1.0 Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) Purpose

This Title IX Grievance Procedure (“Grievance Procedure”) is part of the Title IX Policy (“Policy”) and describes the procedure the University applies when it receives a Report of possible Prohibited Conduct. This Grievance Procedure therefore must be read in conjunction with the Policy. Capitalized terms used and not otherwise defined in this Grievance Procedure are defined in the Policy.

Note: For information regarding available resources or how to make a report, please refer to Section 3.3 of the Policy.

 

2.0 SOP

This Grievance Procedure applies to Reports and Complaints made by Covered Persons and other individuals participating in or attempting to participate in the University’s Education Program or Activity where the alleged Prohibited Conduct (a) occurred in Brown’s Education Program or Activity; or (b) creates or contributes to a Hostile Environment in Brown’s Education Program or Activity.

The University will determine the appropriate manner of resolution, if any, by the nature of the Respondent’s relationship to the University. Only Respondents who are Students or Employees at the time the Complaint is filed are entitled to the process set forth in this Grievance Procedure. 

In the event a Complaint is filed against an individual who is not a Student or Employee, the Title IX Coordinator will conduct an assessment of the allegation, which may include but not be limited to gathering Relevant information, interviewing individuals with Relevant information, and consulting with individuals and offices both internal and external to Brown. After conducting the assessment, the Title IX Coordinator will determine what actions, if any, the University will take to address the allegation and eliminate and prevent any Hostile Environment in the University’s Education Program or Activity. 

The Title IX and Gender Equity Office applies the policy defining the Prohibited Conduct that was in effect at the time of the alleged conduct and the procedures that are in effect when the Complaint is filed. 

In all cases in the Grievance Procedure where a University official, including the Title IX Coordinator, is referenced, it shall include their designee.
 

2.1 Filing a Complaint

A Complaint must be submitted to the Title IX Coordinator. A Complaint may be filed with the Title IX Coordinator orally in person, by mail, or by electronic mail, using the contact information listed below.

Title IX and Gender Equity Office 
20 Benevolent Street
titleixoffice@brown.edu  
Title IX Coordinator: 401-863-2026  
Title IX Case Manager: 401-863-5140  

Online reporting form: Gender Discrimination and Sexual Violence Incident Reporting Form
 

2.2 Response to Reports and Initial Evaluation

The University will review and respond to all Reports. Upon receiving a Report, the Title IX Coordinator will promptly contact the Complainant to provide information, advise them of the availability of Supportive Measures and on- and off-campus resources, and discuss the procedural options available to the Complainant under this Policy, including the Informal Resolution Process and Formal Resolution Process. The University will also assess whether there are any immediate threats to health or safety that must be addressed. 

Importantly, if the alleged conduct, if established, would not constitute a violation of this Policy, the Title IX Coordinator will inform the Complainant of any other resources and options available, which may include referring the matter for action under a separate policy. Similarly, in cases in which the Respondent is not a Brown affiliate and the Grievance Procedure would not be available to the Complainant, the Title IX Coordinator will offer Supportive Measures and take other action as appropriate, if any, to address the behavior at issue. 

The Title IX Coordinator will conduct an initial evaluation typically within seven (7) days of receiving a Complaint. The initial evaluation typically includes:

• Assessing whether the reported conduct may reasonably constitute a violation of the Policy. 
  • If the reported conduct does not reasonably constitute a violation of the Policy, the matter is typically dismissed from this process, consistent with the dismissal provision in this Grievance Procedure. It may then be referred to another process, if applicable.

• Determining whether the University has jurisdiction over the reported conduct, as defined in the Policy.

• If the reported conduct is not within the University’s jurisdiction, the matter is typically dismissed from this process, consistent with the dismissal provision in this Grievance Procedure. If applicable, the conduct will be referred to the appropriate University office for resolution.

At all times, the University will treat Complainants and Respondents equitably.

Note: If circumstances require, the Associate Vice President for Institutional Equity, Accessibility and Compliance will designate another person to oversee the complaint resolution process should an allegation be made about the Title IX Coordinator or the Title IX Coordinator is otherwise unavailable, unable to fulfill their duties, or has a conflict of interest.

 

2.3 Presumption of Non-Responsibility and Good Faith Reporting

2.3.1 Presumption of Non-Responsibility

A Respondent is presumed to be not responsible for the alleged Prohibited Conduct unless and until the Respondent is determined to be responsible for a violation of this Policy at the conclusion of the Grievance Procedure.

2.3.2 False Allegations and Statements

A determination that a Respondent was not responsible for a Policy violation does not, without more, establish that the Complainant or any other Party or witness has made a false allegation or statement in bad faith.

Deliberately false allegations and statements are a violation of University policy, and individuals, including witnesses, who knowingly make false allegations, provide false statements or evidence, tamper with or destroy evidence they were instructed to preserve, or commit similar acts of dishonesty may be subject to disciplinary action.
 

