Sexual Misconduct Grievance Procedure

Upon receiving a report or formal complaint alleging prohibited conduct, the university has jurisdiction to conduct at least a preliminary inquiry. A preliminary inquiry may include, but is not limited to, evaluating whether the report or formal complaint implicates a policy enforced by the OIE, whether the report or formal complaint and parties are within the jurisdiction of the OIE, and whether the report or formal complaint presents a safety threat such that the OIE must report the concern to law enforcement, take action on the report despite a complainant’s request for privacy.

Once a formal complaint has been filed, the Title IX Coordinator or designee will evaluate whether the conduct alleged in the formal complaint, if proved, would constitute a violation of the policy. If additional information is needed to evaluate jurisdiction, the Title IX Coordinator or designee will make reasonable efforts to obtain that information. The Title IX Coordinator or designee will notify the complainant if additional time is needed to consider the complaint. If the alleged conduct would not violate the policy, even if proven true, or the university lacks jurisdiction under CU APS 5014 to pursue the matter, the Title IX Coordinator or designee will dismiss the Formal Complaint with regard to that conduct (mandatory dismissal).

If a Formal Complaint is dismissed, parties will receive a Notice of Complaint and Dismissal, which will include a summary of the allegations reported and an explanation as to the reason for the dismissal. Either party may appeal. To file an appeal of the dismissal, the complainant or respondent must submit the appeal within seven (7) calendar days of the Notice of Complaint and Dismissal. The appeal must include an explanation as to why the alleged misconduct, if true, would violate the Sexual Misconduct, Intimate Partner Violence, and Stalking Policy and why the Formal Complaint should not be dismissed.

An administrator within the OIE, separate from the Title IX Coordinator or decision-maker for the initial dismissal, will consider the appeal and issue a determination either upholding or overturning the dismissal within seven (7) calendar days.

The university may consolidate Formal Complaints in situations that arise out of the same facts or circumstances and involve more than one complainant, more than one respondent, or what amount to counter-complaints by one party against the other. The university may also consolidate under the Formal Grievance Process related violations as designated in CU APS 5014 or other prohibited conduct under other policies, procedures, or codes of conduct.

If a Formal Complaint is dismissed, parties will receive a Notice of Complaint and Dismissal, which will include a summary of the allegations reported and an explanation as to the reason for the dismissal. Either party may appeal. To file an appeal of the dismissal, the complainant or respondent must submit the appeal within seven (7) calendar days of the Notice of Complaint and Dismissal. The appeal must include an explanation as to why the alleged misconduct, if true, would violate the Sexual Misconduct, Intimate Partner Violence, and Stalking Policy and why the Formal Complaint should not be dismissed.

An administrator within the OIE, separate from the Title IX Coordinator or decision-maker for the initial dismissal, will consider the appeal and issue a determination either upholding or overturning the dismissal within seven (7) calendar days.

If the Formal Grievance Procedure is commenced, the respondent and complainant shall receive a written Notice of Allegations. The written Notice of Allegations may be sent to the respondent and the complainant by email;, via U.S. mail to the permanent addresses appearing in the university’s information system, the address appearing in a police report; or may be hand-delivered. The written Notice of Allegations will include a request that the respondent contact the OIE within three (3) business days of the issuance of the Notice of Allegations to schedule an initial meeting.

All participants in an investigation are expected to tell the truth and provide factual information, to the best of their knowledge.

Interviews may be conducted in-person in an office space designated by the OIE on campus, or virtually (via phone, Zoom, Microsoft Teams, or other virtual platform). Interviews may include one or two investigators.

The investigator/s will create a summary of each participant’s statement. Summary statements are not word-for-word transcriptions of interviews. Each participant will have the opportunity to review their summary statement for accuracy prior to disclosure to the complainant/s and respondent/s as part of the Preliminary Investigative Report (PIR). This review is optional, and may occur in-person or be shared electronically. Participants have a period of three (3) business days to review their summary statement and respond to the investigator/s with any questions, additional information, or clarifications to their summary statement. All summary statements will be included in the PIR, and final investigative report (FIR).

The OIE will provide both parties an equal opportunity to inspect and review any evidence obtained as part of the investigation that is directly related to the allegations raised in a Formal Complaint, including the evidence upon which the university does not intend to rely in reaching a determination regarding responsibility, so that each party can meaningfully respond to the evidence prior to conclusion of the investigation. This includes inculpatory or exculpatory evidence, whether obtained from a party or other source.

