Procedures for Reporting and Responding to Complaints of Discrimination, Harassment, and Related Misconduct Involving a Student as the Responding Party

Body

University Procedure

Title

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Procedures for Reporting and Responding to Complaints of Discrimination, Harassment, and Related Misconduct Involving a Student as the Responding Party

Introduction

A. Purpose

The purpose of this Procedure is to outline the process for a prompt, equitable, impartial, and effective response to reports of Prohibited Conduct as defined in the Policy on Prohibited Discrimination, Harassment and Related Misconduct ("Policy") involving a University student as the Responding Party.

B. Scope

This Procedure applies to the reporting and resolution of conduct that:

could constitute Prohibited Conduct as defined in the Prohibited Conduct section of the Policy, and
meets the requirements in the Jurisdiction section of the Policy, and
involves a University student as the Responding Party as defined in the Key Terms section of the Policy.

This Procedure is intended to comply with current federal and state law. While the University will make good faith efforts to update this Procedure to reflect any legal changes, in the event any provision of this Procedure conflicts with applicable law, the law will supersede such provision.

C. Key Terms

Appeals Officer: an impartial individual selected from a pool of qualified, trained employees who does not participate in the investigation or the hearing and who is charged with deciding the appeal.

Decision-maker: an individual who makes an investigative finding or Formal Determination as to whether the alleged Prohibited Conduct occurred, including an investigator or the Hearing Officer.

EOC: the University’s Equal Opportunity and Compliance Office.

Hearing Officer: a trained and qualified individual who conducts and presides over the hearing and is charged with drafting a final determination.

Policy: the University’s Policy on Prohibited Discrimination, Harassment, and Related Misconduct.

Preponderance of the Evidence: an evidentiary standard that means the totality of the relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence supports the conclusion that it is more likely than not that the Prohibited Conduct occurred. If the Decision-maker is not persuaded by the evidence that it is more likely than not that the behavior occurred, the Decision-maker must not determine that the Prohibited Conduct occurred. 

This Procedure also incorporates all defined terms in the Policy.

D. Resources

Safe at UNC website

Comprehensive Resource Guide

Procedures

A. Reporting Prohibited Conduct

Any person may report Prohibited Conduct to the EOC and/or the Title IX Coordinator or designee in person, by telephone, in writing, by e-mail, by using the EOC’s electronic reporting form, or by any other means that results in the EOC, Title IX Coordinator, or designee receiving the person’s verbal or written report. Details about how to report can be found in the Reporting Prohibited Conduct section of the Policy.

B. Response to a Report of Prohibited Conduct

Upon receiving a report of Prohibited Conduct, the EOC will conduct an Initial Assessment as described in the Policy. During the Initial Assessment, the EOC will evaluate several factors to determine whether to take action and, if so, the appropriate resolution route. These factors include but are not limited to:

the Reporting Party’s request not to proceed with a Formal Determination; 
the Reporting Party’s reasonable safety concerns relating to proceeding with a Formal Determination;
the risk that additional acts of Prohibited Conduct would occur without pursuing a Formal Determination; 
the severity of the alleged conduct, including whether the conduct, if proven, would require the removal of a Responding Party from campus or imposition of another disciplinary sanction to end the behavior and prevent its recurrence; 
the age and relationship of the parties, including whether the Responding Party is an employee; 
the scope of the alleged conduct, including information suggesting a pattern, ongoing behavior, or conduct alleged to have impacted multiple individuals; 
the availability of evidence to assist a Decision-maker in determining whether Prohibited Conduct occurred; and 
whether the University could end the alleged Prohibited Conduct and prevent its recurrence without initiating a Formal Determination.

Where possible based on the facts and circumstances, the EOC will take action consistent with the Reporting Party’s expressed preference for manner of resolution. However, in some circumstances, after considering the factors above, the University may determine that it must move forward to investigate reports in which there appears to be a threat to an individual or to the University as a whole. The University’s ability to fully investigate and respond to a report may be limited or impossible if the Reporting Party requests that their name not be disclosed to the Responding Party or declines to participate in an investigation.

If the Responding Party is no longer a student at the time of the report, or if the conduct does not meet the jurisdictional requirements as outlined in the Policy, the University may not be able to fully investigate or take disciplinary action against the Responding Party.

The Initial Assessment may include consultation with appropriate campus units to determine if interim suspension or other interim actions are appropriate for the Responding Party.

At the conclusion of the Initial Assessment, the Associate Vice Chancellor for Equal Opportunity and Compliance/Title IX Coordinator or designee will determine the appropriate resolution route. Resolution may include:

take no further action;
pursue an informal resolution that does not involve disciplinary action against the Responding Party; or
pursue a formal resolution, which may be an Alternative Resolution or a Formal Determination to determine if disciplinary action is warranted.

The EOC will take no further action where the conduct, even if true, would not constitute a Policy violation; where the EOC determines it can respect the Reporting Party’s request for no further action; where the EOC is unable to identify relevant parties; and other appropriate circumstances. To determine that the conduct, even if true, would not constitute a Policy violation, the EOC may request information from other University offices.

Regardless of the manner of resolution, a Responding Party may choose to accept responsibility at any stage in the process.

