Grievance Procedures

The following grievance processes comply with 34 CFR § 106.45 and § 106.46 of Title IX as required. All processes, provisions, and rules stated in this Policy apply equally to both Parties—Complainants and Respondents.

Rockford University will treat Complainants and Respondents equitably throughout the grievance process.

Determination of a Party’s credibility will not be based on a person’s status as a Complainant, Respondent, or witness. The University presumes that the Respondent is not responsible for the alleged conduct until a determination is made at the conclusion of the appropriate grievance process.

The University will take reasonable steps to protect the privacy of the Parties and witnesses during the pendency of the grievance procedures without restricting the ability of the Parties to obtain and present evidence (including by speaking to witnesses, except to prohibit retaliation); consult with their family members, confidential resources, or advisors; or otherwise prepare for or participate in the grievance procedures.

Employees’ participation in proceedings may be required. Students may decline to participate in any proceedings.

The role of the Title IX Investigator, Decision-Maker, Appeal Decision-Makers, and/or Informal Resolution Facilitator may be filled by appropriate Rockford University personnel and/or external parties.

When a sex discrimination complaint alleges that an institution’s policy or practice discriminates on the basis of sex, Rockford is not considered a Respondent. The grievance procedure requirements related to a Respondent apply only to sex discrimination complaints alleging that a person violated the University’s prohibition on sex discrimination.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Rockford University employees participating in the Title IX grievance process including the Title IX Coordinator, Investigators, Decision-Makers, Appeals Officers, and Informal Resolution Facilitators as well as external parties employed by the University to complete Title IX investigation and adjudication functions (hearings, appeals, and informal resolution options) are prohibited from having a conflict of interest or bias for or against Complainants or Respondents generally or an individual Complainant or Respondent.

In an effort to avoid potential conflicts of interest, Rockford may provide the names and titles of internal and external Title IX investigators and adjudicators to the Parties at the initiation of the investigation, informal resolution process, or hearing. Such information will be provided no less than five (5) business days before any meeting or hearing between the Party and the Investigator or Adjudicator. The Complainant or Respondent may request the removal of an Investigator or Adjudicator on the grounds of personal bias or other conflicts of interest by submitting a written statement to the Title IX Coordinator setting forth the basis for the request no more than three (3) business days after receiving notice of the identity of the individual involved in the Title IX grievance process. The Title IX Coordinator will review the written statement and make a determination if there is a conflict of interest. Appropriate steps will be taken to ensure that no conflict of interest exists on the part of anyone involved in the Title IX investigation, hearing, appeals, or informal resolution processes. If a conflict of interest exists, another individual will be assigned to the appropriate role. If a conflict of interest exists between the Complainant or Respondent and the Title IX Coordinator, reports should be directed to the Rockford University Office of the President.

RELEVANT & IMPERMISSIBLE EVIDENCE

The University’s grievance processes rely upon an objective evaluation of all relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence—including both inculpatory and exculpatory evidence.

Relevant evidence is evidence related to the allegations of sex discrimination under investigation as part of the grievance procedures under this Policy. Questions are relevant when they seek evidence that may aid in showing whether the alleged sex discrimination occurred, and evidence is relevant when it may aid a Decision-Maker in determining whether the alleged sex discrimination occurred.

Impermissible Evidence is evidence, and questions seeking such evidence, that are excluded and must not be accessed or considered, disclosed or otherwise be used, regardless of whether they are relevant. Such evidence may only be accessed or considered to determine whether one of the below exceptions applies. Types of Impermissible Evidence are as follows:

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;
• A Party’s or witness’s records that are made or maintained by a physician, psychologist, or other recognized professional or paraprofessional in connection with the provision of treatment to the Party or witness, unless the University obtains that Party’s or witness’s voluntary, written consent for use in the applicable grievance procedures; and
• Evidence that relates to the Complainant’s sexual interests or prior sexual conduct, unless evidence about the Complainant’s prior sexual conduct is offered to prove that someone other than the respondent committed the alleged conduct or is evidence about specific incidents of the Complainant’s prior sexual conduct with the Respondent that is offered to prove consent to the alleged sex-based harassment.