The OIE must send to each party and the party’s advisor, if any, the evidence subject to inspection and review in an electronic format or hard copy, along with the PIR. The PIR will include a written summary of all relevant and material evidence. While the university will not restrict the ability of the parties to discuss the allegations or gather evidence, the OIE will seek to ensure that the parties and their respective advisors or support persons, as applicable, maintain the privacy of disclosed information. Parties receiving such private information should only distribute it to those individuals with a legitimate need to know. The university will continue to enforce prohibitions against harassment, retaliation, and other related misconduct.

The parties will have seven (7) calendar days to access and download the PIR, and fourteen (14) calendar days to submit a written response to the PIR. The investigator(s) will consider the parties’ responses, if any, prior to completing the Final Investigative Report.

The FIR will include a written summary of relevant and material evidence, will incorporate the parties’ responses to the PIR, if any. The factual findings and final determination regarding responsibility are made by the Hearing Officer(s) only after a live hearing that includes the opportunity for cross-examination.

The FIR will be issued to each party and the party’s advisor at least fourteen (14) calendar days prior to a hearing in an electronic format or hard copy for their review and written response that will be provided to the Hearing Officer(s). The parties will have seven (7) calendar days to access and download the FIR.

If, after initiating Formal Grievance Procedure and before the Hearing, the university, based on the available evidence, engages in a mandatory or discretionary dismissal, the university will provide a Notice of Dismissal and Opportunity to Appeal to complainant and respondent.

Notice of Dismissal and Opportunity to Appeal after Notice of Allegations

If the university dismisses a case and after it has issued the NOA, the university will promptly send written notice of the dismissal (Notice of Dismissal) and reason(s) simultaneously to the parties, along with information about the appeal process. If a Formal Complaint is dismissed, both parties may appeal. To file an appeal of the dismissal, a party must submit the appeal in accordance with the instructions contained in the Notice of Dismissal within seven (7) calendar days.

Either party may appeal a dismissal of a Formal Complaint on the following bases:

• Procedural irregularities that affected the dismissal
• New evidence that was not reasonably available at the time of dismissal, which could affect the outcome of the matter.
• The Title IX Coordinator, investigator(s), or other decision-makers for the dismissal of the Formal Complaint had a conflict of interest or bias for or against complainants or respondents generally or the individual complainant or respondent that affected the dismissal.

Both parties may submit a written statement in response to the appeal, either in support of, or challenging, the dismissal.

The university will designate a trained decision maker for the appeal. The decision-maker for the appeal of a dismissal may not be the same decision-maker that reached the determination regarding dismissal, the investigator(s), or the Title IX Coordinator.

The decision maker will consider the appeal and issue a determination either upholding or overturning the dismissal within seven (7) calendar days. If additional time is needed to consider the appeal, the decision maker will notify the parties of the extension for good cause. This could include gathering additional information from the complainant, the respondent, or additional individuals.

The appeal decision-maker will issue a written decision describing the result of the appeal and the rationale for the result. The appeal decision must be provided simultaneously to both parties.

A trained Hearing Officer will preside over a live hearing for the purpose of determining findings of fact and policy violations. Nothing precludes the university from utilizing a single decision-maker (Hearing Officer) or a panel of decision-makers (including the Hearing Officer) for the hearing and to determine responsibility.

Each party must have an advisor to conduct cross-examination during the live hearing. Each party may bring one advisor of their choosing to the hearing to conduct cross-examination. 

A party may not personally ask questions of the other party or any witnesses during the hearing. If a party does not bring an advisor of their choosing and declines to utilize the university provided advisor, the party still may not personally ask questions of the other party or witnesses during the hearing.

Each party is also permitted to bring one support person of their choice to the hearing, with prior notice to the university that a support person will attend and that support person’s name. The support person may not be a witness to the incident(s) at issue and may not speak during the hearing.

Live hearings will be conducted virtually, with parties (and their respective advisors) participating from separate locations. Technology will enable the Hearing Officer or panel of decision-makers and parties to simultaneously see and hear the party or the witness answering questions. Hearings are closed to the public.

