by discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation;
    • Coordinate the imposition of any disciplinary sanctions on a respondent, including notification to the complainant of any such disciplinary sanctions; and
    • Take other appropriate prompt and effective steps to ensure that discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation does not continue or recur within the University’s education program or activity.
    • Comply with the grievance procedures before the imposition of any disciplinary sanctions against a respondent; and
    • Not discipline a party, witness, or others participating in the grievance procedures for making a false statement or for engaging in consensual sexual conduct based solely on the determination whether sex discrimination occurred.

After the conclusion of the hearing, (generally within 10 business days), the Hearing Officer will prepare and issue a written determination regarding responsibility including:

• Identification of the allegations at issue;
• Description of the procedural steps taken throughout the case;
• Findings of fact supporting the determination;
• Conclusions regarding application of the sexual misconduct / harassment / discrimination policy / retaliation;
• A statement and rationale as to the determination for each allegation;
• If a policy violation is found, a statement of any sanctions imposed and whether any remedies will be provided to the complainant; and
• A description of the procedures and permissible grounds for appeal. 
• Complaints involving University employees may involve coordination with complainant’s and/or respondent’s supervisors.
• The hearing officer will send the written determination simultaneously to the parties along with information about how to file an appeal.
• The written determination shall be final, subject only to the right of appeal set forth below.

If a policy violation is found, the hearing officer will outline reasonable steps to correct the effects of such conduct on the complainant and others and to prevent the recurrence of discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation, and retaliation. Sanctions, remediation, and other appropriate actions are discussed further below. 

Complaints involving University employees may involve coordination with complainant and respondent supervisors; this is not a violation of confidentiality.

The written determination becomes final upon the earlier of when: (i) the parties are notified of the determination on appeal; or (ii) the time to file an appeal has passed with neither party appealing. 

Impartiality is integral to the Discrimination, Harassment, Sexual Misconduct and Retaliation formal grievance process. 

Neither Complainants reporting discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation, nor Respondents defending against allegations of discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation, shall be met with prejudgment throughout the formal process. 

For the purpose of this procedure, a conflict of interest is defined as a situation in which personal or private interests may reasonably compromise one's judgment, decisions, or actions. The subjective appearance of conflict will be reviewed by the Title IX Coordinator, Equity Administrator, or their designee and a determination of actual conflict will be made. Reasonable steps will be taken to prevent actual conflicts of interest from impacting the formal grievance process. 

Under this policy, bias is defined as a tendency, inclination, or prejudice toward/against someone based on a protected characteristic. Stereotypes based on protected status will not be allowed to influence the formal grievance process. Evidence of bias impacting the formal grievance process will serve as a potential basis for appeal following a formal hearing.

Title IX Coordinator, Equity Administrator, investigators, hearing officers, appellate officers, and any person who facilitates an informal resolution process will receive training on the definition of discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct and retaliation, the scope of the University’s education program or activity, how to conduct an investigation and grievance process including hearings, appeals, and informal resolution processes, as applicable to their individual role, and how to serve impartially, including by avoiding prejudgment of the facts at issue, conflicts of interest, and bias. 

While the University encourages all good faith complaints of discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct and retaliation, the University has the responsibility to balance the rights of all parties. Lack of evidence sufficient to conclude responsibility does not necessarily imply that the allegations were unfounded, false, or made in bad faith. An allegation may be true and lack sufficient evidence to meet a standard of evidence proving responsibility, or an allegation may be inaccurate but not intentionally falsified. 

If the University's investigation reveals that a party made a bad faith false complaint, the complaint was intentionally malicious to gain personal benefit, or to intentionally misuse the policy to address matters not related to sexual misconduct, discrimination, harassment or retaliation, the complaint will be dismissed, and the person who filed or otherwise participated in the knowingly false complaint may be subject to discipline. 

• The University will carefully assess the facts of each particular situation and evaluate the credibility of all parties in each case. 
• False reports are subject to sanctions equal to those who are found responsible for discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct or retaliation. 
• If it is determined a complainant made false accusations, the respondent will be eligible for the same remediation and supportive services as would a complainant.
• Charging an individual with a code of conduct violation for making a bad faith false statement during a grievance process is not retaliation.   

The University strictly prohibits retaliation against any person for making any good faith report under this policy. This includes peer retaliation. Involved parties may not interfere with any right or privilege secured by this policy or retaliate against an individual who has engaged in protected conduct, to include that they made a report or complaint, testified, assisted, or participated or refused to participate in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under this part. 

Engaging in retaliation is a separate violation of policy and can result in disciplinary action regardless of the outcome of the investigation and resolution of the initial complaint. The university will respond to conduct that reasonably may constitute retaliation using the same procedures it uses for other forms of harassment, discrimination, sexual misconduct and retaliation.

Examples of retaliation include, but are not limited to, intimidation, threats, coercion, or discrimination if based on the underlying protected conduct. Any person who engages in such retaliation shall be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including expulsion or termination of employment. 

The exercise of rights protected under the First Amendment does not constitute retaliation. Charging an individual with a code of conduct violation for making a materially false statement in bad faith in the course of a grievance proceeding under this part does not constitute retaliation.