C. Resolution Process

1. Time Frames

All time frames related to these resolution processes or otherwise listed in the Procedure may be extended on a case-by-case basis for good cause as necessary to ensure the integrity and completeness of the resolution process, to comply with a request by law enforcement, to accommodate the availability of witnesses, to account for University breaks or pre-approved leave, to account for the complexities of an Investigation (e.g., the number of witnesses and volume of information provided by the parties), or to address other legitimate reasons. Any extension of a time frame, and the reason for the extension, will be shared with the parties in writing. The EOC will make best efforts to complete the resolution process in a timely manner by balancing principles of thoroughness and fundamental fairness with promptness.

2. Resources

A Report and Response Manager in the EOC will serve as a resource and point of contact for both parties and any witnesses throughout the applicable resolution and appeal processes to answer questions about the process and to connect parties to resources, support, accommodations, or Supportive Measures, as appropriate.

To the extent permitted by law and subject to some limitations, throughout the resolution process conducted by the EOC, any party may have a Support Person and/or Advocate present at any meeting related to resolution of a report under the Policy. For more information about the role of a Support Person or Advocate, refer to the Policy.

D. Informal Resolution Process

When a Reporting Party does not want to move forward with a formal resolution, informal resolution may be an option. Informal resolution is a voluntary process that focuses on supporting the Reporting Party with no participation or involvement by the Responding Party. In an informal resolution, it may be possible for a Reporting Party to maintain anonymity with respect to the Responding Party. An informal resolution does not involve an investigation or disciplinary action against a Responding Party and is not appropriate for all types of Prohibited Conduct.

Informal resolutions may include but are not limited to:

establishing or continuing Supportive Measures;
conducting targeted or broad-based educational programming or training for relevant groups; and
providing increased monitoring, supervision, or security at locations or activities where the alleged misconduct occurred.

The EOC will seek to complete the informal resolution process within 30 business days of the decision that informal resolution is appropriate. A Reporting Party may choose to end an informal resolution and pursue a formal resolution at any time, including when an informal resolution is unsuccessful at resolving the report. The EOC will maintain records of informal resolution in accordance with the standards outlined in the Policy.

E. Formal Resolution

Following a determination that the University will move forward with a formal resolution, the University will initiate a prompt, thorough, equitable, and impartial resolution process. There are two types of formal resolution processes: Alternative Resolution and Formal Determination.

1. Alternative Resolution

At any time prior to determining whether Prohibited Conduct occurred, either party may request or the University may offer an Alternative Resolution process. Alternative Resolution does not involve a full investigation, adjudication process, or disciplinary action and, when successful, results in a voluntary resolution agreement between the parties.

a. Choosing Alternative Resolution

The University has discretion to determine whether Alternative Resolution is appropriate and may decline to offer Alternative Resolution despite one or more of the parties’ wishes. The EOC will consider the following factors in assessing whether Alternative Resolution is appropriate:

the nature and scope of the alleged conduct, including whether the reported behavior involves allegations of violence and/or the use of a weapon;
the respective ages and roles of the Reporting and Responding Parties;
the power dynamics between the involved parties;
the risk posed to any individual or to the campus community by not pursuing disciplinary action, including the risk of future harm to others;
the risk of retaliation against the parties, witnesses, or other related individuals;
whether there have been other reports of such misconduct by the Responding Party;
whether the report reveals a pattern of such misconduct at a given location, by a particular group or individual, or through a particular means or method;
the Reporting Party’s wish to pursue disciplinary action;
whether Alternative Resolution would adequately address the Reporting Party’s concerns and the alleged behavior; and
the University’s obligation to provide a safe, non-discriminatory, and non-retaliatory environment.

The University will not require or pressure parties to participate in an Alternative Resolution process and must obtain the parties’ voluntarily written consent to the Alternative Resolution process before it can proceed. Participation in an Alternative Resolution process will not require the parties to waive the right to an investigation or determination of the report or exercise of any other right. However, the parties’ agreement to a resolution at the conclusion of the Alternative Resolution process precludes the parties from initiating or resuming the Formal Determination process arising from the same allegations.

b. Notice of Alternative Resolution Process

If both parties consent to an Alternative Resolution process and the University determines it is appropriate, the EOC will provide written notice of the Alternative Resolution process, containing the following:

the allegations;
the requirements of the Alternative Resolution process;
a provision that any party has the right to withdraw from the Alternative Resolution process and resume a Formal Determination process at any time prior to agreeing to a resolution;
the parties' agreement to a resolution at the conclusion of the Alternative Resolution process would preclude the parties from initiating or resuming a Formal Determination process arising from the same allegations; 
the potential terms that may be requested or offered in an Alternative Resolution agreement, including notice that an Alternative Resolution agreement is binding only on the parties;
the EOC will maintain records related to the Alternative Resolution process, which include, but are not limited to, emails with and notes from conversations with the parties and/or other individuals to determine, facilitate, or implement terms; and
the EOC may use that information in a Formal Determination process, if one is initiated or resumed, if the Decision-maker determines that the information is relevant, not otherwise impermissible, and material to whether a policy violation occurred.

c. Additional Details about Alternative Resolution

The facilitator for the Alternative Resolution process:

will not be the same person as the Decision-maker in the Formal Determination process;
will not have a conflict of interest or bias for or against Reporting Parties or Responding Parties, individually or generally; and
will receive training sufficient to effectively serve in the role of facilitator.