The fact of prior consensual sexual conduct between the Complainant and Respondent does not by itself demonstrate or imply the Complainant’s consent to the alleged sex-based harassment or preclude determination that sex-based harassment occurred.

STANDARD OF PROOF

Rockford University uses the preponderance of the evidence standard of proof to determine whether sex discrimination, sex-based harassment, or retaliation occurred. The Decision-Maker will evaluate relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence for its persuasiveness. If the Decision-Maker is not persuaded by the preponderance of the evidence standard that Prohibited Conduct occurred, whatever the quantity of the evidence is, the Decision-Maker is unable to determine that a Policy violation occurred.

9.1 PROCESS A

The grievance procedures outlined in this section apply to Complaints of sex discrimination and sex-based harassment involving employees only as well as Complaints of retaliation including students or employees.

Rockford University aims to complete the Title IX grievance processes in a reasonably prompt time frame. Generally, Rockford University will conclude the grievance process under this section within ninety (90) business days.

The University reserves the right to allow for the reasonable extension of timeframes set forth in this Policy on a case-by-case basis for good cause with notice to the Parties that includes the reason for the delay. Good cause may include considerations such as the absence of the Party, a Party’s Advisor, or a witness; concurrent law enforcement activity; or the need for language assistance or accommodation of disabilities.

NOTICE OF ALLEGATIONS

After receipt of a complaint, the Title IX Coordinator or the Deputy Title IX Coordinator will provide a Notice of the Allegations to the Parties whose identities are known, typically within ten (10) business days of receiving a Complaint. The Notice will include the following information:
• Sufficient information available at the time to allow the Parties to respond to the allegations. Sufficient information includes the following:
o The identities of the Parties involved in the incident(s)
o The conduct alleged to constitute sex discrimination, sex-based harassment, or retaliation
o The date(s) and location(s) of the alleged incident(s), to the extent that information is available to the University
• A statement that retaliation is prohibited
• A statement that the Parties are entitled to an accurate description of the relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence, as outlined in the Complaint Investigations section of these grievance procedures.
o A statement that the Parties are entitled to an equal opportunity to access the relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence upon the request of any Party
• A copy of the Rockford University Title IX Policy and Procedures, which includes the applicable grievance procedures and informal resolution options, if any

Ongoing Notice

If, during the course of an investigation, the University decides to investigate additional allegations of sex discrimination, sex-based harassment, or retaliation by the Respondent toward the Complainant that are not included in the Notice of Allegations or that are included in a consolidated complaint, the Title IX Coordinator will provide notice of the additional allegations to the Parties whose identities are known.

COMPLAINT INVESTIGATIONS

Role of the Title IX Investigator
A trained Title IX investigator (or team of investigators) will be assigned to investigate the conduct alleged in the complaint. The investigation will include interviewing the Complainant, Respondent, and witnesses as well as gathering relevant evidence. The Title IX Coordinator or Investigator(s) will communicate with the Parties throughout the investigation process to provide notice of meetings and updates.

The University will inform the Parties of the name of the assigned investigator in the Notice of Interview. The Investigator may serve as the Decision-Maker.

Burden of Proof and Evidence Collection

The burden to conduct an investigation that gathers evidence sufficient to determine whether sex discrimination, sex-based harassment, or retaliation occurred is on Rockford University, not on the Parties. However, the Parties have an equal opportunity to present fact witnesses and other inculpatory and exculpatory evidence that are relevant and not otherwise impermissible to the Investigator during the applicable grievance process. The Investigator will review all evidence gathered during the course of the investigation and determine what evidence is relevant and what evidence is impermissible, regardless of relevance, as outlined in Section 9. of this policy.

The Investigator may communicate with other campus offices to gather relevant evidence, if appropriate.

Any Party may decide to participate or not participate in the investigation.

Notice of Interviews and Meetings

The Title IX Coordinator or Investigator will provide written notice to a Party whose participation is invited or expected in any investigative meeting or proceeding. The written notice will include the date, time, location, names of participants, and purpose of the meetings or proceedings. It will be provided not less than five (5) business days prior to the meeting, providing the Party has sufficient time to prepare to participate.

Investigation Report & Evidence Review

Each Party will have an equal opportunity to access, review, and respond to the evidence that is relevant to the allegations and not otherwise impermissible.