Any person who believes they have been subjected to retaliation is encouraged to promptly notify the Equity Administrator / Title IX Coordinator. The University will promptly investigate all claims of retaliation.

When an informal resolution to a concern is requested, the University will generally complete informal resolutions within 30 business days. Some complaints may not require the 30 business day time frame and can be resolved in less time, whereas other complaints may require more time based upon mutual participation in the process, holidays, and other University breaks or closures.

The following is an example of a reasonably prompt timeline of how an informal resolution might be conducted within the general 30 business day timeframe:

Report received	Day 1
Initial interview and fact-gathering from the Complainant	Day 2-7
Notice sent to Respondent(s)	Day 8
Respondent reviews and responds to request for informal resolution Parties meet or mutually agree to an informal resolution plan Resolution summary sent to involved parties; case closed	Day 9-16 Day 16-26 Day 27-30

Upon receiving an oral or written complaint, absent informal resolution, the University will determine if the complaint, if proven accurate, would constitute a policy violation. If the behavior might reasonably constitute a policy violation, the University will conduct a prompt and equitable investigation in a timely manner.   

The University will generally resolve complaints within 99 business days, from the initial receipt of an oral or written complaint through the appeal process. Some complaints may not require the 99 business day time frame and can be resolved in less time, whereas other complaints may require more time, based on the complexity of a complaint, additional allegations presented, University closures, or other delays.

If either the complainant or respondent needs additional time to prepare or to gather their witnesses or information beyond the timeframe, they shall notify the Investigator in writing, explaining how much additional time is needed and why it is needed. The Investigator shall respond to any such request generally within five (5) business days, and keep the other parties informed of any extensions granted.

The following is an example reasonably prompt timeline of how a complaint may be processed within the general 99 business day time frame:

Report received	Day 1
Initial interview and fact gathering from the Complainant	Day 2-7
Notice sent to Respondent(s)	Day 8
Respondent reviews and responds to complaint (10 days)	Day 9-18
Interviews with witnesses or other involved parties (average 4 weeks)	Day 19-46
Preparation of investigative report (average 2 weeks)	Day 47-60
Parties review and may respond to preliminary report (10 days)	Day 61-70
Finalize and distribute investigative report	Day 71-72
Involved parties review investigative report (10 days)	Day 73-82
Hearing	Day 83
Hearing officer reviews facts and issues finding (15 days)	Day 84-99

Temporary delays of the grievance process or the limited extension of time frames for good cause are permitted with written notice to the complainant and the respondent of the delay or extension and the reasons for the action. Good cause may include considerations such as the absence of a party, a party’s advisor, or a witness; concurrent law enforcement activity; or the need for language assistance or accommodation of disabilities. 

To facilitate these timelines, the University may require employees to participate in the process at specified times during the workday. Supervisors may be notified and required to comply with this requirement but may not be otherwise informed of its nature unless warranted.

Timelines are provided within this document as guidelines. If the Investigator and/or Title IX Coordinator/Equity Administrator need more time to complete necessary tasks at any stage in the procedure, they will communicate to both parties as appropriate.

In compliance with training requirements, the University ensures that all employees receive training that addresses Discrimination, Harassment, Sexual Misconduct and Retaliation, upon hire, and then annually thereafter.  Employees must be trained on the following topics:

• Essential awareness and understanding of discrimination.
• The University’s obligation to address discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct and retaliation in its educational programs and activities;
• The scope of conduct that constitutes Title IX sex discrimination, including sex-based harassment;
• The employee’s responsibility to provide a student or guardian with the Title IX coordinator’s contact and other information upon notice of a student’s pregnancy; and
• The employee’s responsibility is to notify the Title IX coordinator and/or provide the coordinator’s contact information upon notice of discrimination, harassment, or sexual misconduct, depending on the employee’s role.

All members of the Title IX team must be trained once they transition into a new Title IX role, and annually thereafter.  

Investigators, decision-makers, any employee who is responsible for implementing grievance procedures, and any employee who has the authority to modify or terminate supportive measures must complete the all-employee training and training on:

• The University’s grievance procedures pursuant to § 106.45 and (if applicable) § 106.46 of the Title IX regulations;
• How to carry out their roles in an impartial manner, including by avoiding prejudgment, conflicts of interest, and bias; and
• The meaning and application of the term “relevant” in relation to questions and evidence, and the types of evidence that are impermissible regardless of relevance.
• The definitions of discrimination, harassment, and sexual misconduct; 
• The scope of the University’s education program or activity; 
• How to conduct an investigation and grievance process, including hearings, appeals, and informal resolution processes, as applicable; 
• How to use any technology to be used at a hearing, etc.;
• How to apply the rape shield protections provided only for complainants in complaint alleging sexual misconduct;
• A presumption that the respondent is not responsible for the alleged conduct until a determination regarding responsibility is made at the conclusion of the grievance process. 

Informal resolution facilitators must complete the all-employee training and training on:

• Rules and practices of the University’s informal resolution process; and
• How to carry out their roles in an impartial manner, including by avoiding conflicts of interest, and bias.

Title IX coordinators and their designees must be trained on all of the above trainings and training on:

• Responsibilities specific to Title IX coordinators;
• The University’s record-keeping system(s) and requirements; and
• Any other training method needed to coordinate the University’s compliance with Title IX.