Potential terms that may be included in an Alternative Resolution agreement include but are not limited to:

restrictions on contact;
restrictions on the Responding Party’s participation in one or more University programs or activities or attendance at specific events, including restrictions the University could have imposed as remedies or disciplinary sanctions if the conclusion of a Formal Determination process resulted in a determination that Prohibited Conduct occurred;
facilitation of a private discussion with the Responding Party about the allegations and discussion of solutions for eliminating the alleged behavior and remedying its effects;
mutually agreed upon parameters of interaction between the parties, including modified housing assignments, agreements for no contact, and/or time or place restrictions to limit interaction; and
any other remedy that can be tailored to the parties to promote a non-discriminatory environment.

The time frame for completion of an Alternative Resolution may vary depending on the complexity of the matter, but the EOC will seek to complete the process within 30 business days of the EOC’s written notice of the Alternative Resolution process.

2. Formal Determination Process

The Formal Determination process consists of two phases: the investigation and the hearing. In all phases of the Formal Determination process, the parties will have an equal opportunity to present fact and expert witnesses and inculpatory and exculpatory evidence that is relevant and not otherwise impermissible.

All individuals, including the Reporting Party, the Responding Party, and any witnesses will be treated with appropriate sensitivity and respect throughout the investigation. The process will safeguard the privacy of the individuals involved in a manner consistent with applicable law and University policy. The EOC will provide all individuals whose participation is invited or expected in an investigative interview, hearing, or other meeting related to the Formal Determination process written notice of the date, time, location, participants, and purpose of the meeting with sufficient time for the person to prepare to participate.

Once the EOC determines a Formal Determination is appropriate, the burden of proof and the burden of gathering evidence sufficient to reach a determination of responsibility rests on the University and not on the parties. There is a presumption that the Responding Party is not responsible for the alleged Prohibited Conduct until a final determination is made at the conclusion of the Formal Determination and any applicable appeals processes.

Investigation Phase

The University will provide for thorough, reliable, and impartial investigations of complaints. The EOC will oversee the investigation. The investigation is designed to provide a fair and reliable gathering of the facts by a trained and impartial investigator(s).

a. Time Frame

The EOC will seek to complete an investigation of alleged student misconduct within 60 business days from the issuance of the Notice of Investigation.

b. Investigators

The Associate Vice Chancellor for Equal Opportunity and Compliance/Title IX Coordinator or designee will assign investigator(s) who have training and experience investigating allegations of Prohibited Conduct. The investigator(s) will gather information regarding the alleged conduct, review all evidence gathered through the investigation, determine what evidence is relevant and what evidence is impermissible regardless of relevance, and prepare an investigation report summarizing all relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence obtained as part of the investigation.

c. Written Notice of Investigation

The Formal Determination process begins with written notice to the parties. The University will provide the Notice of Investigation to parties generally within 10 business days of the later of the EOC’s receipt of a request for an investigation or receipt of adequate information to determine that the alleged conduct in the report could, if true, constitute Prohibited Conduct. To the extent the University has reasonable concerns for the safety of any person as a result of providing the notice, the EOC may reasonably delay providing the Notice of Investigation to address the safety concerns appropriately. Such reasonable concerns must be based on individualized safety and risk analysis and not on mere speculation or stereotypes.

The Notice of Investigation will include the following information:

notice of the University’s procedures for resolving reports of Prohibited Conduct;
notice of the allegations of Prohibited Conduct and sufficient information available at the time to allow the parties to respond to the allegations, including, if known, the following:
- the identities of the parties involved in the incident(s);
- a summary of the conduct reportedly constituting Prohibited Conduct; and
- the approximate date and location of the reported incident(s);
information about the range of potential sanctions, including, where appropriate, notification that expulsion is a possible sanction for a Responding Party and that expulsion precludes matriculation at any University of North Carolina constituent institution;
information about the parties’ rights and responsibilities, including the following:
- that the Responding Party is presumed not responsible for the reported conduct and that a determination regarding responsibility is made at the conclusion of the Formal Determination or applicable appeal processes;
- that the parties may have an Advocate of their choice, who may be, but is not required to be, an attorney, accompany them to any meeting or proceeding;
- that for each requested meeting (including interviews and hearings), the EOC will provide each party sufficient time for the party to prepare to participate in the meeting;.
- that prior to the determination, the parties have an equal opportunity to provide relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence to a trained, impartial investigator(s); and
- that it is a violation of the Policy and Honor Code to knowingly make false statements or knowingly submit false information during the resolution process.
a statement that Retaliation is prohibited and how to report incidents of Retaliation.