The University will provide each Party an equal opportunity to access the Investigative Report, which is an accurate description of the relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence, in electronic or hard copy. The Parties will have an equal opportunity to access evidence (that is relevant and not otherwise impermissible) referenced in the Investigative Report upon request. The Parties may request access to such evidence by emailing the Investigator within five (5) business days of receiving the Investigative Report. If one Party requests to access such evidence, the Title IX Coordinator will notify and allow access to the other Party within forty eight (48) hours of the other Party’s request.

The Title IX Investigator will provide the Parties instructions for accessing the evidence. Typically, evidence will be shared via a secure digital platform, or the Parties will have an opportunity to schedule a virtual or in-person meeting(s) with the Investigator to review the evidence. The Investigator may share additional security measures with the Parties prior to evidence review.

Each Party will have ten (10) business days from receipt of the Investigative Report to review the evidence and submit a written response by email to the Investigator. If a Party does not provide a written response within ten (10) business days, it will be assumed that the Party reviewed the information and chose not to respond.

If a Party requests access to evidence, the Parties will have an additional five (5) business days from the date of receiving instructions for accessing evidence to complete the evidence review. The Investigator will consider the Parties’ written responses before completing the investigation file. The Party’s responses to the evidence, if any, will be included in the investigation file.

Unauthorized Disclosure of Information & Evidence

As the University has the right to take reasonable steps to prevent and address the Parties’ and their Advisors’ unauthorized disclosure of information and evidence obtained solely through the
sex-based harassment grievance procedures, it may redact confidential portions of the Investigation File or require the Parties to execute nondisclosure agreements to preserve the confidentiality of confidential information prior to release of the Investigation File to the Parties and their Advisors. Disclosures of such information and evidence for purposes of administrative proceedings or litigation related to the complaint of sex-based harassment are authorized.

EVALUATION OF ALLEGATIONS AND CREDIBILITY ASSESSMENTS

In that the Investigator is the Decision-Maker in this process, the Investigator may pose questions to the Parties and witnesses to evaluate credibility to the extent credibility is both in dispute and relevant to evaluating the allegations during the grievance process.

DETERMINATION OF RESPONSIBILITY

Following the investigation and evaluation of all relevant (and not otherwise impermissible) evidence, the Decision-Maker will make a determination whether sex discrimination, sex-based harassment, or retaliation occurred.

Issuing the Determination
The Decision-Maker will notify the Parties in writing of the determination sex discrimination, sex-based harassment, or retaliation occurred under this Policy. The determination will include the rationale for such determination as well as the procedures and permissible bases for the Complainant and Respondent to appeal.

The Decision-Maker may also include or reference disciplinary sanctions and whether remedies will be offered to the Complainant in the determination regarding responsibility.

Generally, the determination will be issued to the Parties no more than ten (10) business days after the conclusion of the process for questioning Parties to aid in evaluating the allegations and assessing credibility.

Disciplinary Sanctions

Discipline may not be imposed upon a Respondent for sex discrimination, sex-based harassment or retaliation prohibited by this Policy unless there is a determination at the conclusion of the applicable grievance procedures that the Respondent engaged in Prohibited Conduct and therefore violated this Policy.

The range of possible disciplinary sanctions is as follows:
• Warning
• Probation
• Loss of Privilege
• Suspension
• Expulsion
• Termination

The Decision-Maker reserves the right to broaden or lessen any range of recommended sanctions in the case of serious mitigating circumstances or egregiously offensive behavior.

A Party, witness, or others participating in either grievance process will not be disciplined for making a false statement or for engaging in consensual sexual conduct based solely on the Decision-Maker’s determination whether sex discrimination, sex-based harassment, or retaliation occurred.

Remedies

The Title IX Coordinator will coordinate the provision and implementation of remedies to a Complainant and other persons the University identifies as having had equal access to its education program or activity limited or denied by sex discrimination, sex-based harassment or retaliation.