2.4 Conflict of Interest and Bias

The Title IX Coordinator, Investigator, Decision-Makers, Appeal Decision-Makers and facilitators of the Informal Resolution Process will be free from conflicts of interest and bias for or against Complainants or Respondents.

If a Party has concerns about bias in favor of or against a specific Complainant or Respondent, bias in favor of or against Complainants or Respondents generally, or a potential conflict of interest which involves the facilitator of an Informal Resolution Process, Investigator, Decision-Maker, or Appeals Decision-Maker, the Party should direct those concerns to the Title IX Coordinator. Concerns regarding a conflict of interest or bias that involves the Title IX Coordinator should be reported to the Associate Vice President for Institutional Equity, Accessibility and Compliance. 

The Parties are expected to promptly report a concern(s) once they become aware of the alleged conflict of interest or bias. 

Upon receiving a report of conflict of interest or bias, the University will evaluate the report, and if it is determined that a conflict of interest or bias exists, the University will appoint another individual to serve in the role. 

 

2.5 Supportive Measures

Supportive Measures are non-punitive, non-disciplinary individualized measures offered as appropriate, as reasonably available, and without fee or charge to the Complainant or Respondent.  Supportive Measures are designed to (a) restore or preserve that Party’s access to the University’s Education Program or Activity, including measures that are designed to protect the safety of the Parties or the University’s educational environment; and/or (b) provide support during the Informal Resolution Process or Formal Resolution Process, without unreasonably burdening the either Party.

Supportive Measures are available before or after the filing of a Complaint, as well as in cases in which no Complaint is ever filed. Supportive Measures include, but are not limited to:

• Referral to counseling, medical, and/or other health services;
• Referral to the Employee Assistance Program;
• Referral to community-based service providers;
• Modification to campus housing assignment(s);
• Modification to work arrangements for Employees or Student-Employees;
• Safety planning;
• Campus safety escorts;
• Implementing no contact orders between Parties;
• Academic support, extensions of deadlines, or other course/program-related adjustments;
• Trespass orders;
• Timely warnings;
• Assistance with class schedule modifications, withdrawals, or leaves of absence;
• Increased security and monitoring of certain areas on campus; and
• Any other actions deemed appropriate by the Title IX Coordinator.

Changes in class, work, housing, extracurricular, and/or other activities may be made regardless of whether there is or is not a comparable alternative.

Violations of no contact orders or other restrictions may be referred to appropriate student or employee conduct processes for enforcement or added as collateral misconduct allegations to an ongoing Complaint under the Policy.

Supportive Measures may, but may not, be modified or terminated at the conclusion of the Informal Resolution Process or Formal Resolution Process.

A Party may seek modifications or reversal of the University’s decision to provide, deny, modify, or terminate Supportive Measures applicable to that Party. A request to do so should be made in writing to the Title IX Coordinator. An impartial Employee other than the Employee who implemented the Supportive Measures, who has authority to modify or reverse the decision, will determine whether to provide, deny, modify, or terminate the Supportive Measures. The University will also provide the Parties with the opportunity to seek additional modification or termination of Supportive Measures applicable to them if circumstances change materially. A decision on Supportive Measures will typically be made within seven (7) days of receiving a request and a written determination will be provided to the impacted Party and the Title IX Coordinator.

Information about Supportive Measures provided to a Party will not be disclosed, including by informing one Party of Supportive Measures provided to another Party, except when necessary to provide the Supportive Measures, or restore or preserve a Party’s access to the University’s Education Program or Activity.
 

2.6 Acceptance of Responsibility

At any time prior to the rendering of a finding as to responsibility by a Decision-Maker, the Respondent may indicate that they do not wish to contest the disciplinary case against them and accept responsibility for all or part of the Prohibited Conduct alleged. Such acceptance of responsibility must be submitted to the Title IX and Gender Equity Office in writing. In the event that a Respondent accepts responsibility, the Complainant will be notified in writing. The Decision-Maker is then authorized to accept the Respondent’s acceptance of responsibility and determine appropriate Discipline and/or Remedies. The Parties may submit an impact and mitigation statement to the Decision-Maker for consideration. The Parties will thereafter be notified simultaneously in writing of the Discipline imposed and whether Remedies will be provided. This decision may be appealed as to the severity of the Discipline imposed only (See Appeal Process below). The decision is otherwise not appealable and is final.

If the Respondent accepts responsibility for only some of the Prohibited Conduct alleged, the remaining allegations will be subject to the Formal Resolution Process through conclusion.
 

2.7 Informal Resolution Process

An Informal Resolution Process may be offered at any time before a determination of whether Prohibited Conduct occurred has been made. This includes upon receipt of a Report, or during the pendency of the Formal Resolution Process. A Complaint need not be made in order to initiate the Informal Resolution Process. An Informal Resolution Process is not permitted if such a process would conflict with federal, state, or local law. The University may also decline to permit an Informal Resolution Process when it determines that the alleged conduct presents a future risk of harm to others.

An informal resolution is an alternative to the formal resolution, which entails an investigation and adjudication. The Informal Resolution Process is intended to create a facilitated resolution that is acceptable to both the Complainant and Respondent.