If, during an investigation, the University decides to investigate additional allegations involving the same parties or learns information requiring the original allegations to be amended, the EOC will provide an amended Notice of Investigation to the parties in writing.

d. Consolidation of Complaints

At the discretion of the University, the EOC may consolidate multiple reports into one investigation if the information related to each incident would be relevant in reaching a determination regarding the other incident(s). This includes, but is not limited to, matters where the EOC has determined that there is relevant pattern evidence or where the evidence relating to the other alleged conduct is inextricably intertwined with Prohibited Conduct under the Policy. The EOC may consolidate matters when they involve multiple Reporting Parties, multiple Responding Parties, or related conduct within a department or unit. When more than one Reporting Party or more than one Responding Party is involved, references in this Procedure to a party, Reporting Party, or Responding Party include the plural, as applicable. For matters involving multiple student Responding Parties, consolidation to a single hearing requires voluntary written consent by each student Responding Party.

e. Intersection with Laws or Other Policies

If the report includes allegations that could potentially violate other University policies, the EOC may co-investigate with other relevant units or may seek authorization to investigate from the applicable policy authority to maximize efficiency, minimize disruption, and impart a prompt and appropriate resolution by the University. Where an applicable policy authority authorizes EOC to investigate allegations under their policy, these Procedures will apply to those allegations, unless there is a conflict between these Procedures and that policy, in which case that policy will control.

Where the University is made aware that there is a concurrent criminal investigation, the EOC will coordinate with law enforcement to prevent any University processes from interference with the integrity or the timing of the law enforcement investigation. At the request of law enforcement, the University may agree to defer the fact-finding portion of its investigation until after the initial stages of a criminal investigation. The EOC will communicate with the parties regarding resources and accommodations, procedural options, anticipated timing, and the implementation of any necessary Supportive Measures for the safety and well-being of the parties. The investigator(s) will promptly resume fact-gathering as soon as law enforcement releases the case for review following the initial criminal investigation.

f. Information and Evidence Collection

The investigator(s) will seek to speak separately with the Reporting Party, the Responding Party, and any other individuals who have information relevant to the determination of responsibility for a Policy violation. As part of the investigation, the investigator(s) may gather or receive information that is relevant to the determination of appropriate disciplinary sanctions, corrective measures, or remedies, including information about the impact of the alleged incident on parties.

The investigator(s) will also gather any available physical or documentary evidence that is relevant to the determination of responsibility under the Policy, including prior statements by the parties or witnesses, communications between the parties, email messages, social media materials, text messages, and other records as appropriate and available.

Relevance
The University requires the Decision-makers for each Formal Determination to objectively evaluate all evidence that is relevant and not otherwise impermissible, as described in this section. Relevant means related to the allegations of Prohibited Conduct under investigation as part of the Formal Determination process. Questions are relevant when they seek evidence that may aid in showing whether the alleged Prohibited Conduct occurred, and evidence is relevant when it may aid the Decision-makers in determining whether the alleged Prohibited Conduct occurred.

Character evidence is information that does not directly relate to the facts at issue but reflects on the reputation, personality, qualities, or habits of an individual. If a party or witness offers character evidence, the Decision-maker will evaluate the evidence for relevance and permissibility. However, character evidence is generally not relevant to the determination of whether there is a Policy violation.

Pattern evidence is evidence of an occurrence(s) of relevant behavior before, during, or after the conduct under investigation so distinctive and so closely resembling either party’s version of the alleged encounter as to tend to prove a material fact. The Decision-maker will evaluate proposed pattern evidence by assessing whether the previous or subsequent incident was substantially similar to the conduct described in the allegations or indicates a pattern of behavior and substantial conformity with that pattern. The Decision-maker will also evaluate offered pattern evidence for relevance and permissibility.
Impermissible Evidence
The following types of evidence, and questions seeking that evidence, are impermissible and must not be considered regardless of whether they are relevant, except by the Decision-maker to determine whether an exception applies, and will not be disclosed or otherwise be used:
- evidence that is protected under privilege as recognized by federal or state law or evidence provided to a confidential employee, unless the person whom the privilege or confidentiality is owed has voluntarily waived the privilege or confidentiality in writing;
- 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 resolution process; and
- evidence that relates to the Reporting Party’s sexual interests or prior sexual conduct, unless evidence about the Reporting Party’s prior sexual conduct is:
  - offered to prove that someone other than the Responding Party engaged in the alleged conduct; or
  - evidence about specific incidents of the Reporting Party’s prior sexual conduct with the Responding Party that is offered to prove consent to the alleged sex-based harassment.
Credibility
The Formal Determination process will provide the opportunity for the Decision-maker 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. Credibility determinations must not be based on a person’s status as a Reporting Party, Responding Party, or witness.

g. Impact Statement

The Reporting Party and Responding Party will be provided the opportunity to submit a written impact statement. The purpose of the impact statement is for the parties to provide relevant information about how the alleged conduct has affected their access to educational programs, activities, and opportunities. The impact statement can also include any mitigating or aggravating factors to be considered for the purposes of determining sanctions as outlined in the Sanctions, Corrective Measures, and Remedies section, if applicable.

Impact statements are not considered when determining whether a policy violation occurred. Impact statements will only be considered by the Decision-maker after a determination that the Responding Party violated the Policy for the purpose of determining sanctions, corrective measures, and remedies.

The impact statement may be submitted to a Report and Response Manager or designee at any time in the process, provided that it is received no later than 5 days after the parties have been given notice of the opportunity to review the draft investigation report. The parties may submit a supplemental impact statement to the Decision-maker if there is a change in circumstances warranting an updated impact statement. The impact statements may be shared with the parties and may be redacted at the discretion of the Associate Vice Chancellor for Equal Opportunity and Compliance/Title IX Coordinator or designee, or in accordance with FERPA.