The Hearing Officer must create an audio or audiovisual recording, or transcript, of any live hearing and the university must make it available to the parties for inspection and review.

Consistent with the standard of proof in other conduct proceedings, the Hearing Officer and panelists, if applicable, must apply the preponderance of the evidence standard when making findings of fact and conclusions as to whether a violation of the Sexual Misconduct, Intimate Partner Violence, and Stalking Policy occurred. A preponderance of the evidence exists when the totality of the evidence demonstrates that an allegation of misconduct is more probably true than not. If the evidence weighs so evenly that the Hearing Officer and panelists, if applicable, is unable to say that there is a preponderance on either side, the Hearing Officer and panelists, if applicable, must determine that there is insufficient evidence to conclude there has been a violation of the policy.

In applying the preponderance of the evidence standard, the Hearing Officer and panelists, if applicable, may consider both direct and circumstantial evidence. The Hearing Officer and panelists, if applicable, may determine the credibility of parties and witnesses and the weight to be given to their statements, taking into consideration their means of knowledge, strength of memory and opportunities for observation, the reasonableness or unreasonableness of their statements, the consistency or lack of consistency of their statements, their motives, whether their statements are contradicted or supported by other evidence, any evidence of bias, prejudice or interest, and the person’s manner and demeanor when providing statements.

It is the responsibility of the Hearing Officer and the panelists, if applicable, not the parties, or the investigators, to make a determination based on the totality of the available information whether or not the preponderance of the evidence has been met. Neither party bears a burden of proof. While the Hearing Officer and panelists, if applicable, may consider any recommendations provided by the investigator(s) in the FIR, the ultimate determination of factual findings and responsibility rests with the Hearing Officer and panelists, if applicable, after full consideration of all available evidence.

The Hearing Officer must issue a written determination regarding responsibility that will be sent to the OIE.

In cases where the Formal Grievance Procedure results in a determination that a student respondent is responsible for a policy violation, the matter will be referred, with the written determination (prior to the inclusion of the sanction), to the Office of the Dean of Students prior to the issuance of a final written determination. The conduct officer will notify the Hearing Officer and Title IX Coordinator or designee of the determined sanctions, so that it will be included with the written determination provided by the OIE.

In cases that result in a determination that an employee respondent is responsible for a policy violation or acted inappropriately or unprofessionally, the matter will be referred, with the written determination (prior to the inclusion of the sanction), to the disciplinary authority and Human Resources.

Either the complainant or respondent may file a written appeal of the determination regarding responsibility. All appeals must be made in accordance with the Procedures outlined in this section.

Basis for appeal of a determination regarding responsibility:

1. To determine whether there were procedural irregularities that affected the outcome of the matter;
2. If new evidence that was not reasonably available at the time the determination regarding responsibility or dismissal was made that could affect the outcome of the matter; and/or
3. The Title IX Coordinator, investigators, or Hearing Officer and panelists, if applicable, had a conflict of interest or bias for or against complainants or respondents generally or the individual complainant or respondent that affected the outcome of the matter

In the appeal, both parties must have a reasonable, equal opportunity to submit a written statement in support of, or challenging, the outcome.

Appeals must be submitted in writing to the OIE within seven (7) calendar days after the determination regarding responsibility is issued. The appeal should indicate the specific basis for the appeal, supporting arguments and documentation, and any other relevant information the appealing party wishes to include.

If an appeal is received, the OIE will appoint a trained Appeal Officer. The Appeal Officer will notify the non-appealing party (complainant or respondent) in writing of the appeal, and the non-appealing party will be provided seven (7) calendar days to respond in writing to the appeal. The response should be sent to the designated Appeal Officer. Neither party is required to respond to an appeal. Not responding to an appeal does not imply agreement with the appeal.

Upon review of the appeal, the Appeal Board may:

1. Uphold the initial decision in its entirety;
2. Direct that there be reconsideration by the Hearing Officer (or a new Hearing Officer) based on the existing evidence; or
3. Direct that there be re-investigation (by the same or different investigators) followed by a second live cross-examination hearing process conducted in accordance with the process outlined above.

The Appeal Board shall not make new findings of fact. The Appeal Board shall review all documentation submitted, make the final decision upon appeal, and simultaneously provide the parties with a written Notice of Appeal Decision within 21 calendar days of its receipt of all final documentation.