The list of possible remedies that may be provided is as follows:
• Counseling services on- and off-campus and assistance in setting up an initial appointment
• Extensions of deadlines or other course-related adjustments such as taking an incomplete in a class
• Modifications of work or class schedules without penalty
• Campus escort services
• Mutual restrictions on contact between the Parties

Changes in work or housing locations
• Leaves of absence
• Increased security and monitoring of certain areas of the campus
• Providing academic support services, such as tutoring;
• Any other remedy that can be tailored to the involved individuals to achieve the goals of
this policy.

APPEALS

Complainants and Respondents have the right to appeal the Determination of Responsibility.

To appeal, a Party must submit their written appeal to the Title IX Coordinator within five (5) business days of being sent the Determination of Responsibility and must include the grounds for the appeal.

Grounds for Appeal

The Parties may appeal the determination on the following grounds:

(1) Procedural irregularity that would change the outcome;
(2) New evidence that would change the outcome and that was not reasonably available when the determination whether sex-based harassment occurred or dismissal was made; or
(3) The Title IX Coordinator, Investigator, or Decision-Maker had a conflict of interest or bias for or against complainants or respondents generally or the individual Complainant or Respondent that would change the outcome.

The submission of an appeal stays any sanctions for the pendency of an appeal. Supportive measures and remote learning opportunities remain available during the pendency of the appeal.

Appeals will be decided by a second Hearing Panel, who will be free of conflict of interest and bias, and will not have served as Title IX Coordinator, Investigator, or Decision-Maker in the same matter.

Typically, the second Hearing Panel will issue a written decision simultaneously to both Parties describing the result and the rationale of the decision within ten (10) days of the second hearing.

9.2 PROCESS B

The grievance procedures outlined in this section apply to complaints of sex discrimination and sex-based harassment involving a student Complainant or student Respondent.

Right to an Advisor

All Parties are entitled to an Advisor of their choosing to assist them throughout Process B. The Advisor may be a friend, counselor, faculty member, family member, attorney or any other individual a Party chooses to advise them who is eligible and available to serve during the grievance process. Any person who may be called as a witness may not serve as an Advisor.

Parties are entitled to be accompanied by their Advisor in all meetings, interviews, hearings, and appeals at which the Party is entitled to be present during the grievance process.

To locate an Advisor, Respondents may wish to contact organizations such as:
• Families Advocating for Campus Equality (FACE), facecampusequality.org

Complainants may wish to contact organizations such as:
• The Victim Rights Law Center, victimrights.org
• The National Center for Victims of Crime, victimsofcrime.org, which maintains the Crime Victim’s Bar Association

The University cannot guarantee equal advisory rights. Consequently, if one Party selects an Advisor who is an attorney, but the other Party does not or cannot afford an attorney, Rockford University is not obligated to provide an attorney or other Advisor, except at the hearing. Rockford is not required to provide an attorney as an Advisor at the hearing.

All Advisors are subject to the same Rockford University rules whether they are attorneys or not. Advisors may not present on behalf of their advisee in a meeting or interview. Additionally, Advisors may not actively participate in the investigation or informal process. Advisors must conduct all questioning of the other Party and all witnesses in a live hearing even in the event that their Party is not present at the live hearing.

Advisors should request or wait for a break in the interview, hearing, or meeting if they wish to interact with University Title IX personnel. Advisors may confer quietly with their advisees as necessary, as long as they do not disrupt the process. For longer or more involved discussions, the Parties and their Advisors should ask for breaks or step out of meetings to allow for private conversation. Advisors may be given an opportunity to meet in advance of any interview or hearing with the Rockford University Title IX personnel during the grievance process.

Any Advisor who fails to follow the guidelines established by the University in the grievance process will be provided an oral warning. If the Advisor continues to disrupt or otherwise fails to follow those guidelines, the Advisor will be asked to leave the proceeding. If an Advisor is asked to leave, the meeting, interview, hearing or other proceeding will be suspended until the Party’s Advisor is reinstated; the Party secures another Advisor to accompany them at that meeting, interview, hearing or proceeding; or the University provides the Party with another Advisor for the hearing.

If an Advisor is asked to leave a proceeding, the Title IX Coordinator will determine whether the Advisor may be reinstated or must be replaced by a different Advisor for the remainder of the grievance process. The Parties must advise the Title IX Coordinator of the identity of their Advisor at least five (5) business days before the scheduled hearing. The Parties must provide subsequent timely notice to the Title IX Coordinator if they change Advisors at any time. No audio or video recording of any kind other than as required by institutional procedure is permitted during meetings with University officials.