The Associate Vice Chancellor for Equal Opportunity and Compliance/Title IX Coordinator or designee may also consider impact statements from other individuals as appropriate based on the nature and facts of the circumstances and the extent to which the conduct at issue was directed at and created a hostile environment for other community members beyond the Reporting Party. The Associate Vice Chancellor for Equal Opportunity and Compliance/Title IX Coordinator or designee may limit the submission or use of impact statements.

h. Review of Draft Investigation Report

At the end of the investigation, but before the investigator(s) issue a final investigation report, the EOC will, as permitted by law or policy, provide the parties with an equal opportunity to review a draft investigation report that summarizes the information gathered and synthesizes the areas of agreements and disagreement between the parties with any supporting information or accounts.

The draft investigation report will not include an investigative finding and may be presented in redacted form. The EOC will give each party and the party’s Advocate, if any, access to the draft investigation report via download-restricted electronic means. To safeguard privacy, the parties may not photograph or copy the draft investigation report. However, the parties will be permitted to take notes on the content.

The parties may submit any additional comment or information to the investigator(s) within 10 business days following the date of the notice of the opportunity to review the draft investigation report. This is the final opportunity for the parties to identify any additional information or witnesses for the investigator(s) to consider.

i. Final Investigation Report

After receiving the parties’ written responses or after the lapse of 10 business days without receipt of such responses, the investigator(s) will consider any written response(s) and create a final investigation report. In the final investigation report, the investigator(s) will evaluate the relevant and permissible evidence for its persuasiveness and make a preliminary finding as to whether the Preponderance of the Evidence supports a finding that the Responding Party engaged in Prohibited Conduct and will include the rationale for the finding. If the preliminary finding includes a finding that the Responding Party violated the Policy, the investigator(s) will also include recommended sanctions, corrective measures, and/or remedies, if applicable. In reaching these determinations, the investigator(s) may consult with the Associate Vice Chancellor for Equal Opportunity and Compliance/Title IX Coordinator and any other administrator who has information relevant to the Investigation.

The EOC will issue a Notice of Preliminary Finding and provide access to the final investigation report, as permitted by law or policy, within 10 business days following the final day for the parties to provide a response to the draft investigation report. The EOC will provide access to the final investigation report in a download-restricted electronic format. To safeguard privacy, the parties may not photograph or copy the investigation report. However, the parties will be permitted to take notes on the content.

The parties may choose to accept the preliminary finding and/or the associated recommendations and waive their right to a live hearing on the preliminary finding and/or associated recommendations. Absent written waivers from both parties within 5 business days of the Notice of Preliminary Finding, the EOC will proceed with scheduling a hearing. In this case, the EOC will send a Pre-Hearing Notice to the parties, outlining the date of the hearing, the identity of the Hearing Officer, and relevant procedural information.

Hearing Phase

A hearing will provide the parties an equal opportunity to present and question relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence in front of a Hearing Officer who will make a determination as to whether the Responding Party engaged in Prohibited Conduct in violation of the Policy. The Hearing Officer will have access to the evidence collected in the investigation and the final investigation report. The hearing is de novo, meaning that the Hearing Officer is not bound by the analysis or any findings, including the preliminary finding in the final investigation report, and there is no presumption that the preliminary finding is correct.

a. Hearing Officer

A Hearing Officer is an impartial and appropriately trained individual designated by the University to conduct the hearing, review all relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence gathered in the investigation and presented in the hearing, and make a determination as to whether Prohibited Conduct occurred. A Hearing Officer may decline to participate, or the parties may request a different Hearing Officer, on the basis of a conflict of interest or bias for or against Reporting Parties or Responding Parties generally or the individual Reporting Party or Responding Party that would change the outcome of the matter. The parties must submit the request in writing to the EOC no later than 5 business days after receipt of the Pre-Hearing Notice and must clearly state the grounds to support a claim of bias or conflict of interest.

b. Notice of Hearing

The Hearing Officer will send a Notice of Hearing to the parties and the investigator(s) promptly after identifying the hearing date. The Notice of Hearing will outline:

the hearing date, location, and other logistical details;
information about the Hearing Officer and their role;
details about the pre-hearing meeting, including date and topics;
information about the role of a Support Person and Advocate;
hearing protocols, including questioning, decorum standards, and expectations;
information about deadlines and procedures related to the Hearing; and
any other relevant information related to the hearing process.

c. Time Frame

Hearings will generally be conducted within 30 business days, but not less than 10 business days, of the Notice of Preliminary Finding.

Any legal or procedural challenge should be submitted to the EOC in writing no later than 10 business days prior to the Hearing.

The Hearing Officer will provide the parties with reasonable deadlines for submissions of evidence and/or witness lists.

d. Pre-Hearing Meeting

The Hearing Officer will meet separately with each party and their Advocate to resolve pre-hearing concerns. At this pre-hearing meeting, the parties will each have the opportunity to raise any challenges. The parties will also have the opportunity to address questions about the hearing process. At this meeting, the Hearing Officer will also review expectations for hearing participants, including the Advocate and/or Support Person.

e. Hearing Procedures

Hearings will be conducted in closed session. Attendance at the hearing is limited to the parties, one Advocate and/or one Support Person per party, witnesses, and necessary University staff. Hearings must be conducted live. At the discretion of the University a hearing may be conducted with the parties physically present in separate locations with technology enabling the Hearing Officer and parties to simultaneously see and hear the party or witness while that person is speaking. The University will record the hearing by audio or audiovisual means, and the recording or transcript will be made available to the parties for review and inspection. The parties and their Advocate and/or Support Person are prohibited from recording the hearing in any manner.