NOTICE OF ALLEGATIONS

After receipt of a Complaint, the Title IX Coordinator or Deputy Title IX Coordinator will provide a written Notice of the Allegations to the Parties, typically within ten (10) business days of receiving a Complaint. The Notice will be sent to the Parties whose identities are known at least five (5) business days before any interview.

The Notice will include the following information:
• Sufficient information available at the time to allow the Parties to respond to the allegations. Sufficient information includes the following:
o The identities of the Parties involved in the incident(s)
o The conduct alleged to constitute sex discrimination
o The date(s) and location(s) of the alleged incident(s), to the extent that information is available to the University
• Statement that retaliation is prohibited
• Statement that the Respondent is presumed not responsible for the alleged sex-based harassment until a determination is made at the conclusion of the Section 9.2. Process B. grievance procedures

• Statement that prior to the determination, the Parties will have an opportunity to present relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence to a trained, impartial Decision-Maker
• Parties’ right to have an Advisor of their choice to serve in the role set out Section 9.2 Process B. of this Policy. The Advisor may be, but is not required to be, an attorney
• Parties’ right to an equal opportunity to access an Investigative Report that accurately summarizes the relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence. Parties are entitled to an equal opportunity to access to the relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence upon the request
• Statement that the University prohibits Parties, including Complainants, Respondents, and witnesses, from knowingly making false statements or knowingly submitting false information during the grievance process. It is a violation to make an intentionally false report of any policy violation, and it may also violate state criminal statutes and civil defamation laws

Rockford University reserves the right to charge an individual with a Code of Conduct or Faculty and Employee Handbook violation for making a knowingly false statement during the course of the grievance process. Such charges do not constitute retaliation on behalf of Rockford University against the individual as the individual has violated Rockford University own policy.
• A copy of the Rockford University Title IX Policy and Procedures, which includes the applicable grievance procedures and informal resolution options, if any

Ongoing Notice

If, in the course of an investigation, the University decides to investigate additional allegations of sex-based harassment by the Respondent toward the Complainant that are not included in the initial written notice provided to the Parties or that are included in a consolidated complaint, Rockford University will provide written notice of the additional allegations to the Parties whose identities are known.

Reasonable Delays

To the extent the University has reasonable concerns for the safety of any person as a result of providing this Notice, the University may reasonably delay providing written Notice of the Allegations in order to address the safety concern appropriately. Reasonable concerns will be based on individualized safety and risk analysis and not on mere speculation or stereotypes.

COMPLAINT INVESTIGATIONS

After the Notice of Allegations is issued, the University will conduct an adequate, reliable, and impartial investigation into the complaint within a reasonably prompt timeframe. Generally, the investigation will take no longer than sixty (60) business days after the Notice of Allegations is sent to the Parties. Rockford University reserves the right to allow for reasonable extension of timeframes on a case-by-case basis for good cause with written notice to the Parties that includes the reason for the delay.

Role of the Title IX Investigator

A trained Title IX investigator (or team of investigators) will be assigned to investigate the conduct alleged in the complaint. The investigation will include interviewing the Complainant, Respondent, and witnesses as well as gathering relevant evidence. The Title IX Coordinator or Investigator(s) will communicate with the Parties throughout the investigation process to provide notice of meetings and updates.

Rockford University will inform the Parties of the name of the assigned investigator in the Notice of Interview.

Burden of Proof and Evidence Collection

The burden to conduct an investigation that gathers evidence sufficient to determine whether sex discrimination or sex-based harassment occurred is on Rockford University, not on the Parties. However, the Parties have an equal opportunity to present fact witnesses and other inculpatory and exculpatory evidence that are relevant and not otherwise impermissible to the Investigator during the applicable grievance process. The Investigator will review all evidence gathered during the course of the investigation and determine what evidence is relevant and what evidence is impermissible, regardless of relevance, as outlined in Section 9. of this Policy.

The Investigator may communicate with other campus offices to gather relevant evidence, if
appropriate.

Any Party may decide to participate or not participate in the investigation.