Both parties will have the opportunity to provide a statement of their account related to the alleged conduct, beginning with the Reporting Party and followed by the Responding Party. Each party will then have the opportunity to present any evidence, including witnesses, beginning with the Reporting Party and followed by the Responding Party. The Hearing Officer may also call witnesses. The Hearing Officer may, in their discretion, alter this order to accommodate availability of witnesses or to otherwise avoid undue delay in the hearing.

The Hearing Officer and the parties may pose questions to any party or witness participating in the hearing. All questions must be relevant and not otherwise impermissible.

Questions directed at parties will be facilitated by the Hearing Officer. Before a question is posed to a party, the Hearing Officer will first determine if the question is relevant and not otherwise impermissible. If so, the Hearing Officer will ask the question to the party.

Witnesses may be directly questioned. The Hearing Officer has the discretion to modify the procedures at any time if the Hearing Officer determines questioning by the parties will be unduly intimidating or burdensome to a witness. In all such instances, the Hearing Officer may require measures to assure the integrity of the process.

The Hearing Officer may choose to place less or no weight on statements by a party or witness who refuses to respond to questions deemed relevant and not otherwise impermissible. The Hearing Officer must not draw an inference about whether Prohibited Conduct occurred based solely on a party or witness’s absence from the live hearing or refusal to answer questions.

If either party or any witness declines to participate, the Hearing Officer will consider the available evidence in determining whether the evidence establishes a violation of the Policy. Such evidence may include evidence collected as part of the investigation report, including witness statements, documents, and records, which will be presented by the investigator.

f. Determination

The Hearing Officer will provide the determination whether Prohibited Conduct occurred in a written Notice of Hearing Outcome simultaneously to the parties within 10 business days of the conclusion of the hearing. In reaching the determination, the Hearing Officer will objectively evaluate all relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence and will use the Preponderance of the Evidence standard.

The written determination will include the following, as permitted by law or policy:

a written description of the alleged Prohibited Conduct;
information about the policies and procedures the Decision-makers used to evaluate the allegations;
the Hearing Officer’s evaluation of the relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence; 
a determination whether Prohibited Conduct occurred and rationale for each instance of reported conduct;
if the Hearing Officer finds that Prohibited Conduct occurred, any disciplinary  sanctions the University will impose on the Responding Party and any corrective measures;
whether remedies will be provided to the Reporting Party; and
the University’s procedures and permissible bases for the parties to appeal, including the time frame for submitting an appeal.

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

F. Appeals

1. Grounds for Appeal

Either party may appeal the Hearing Officer’s determination of whether Prohibited Conduct occurred and/or the determination regarding sanctions on the following bases:

procedural error that would change the outcome, including violation of due process or material deviation from the "Policy on Minimum Substantive and Procedural Standards for Student Disciplinary Proceedings" adopted by the Board of Governors, University of North Carolina Policy Manual § 700.4.1;
new evidence that would change the outcome and that was not reasonably available at the time the determination was made; and/or
the Associate Vice Chancellor for Equal Opportunity and Compliance/Title IX Coordinator, investigator(s), or Hearing Officer had a conflict of interest or bias for or against Reporting Parties or Responding Parties generally or the individual Reporting Party or Responding Party that would change the outcome.

2. How to Appeal

Parties must submit appeals in writing to the EOC within 5 business days of the written Notice of Hearing Outcome. The appeal must consist of a plain, concise, and complete written statement specifically identifying both the procedural error, new evidence, and/or conflict of interest and how it would/did change the outcome. The EOC will provide written acknowledgement of receipt.

Prior to the issuance of the Notice of Final Outcome, the time frame for filing an appeal based on newly discovered information may be extended at the discretion of the Associate Vice Chancellor for Equal Opportunity and Compliance/Title IX Coordinator or designee where the evidence could not reasonably have been discovered within the time frame and compelling justification exists for its consideration.

3. Appeal Procedures

Upon receipt of the appeal, the EOC will forward the appeal to the Appeals Officer. The EOC will notify the parties of the appeal in writing and will identify the Appeals Officer.

The Appeals Officer will assess the appeal to determine whether it is timely filed and, if so, whether the appeal satisfies one or more of the permitted bases for appeal. If the Appeals Officer determines that the appeal does not satisfy one or more of the permitted bases, the appeal will be denied. The Appeals Officer will decide whether the appeal is properly filed within 5 business days of receiving the appeal. The decision will be communicated to both parties simultaneously in writing.

If the appeal is properly filed, the EOC will provide parties access to the written appeal, and the Appeals Officer will provide both parties a reasonable and equal opportunity to provide a written statement in support of or challenging the appeal within 5 business days from the date on which the Appeals Officer notifies the parties that the appeal is properly filed. The Title IX Coordinator or designee may also submit a written response within 5 business days from the deadline for submission for the parties. If both parties file an appeal, the appeal documents from each party will be considered together in one appeal process.