Notice of Interview

Participating in Interviews or Meetings

Parties have an equal opportunity to be accompanied to any meeting or proceeding by an Advisor of their choice, who may be, but is not required to be, an attorney. The University cannot limit the choice or presence of the Advisor for the Complainant or Respondent in any meeting or proceeding. However, the University has established restrictions regarding the extent to which the Advisor may participate in the grievance procedures. Such restrictions apply equally to the Parties.

Investigative interviews may be recorded by the Investigator with the consent of the Parties or witnesses. Other recordings are not permitted without explicit permission from the Investigator and/or Title IX Coordinator.

Parties may not attend interviews of any other Party or witness or any meeting or hearing related to the investigation, unless invited and expected to participate by Rockford University.

Investigative Report and Evidence Review

The University will provide each Party an equal opportunity to access the preliminary Investigative Report, which accurately summarizes the relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence, in electronic or hard copy. The Parties will have an equal opportunity to access evidence (that is relevant and not otherwise impermissible) referenced in the Investigative Report upon request. The Parties may request access to such evidence by emailing the Investigator within five (5) business days of receiving the Investigative Report. If one Party requests to access such evidence, the Title IX Coordinator will notify and allow access to the other Party within forty-eight (48) hours of the other Party’s request.

Each Party will have ten (10) business days from receipt of the preliminary Investigative Report to review the evidence and submit a written response by email to the Investigator. If a Party does not provide a written response within ten (10) business days, it will be assumed that the Party reviewed the information and chose not to respond.

If a Party requests access to evidence, the Parties will have an additional five (5) business days from the date of access to review that evidence.

The Investigator will consider the Parties’ written responses before completing the final Investigation Report and evidence. The Party’s responses to the evidence, if any, will be included in the investigation file.

The final Investigative File will be shared with the Parties, their Advisors (if any), and the Decision-Maker no less than seven (7) days before the live hearing. The Parties will have an opportunity to respond to the final Investigation File during the live hearing.

Unauthorized Disclosure of Information & Evidence

As Rockford University has the right to take reasonable steps to prevent and address the Parties’ and their Advisors’ unauthorized disclosure of information and evidence obtained solely through the sex-based harassment grievance procedures, it may redact confidential portions of the Investigation File or require the Parties and their Advisors to execute nondisclosure agreements to preserve the confidentiality of confidential information prior to release of the Investigation File to the Parties and their Advisors.

Disclosures of such information and evidence for purposes of administrative proceedings or litigation related to the complaint of sex-based harassment are authorized.

HEARING PROCESS

After the investigation, the Decision-Maker will conduct a live hearing. During the live hearing, the Decision-Maker may question Parties and witnesses to adequately assess credibility to the extent credibility is both in dispute and relevant to evaluating one or more allegations of sex-based harassment.

Role of the Decision-Maker
A trained Title IX Decision-Maker will be assigned to facilitate the live hearing, question Parties and witnesses, assess credibility, and determine whether sex-based harassment occurred.

Notice of Hearing
No less than ten (10) business days before the hearing, the Title IX Coordinator will issue a Notice of Hearing to the Parties and their Advisors.

The Notice of Hearing will contain the following:

Summary of the Alleged Conduct and Potential Policy Violations
• Identification of Applicable Policies

• Access to the Final Investigation File (which may have been previously provided by the
Investigator)
• Date, Time and Location of the Pre-Hearing Meeting
• Date, Time, and Location of the Hearing
• Name of the Assigned Decision-Maker
• Names of the Pre-Hearing Meeting and Hearing Participants
• Information on Requesting Accommodations for a Documented Disability or a Translator
• Deadline for Submitting Proposed Questions to be asked at the Hearing

Additional Information about Pre-Hearing Meeting and Hearing Procedures, as necessary

Pre-Hearing Meetings

After the final Investigation File is shared with the Parties and their Advisors, if any, and before the live hearing, the Decision-Maker may invite the Parties and their Advisors to participate in a pre-hearing meeting. The pre-hearing meeting may take place with the Complainant and Respondent separately or together.

The purpose of the Pre-Hearing Meeting is to discuss the hearing procedures, rules of decorum, and technology that will be used during the hearing; identify witnesses that will be asked to appear at the hearing; to determine how to address any new evidence the Parties seek to offer at the hearing that was not previously available during the investigation, if any (see below); and to resolve any other matters that the Decision-Maker determines should be resolved before the hearing (at their discretion).

New Evidence

Parties are encouraged to provide all relevant witnesses and evidence during the investigation. Parties asking that additional relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence (including
witness testimony) that was not previously provided to the investigators be considered may be asked to demonstrate why such evidence was not reasonably available to them at the time of the investigation. If any Party seeks to introduce such new evidence, the Decision-Maker may, at their discretion: 1.) accept the new evidence as admissible, share it with all Parties and their Advisors (if any) prior to the hearing, and proceed with the scheduled hearing; 2.) postpone the hearing to allow sufficient time for all Parties and their Advisors (if any) to review and respond to such evidence; or 3.) take other measures as they deem appropriate.

Submission of Questions to the Decision-Maker Prior to the Hearing

No less than five (5) days before the hearing, each Party or their Advisor must submit to the Decision-Maker written proposed questions that they want asked of any Party or witness at the hearing. The Decision-Maker will determine whether a proposed question is relevant and not otherwise impermissible and notify the Parties of their determination on each question in writing no less than three (3) business days prior to the hearing.

If the Decision-Maker decides that a question is not relevant or otherwise impermissible, they will explain that decision to the Party or Advisor in writing no less than three (3) business days before the hearing.

Questions that are unclear, harassing, or repetitive of the Party or witness being questioned are not permitted. If such questions are proposed to the Decision-Maker, the Decision-Maker will notify the proposing Party or Advisor in writing (no less than three (3) business days before the hearing) and give the Party an opportunity to clarify or revise the question(s) that the Decision-Maker has determined to be unclear, harassing, or repetitive. The Party or Advisor will have twenty-four (24) hours to submit revised questions to the Decision-Maker. If the Party sufficiently clarifies or revises a question, that question is eligible to be asked at the hearing.

Live Hearing Procedures

The hearing will take place no less than ten (10) business days after the final Investigative Report and evidence is shared with each Party and their Advisor.

The Decision-Maker, Complainant, Respondent, their Advisors, and relevant witnesses will be invited to participate in the live hearing. Participating in the hearing is not mandatory. The College will proceed with the live hearing in the absence of any Party or witness, and the Decision-Maker may reach a determination of responsibility in their absence.

The hearing attendees may be physically present in the same geographic location, or the hearing may be conducted with the Parties in physically separate locations with technology enabling the Decision-Maker, Parties, and Advisors to simultaneously see and hear the Party or witness while that person is speaking. The University will create an audio or audiovisual recording or transcript of the live hearing, which will be made available to the Parties for inspection and review. Cell phones may not be used during the hearing unless approved by the Decision-Maker in advance.

The Decision-Maker will start the hearing by stating the allegations, reviewing rules of decorum for the hearing, outlining the hearing procedures, and explaining other necessary information.

The Decision-Maker may invite the Complainant and then the Respondent to present an opening statement. The opening statement is to be made by the Party, not the Advisor, and is not to exceed five (5) minutes.

The Decision-Maker will ask their own relevant and not otherwise impermissible questions to the Complainant, Respondent, and witnesses to aid in evaluating the allegations and assessing credibility.

Advisors will have the opportunity to ask the Parties and witnesses the questions submitted to and approved by the Decision-Maker prior to the hearing. Prior to the conclusion of each Party’s or witnesses’ testimony, Advisors will have an opportunity to propose follow up questions. These questions will be proposed orally to the Decision-Maker during the live hearing, who will first determine whether the question is relevant (and not otherwise impermissible). If determined to be relevant and not otherwise impermissible, the Advisor will ask such questions to the Parties or witnesses. The Decision-Maker will explain any decision to exclude a question that is
not relevant or otherwise impermissible.

Unclear, harassing, and repetitive follow up questions will not be permitted. The Decision-Maker will give Advisors the opportunity to clarify or revise questions that the Decision-Maker has determined to be unclear, harassing, or repetitive. If the Party sufficiently clarifies or revises a question, as determined by the Decision-Maker, the question will be asked.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the Decision-Maker may invite the Parties to give closing statements, first by the Complainant then the Respondent. Closing statements shall not exceed five (5) minutes.