In any request for an appeal, the burden of proof lies with the party requesting the appeal, because the determination regarding responsibility will be presumed to have been decided reasonably and appropriately. Appeals are not a rehearing of the matter, and mere disagreement with the outcome is not a sufficient basis for altering the outcome. The appeal's scope will be limited only to the stated permissible bases accepted for review. In most cases, appeals are confined to a review of the written documentation or record of the original hearing and pertinent documentation regarding the grounds for appeal. The Appeals Officer may speak to or request written information from the Associate Vice Chancellor for Equal Opportunity/Title IX Coordinator or designee, investigator(s), the Hearing Officer, or the parties, as appropriate. If the Appeals Officer elects to speak with one party, the Appeals Officer will provide the other party with an equal opportunity to speak.

Depending on the basis of the requested appeal, the Appeals Officer may:

affirm the Outcome, or
return the matter to the EOC with instructions for additional proceedings.

The Appeals Officer will notify the parties of the result of the appeal and rationale simultaneously in writing within 15 business days from the date of the deadline for document submission. Appeal decisions by the Appeals Officer are final, with the exception of cases involving expulsion.

4. Further Review/Appeal in Matters of Expulsion

Where the appeal to the University affirms a hearing determination that includes expulsion, either party may further appeal the hearing determination to the Board of Trustees on the following grounds:

violation of due process; and
material deviation from the "Policy on Minimum Substantive and Procedural Standards for Student Disciplinary Proceedings" adopted by the Board of Governors, University of North Carolina Policy Manual § 700.4.1.

Appeals to the Board of Trustees must be filed in accordance with the University's Procedure for Appeals to the Board of Trustees.

Where the Board of Trustees affirms the hearing determination, the decision is final and is not subject to further appeal. Consistent with the Code of the Board of Governors of the University of North Carolina system, no appeal to the President or the Board of Governors of the University of North Carolina system is permitted.

G. Sanctions, Corrective Measures, and Remedies

The Policy prohibits a range of behaviors that are serious in nature. In keeping with the University’s commitment to foster an environment that is safe, inclusive, and free from Prohibited Conduct, the Policy authorizes the Decision-maker to impose sanctions, corrective measures, and remedies tailored to the circumstances of each report. Specifically, these sanctions, corrective measures, and remedies are designed to:

address the effects of the misconduct on the Reporting Party and the University community;
hold the Responding Party accountable for the conduct committed; and
eliminate Prohibited Conduct, prevent its recurrence, and remedy its effects.

The sanctions, corrective measures, and remedies the University imposes may include educational, restorative, rehabilitative, and/or punitive components. Some behavior, however, is so harmful to the educational process and/or the work environment that it requires severe sanctions or disciplinary action, including temporary or permanent separation from the University or UNC System.

1. Sanctions

a. Sanctioning Factors

In determining the appropriate course of action, the Decision-maker must consider the following factors:

the nature and violence of the conduct at issue;
the effects of the conduct on the Reporting Party;
the effects or implications of the conduct on the educational mission, work environment, the community, or the University;
whether the conduct involved an abuse of power or authority;
prior misconduct by the Responding Party, including the Responding Party’s relevant prior discipline history, both at the University or elsewhere, including criminal convictions;
whether the Responding Party has accepted responsibility for the conduct;
maintenance of a safe and respectful environment conducive to learning and working;
protection of the University community; and
any other mitigating, aggravating, or compelling circumstances to reach a just and appropriate resolution in each case.

All similarly situated Responding Parties must be treated equitably when applying these factors. The Decision-maker may also review any written impact statements submitted by the Reporting Party or the Responding Party when determining sanctions.

b. Range of Sanctions

The University may impose sanctions on a Responding Party, individually or in combination. Sanctions that affect a student’s status with the University include the following:

Expulsion, which must be approved by the Chancellor, means that a student is removed from the University and from the UNC System permanently and may not be re-admitted to any UNC System university unless and until the Chancellor who imposed or approved the sanction (or the Chancellor’s successor) concludes on the basis of the former student’s petition and any supportive documentation that the individual should be given a new opportunity to pursue higher education within the UNC System.
Permanent Suspension, which must be approved by the Chancellor, means that the student is removed from good standing and must leave the University permanently without an expectation that the student may eventually return to the Chapel Hill campus. The student is not barred, however, from seeking admission to another UNC System university, if that university wishes to permit such application following disclosure of the student’s disciplinary record at UNC-Chapel Hill. Permanent suspension from the University will remain in effect until the Chancellor who imposed or approved the sanction (or the Chancellor’s successor) concludes on the basis of the former student’s petition and any supportive documentation that the individual should be given a new opportunity to pursue higher education at the University.
Suspension for a Definite or Indefinite Period means that the student is removed from good standing and must leave the University for a definite or indefinite period. This form of suspension anticipates that the student may eventually return if applicable conditions are satisfied. Academic work completed at another institution during a period in which a student is under suspension from the University may not be transferred toward the degree, but applicable health care or insurance benefits may be continued if the health insurance premium has already been paid.
Probation for a Definite or Indefinite Period, including probation with associated conditions or requirements as set by the Decision-maker, means that a student may remain at the University but may be required to satisfy specified conditions or requirements, report regularly to a designated administrator, and be barred from holding any office or participating in any activity in which the student represents the University, including athletics or other competitive teams, or from participating in any University-recognized student organizations either within or outside the University community. The sanction of probation prohibits graduation until the probation period ends, and the student has complied with all requirements.
Disciplinary Action Relating to Student Employment, if applicable. Such disciplinary actions could include termination of employment with the University, suspension without pay, demotion, or written warning/letter of reprimand.