A Decision-Maker 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 Decision-Maker must not draw an inference about whether sex discrimination or sex-based harassment occurred based solely on a Party’s or witness’s refusal to respond to such questions.

Additional rules of decorum and hearing procedures that apply equally to the Parties and their Advisors may be shared prior to the hearing.

Advisors at the Hearing

Only Advisors are permitted to question the Parties and witnesses – questioning will never be conducted by a Party personally. Therefore, Parties are required to have an Advisor present at the live hearing to ask questions. If a Party does not have an Advisor present at the live hearing, the College will provide the Party with an Advisor of the University’s choice, without charge to the Party, for the purpose of Advisor-conducted questioning. The Advisor will not be a Confidential Employee and may or may not be an attorney. The University cannot guarantee equal advisory rights. Consequently, 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 or other Advisor, except at the hearing. The University is not required to provide an attorney as an Advisor at the hearing.

NOTICE OF OUTCOME
Following the investigation and live hearing, the Decision-Maker will make a determination whether sex-based harassment occurred. The Decision-Maker will draft and issue a written determination regarding responsibility called the Notice of Outcome, which will be shared with the Parties simultaneously.

Elements of the Notice of Outcome

The Notice of Outcome will include the following elements:
(1) A description of the alleged sex-based harassment
(2) Information about the policies and procedures that the University used to evaluate the allegations
(3) The Decision-Maker’s evaluation of the relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence and determination whether sex discrimination or sex-based harassment occurred
(4) When the Decision-Maker finds that sex discrimination or sex-based harassment 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 y institution to the Complainant, and, to the extent appropriate, other students identified by the University to be experiencing the effects of the sex-based harassment; and

(5) The University’s procedures for the Complainant and Respondent to appeal

Generally, the Notice of Outcome will be issued no more than ten (10) business days after the live hearing.

The Notice of Outcome becomes final either on the date that the University provides the Parties with the written determination of the result of any appeal, or, if no Party appeals, the date on which an appeal would no longer be considered timely.

Disciplinary Sanctions
Discipline may not be imposed upon a Respondent for sex discrimination or sex-based harassment prohibited by this Policy unless there is a determination at the conclusion of the applicable grievance procedures that the Respondent engaged in Prohibited Conduct and therefore violated the Policy.

The range of possible disciplinary sanctions is as follows:
• Warning
• Probation
• Loss of Privilege
• Suspension
• Expulsion
• Termination

The Decision-Maker reserves the right to broaden or lessen any range of recommended sanctions in the case of serious mitigating circumstances or egregiously offensive behavior.

Remedies

-Changes in work or housing locations
• Leaves of absence
• Increased security and monitoring of certain areas of the campus
• Providing academic support services, such as tutoring;
• Any other remedy that can be tailored to the involved individuals to achieve the goals of this policy

APPEALS
Complainants and Respondents have the right to appeal the dismissal of a complaint and the Notice of Outcome and make a statement in support of, or challenging, the outcome.

Grounds for Appeal

The Parties may appeal the determination on the following grounds:
(1) Procedural irregularity that would change the outcome;
(2) New evidence that would change the outcome and that was not reasonably available when the determination whether sex-based harassment occurred or dismissal was made; or
(3) The Title IX Coordinator, Investigator, or Decision-Maker had a conflict of interest or bias for or against complainants or respondents generally or the individual Complainant or Respondent that would change the outcome.

The submission of an appeal stays any sanctions for the pendency of an appeal. Supportive measures and remote learning opportunities remain available during the pendency of the appeal.

If a Party appeals, the University will as soon as practicable notify the other Party in writing of the appeal; however the time for appeal shall be offered equitably to all Parties and shall not be extended for any Party solely because the other Party filed an appeal. Parties will have a reasonable and equal opportunity to make a statement in support of, or challenging, the outcome during in front of the second Hearing Panel.

Typically, the second Hearing Panel will issue a written decision simultaneously to both Parties describing the result and the rationale of the decision within ten (10) days of the second hearing.

Compliance and Title IX

TitleIXCoordinator@rockford.edu
Burpee Center, Student Life Suite
5050 E. State Street
Rockford, IL 61108