Expulsion, permanent suspension, suspension for a definite or indefinite period, and probation will be noted on a student’s transcript while the sanction is in effect.

Where the Decision-maker concludes that a sanction of suspension or expulsion is appropriate, and the Responding Party has not already been removed on an emergency basis, the EOC may submit information to the applicable threat assessment body to assess whether emergency removal, which may be referred to as a "summary suspension," or other interim conditions are warranted pending the conclusion of any appeal.

Absent the imposition of an interim suspension by the appropriate campus unit, the imposition of a sanction will be deferred pending the conclusion of any appeal. Supportive Measures in effect for the parties will continue pending the conclusion of any appeal, as appropriate.

2. Corrective Measures

The Decision-maker may also consider corrective measures that are not sanctions but are designed to promote a safe and non-discriminatory educational and work environment. Such measures may focus on educational and restorative principles that allow a Responding Party or other individuals to develop insight about the relationship between certain behaviors and the prohibitions set out in the Policy, learn about the effects of the behavior on the Reporting Party and the community, and identify how to prevent or change the behavior.

Such corrective measures include, but are not limited to:

Educational Requirements: completion of training, programs, or requirements designed to help the Responding Party manage behavior and understand why it was inappropriate.
"No Contact" Orders: compliance with orders of no contact that limit access to specific University areas or forms of contact with particular persons.
Adjustment of Work Duties: reassignment of job duties, responsibilities, supervision, schedule, or location for student employees that does not entail a demotion of rank or position and/or reduction in pay.
Housing Restrictions: exclusion from University housing or changes in housing assignment.

In some circumstances, even if the Decision-maker has found that the Responding Party did not violate the Policy, the EOC may require training or education for the Responding Party, other individuals involved, or an entire cohort or student group.

3. Remedies

When the University determines that the Responding Party has violated the Policy, the EOC will consider appropriate remedies, based upon the findings and unique circumstances of each report. Remedies are measures provided, as appropriate, to restore and preserve the Reporting Party’s equal access to the University’s educational programs or activities by addressing the effects of the conduct on the Reporting Party. Remedies seek to restore to the Reporting Party, to the extent possible, all benefits and opportunities lost as a result of the Prohibited Conduct.

Remedies may include, but are not limited to, adjustment of work or class assignments, location, and/or schedule or recommending or requiring a review of a negative performance or grade decision that may have resulted from the conduct that violated the Policy. Remedies need not be non-disciplinary or non-punitive and need not avoid burdening the Responding Party.

The EOC will identify long-term or permanent remedies for the Reporting Party and address any effects of the conduct on the University community. Long-term remedies may include extending or making permanent any Supportive Measures or implementing additional measures tailored to achieve the goals of the Policy. Many of the remedies and supports that a Reporting Party might need after a determination will have already been provided during the resolution process, including but not limited to academic accommodations, access to available resources at Counseling and Psychological Services, and modifications to housing arrangements. The EOC will, in all cases, consider whether there is a need for additional or extended remedies. The EOC is responsible for the effective implementation of any remedies.

H. Post-Resolution Follow Up

After a resolution, the EOC may periodically contact the parties to:

ensure the Prohibited Conduct has ended,
determine if additional remedies are necessary, and
assure compliance with any disciplinary action or other corrective measures that have been imposed.

Any violation by a Responding Party of a sanction, corrective measure, or Supportive Measure imposed under the Policy or a failure by a University employee to provide a specified remedy should be reported to the EOC or the Associate Vice Chancellor for Equal Opportunity /Title IX Coordinator.

I. Consultation with the EOC

For all matters that fall under the Policy, all grievance panels and adjudicatory bodies must consult with the EOC as needed regarding policy interpretation and application, procedural issues, disciplinary actions, corrective measures, and remedies. In addition, they may consult with other offices with specialized expertise, as appropriate. The purpose of the consultation is not to discuss the merits of the evidence, but rather so that the EOC can help facilitate consistency across various processes with respect to policy application, procedures, disciplinary actions, and remedies so that all categories of employees are treated consistently.

J. External Agreements

The University will not recognize or enforce agreements between the parties outside of these procedures. The University will recognize, however, a lawfully issued protective order under North Carolina law.

Related Requirements

See "Related Requirements" in the Policy.

Contact Information

General Inquiries or Concerns

Office: Equal Opportunity and Compliance Office

Telephone: 919-966-3576

Email: eoc@unc.edu

Inquiries or Concerns about Title IX

Name: Elizabeth Hall, Associate Vice Chancellor of Equal Opportunity and Compliance / Title IX Coordinator

Telephone: 919-445-1297

Email: cehall@email.unc.edu

Concerns about the University's Application of Laws Covered by this Policy

United States Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (OCR)

Website: OCR website
Telephone: 800-421-3481
Email: OCR@ed.gov

United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)

Telephone: 800-669-4000
Email: info@eeoc.gov