An Informal Resolution Process may occur when: 

1. A Complainant or Respondent makes such a request to the Title IX Coordinator at any time prior to a Final Determination, or
2. The Title IX Coordinator may offer the option to the Parties, in writing. 

Both Parties must agree to participate in the Informal Resolution Process, and the University must agree that it is appropriate. The University will obtain voluntary, written confirmation that all Parties wish to resolve the matter through the Informal Resolution Process before proceeding and will not pressure the Parties to participate in the Informal Resolution Process. As participation is voluntary, the University does not require Parties to waive the right to an investigation and adjudication as a condition of (continuing) enrollment or (continuing) employment, or the exercise of any other right.

2.7.1 Notice of Informal Resolution Request

Before initiation of an Informal Resolution Process, the Title IX Coordinator will provide the Parties with a written notice that explains:

• The allegations;
• The requirements of the Informal Resolution Process;
• That, prior to agreeing to a resolution, any Party has the right to withdraw from the Informal Resolution Process and to initiate or resume the Formal Resolution Process;
• That the Parties’ agreement to a resolution at the conclusion of the Informal Resolution Process will preclude the Parties from initiating or resuming an Informal Resolution Process or Formal Resolution Process arising from the same allegations;
• The potential terms that may be requested or offered in an Informal Resolution Agreement, including notification that an Informal Resolution Agreement is binding only on the Parties; and
• Any consequences resulting from participating in the Informal Resolution Process, what information the University will maintain, and whether and how it could disclose such information for use in its Formal Resolution Process.

The Complainant or Respondent will have five (5) days to respond to the informal resolution request indicating whether they have an interest in participating in the Informal Resolution Process. In the instance when a Party does not reply to the notice or a Party does not voluntarily agree to participate in the Informal Resolution Process, the University will discuss with the Complainant the option of making a Complaint, as applicable, and proceeding with the Formal Resolution Process.

2.7.2 Privacy of Informal Resolution

The existence of an informal resolution and the agreed-upon terms is considered private information maintained in the Title IX and Gender Equity Office. The existence of an informal resolution and the agreed-upon terms may be shared with a limited circle of individuals in the University who “need to know” in order to assist in implementing the agreed-upon terms; monitor the agreed upon terms; engage in a risk assessment involving the Complainant or Respondent; implement Supportive Measures; or perform University operations.

The Title IX Coordinator may use the information obtained during an Informal Resolution Process as evidence when investigating the Complaint when the terms of an informal resolution are broken or incomplete. 

2.7.3 Acceptance of Responsibility for Impact 

As a component of the Informal Resolution Process involving Students as the Complainant and Respondent, the Student Respondent must accept responsibility for the harm or impact caused by the Prohibited Conduct alleged. Accepting responsibility for the harm or impact does not mean the Student Respondent accepts responsibility for engaging in Prohibited Conduct as set out in the Policy.

2.7.4 Developing Terms of the Informal Resolution

The Complainant and Respondent may propose terms for the Informal Resolution Agreement. The terms should be designed to remedy the adverse effects the alleged Prohibited Conduct has on the Complainant and/or to restore the Complainant’s equal access to the University’s Education Program or Activity. Informal resolutions between Employees will include a supervisor, senior dean, Office of the Provost, or University Human Resources who may also suggest proposed terms.

The Title IX Coordinator will review the proposed and final terms and will remove those terms that are not permissible under University policy or practice and/or federal or state law. The Title IX Coordinator may consult with the relevant University officials such as a supervisor, department chair, senior dean, Office of the Provost, Division of Campus Life, and/or University Human Resources when determining the permissibility of a proposed term.

After the Title IX Coordinator’s review, the Parties will have five (5) days from the date of delivery of the Informal Resolution Agreement to review the terms. They should indicate their willingness to accept all, some, or none of the proposed terms. They may also propose alternative strategies to meet a specific term they reject.

The Title IX Coordinator will send a Party a copy of the other Party’s response to the proposed terms. The Complainant or Respondent will have a subsequent five (5) days from the date of delivery of the new terms to consider and respond to the revised terms.

The Informal Resolution Agreement is reached when both Parties independently and voluntarily come to an agreement on terms. The above process may be repeated as reasonably necessary to come to a final agreement. Upon agreement and signature (in hard copy or electronically) by both the Complainant and Respondent, the matter is considered resolved and closed.

2.7.5 Categories of Informal Resolution

• Supportive Resolution: The Title IX Coordinator will meet with the Complainant to determine reasonable Supportive Measures that are designed to restore or preserve the Complainant’s access to the University’s Education Program or Activity. Such measures can be modified as the Complainant’s needs evolve over time or circumstances change. If the Respondent has received written notice, the Title IX Coordinator may also provide reasonable Supportive Measures for the Respondent as deemed appropriate. This option is available when the Complainant does not want to engage the other resolution options, and the Title IX Coordinator does not initiate a Complaint.
   
• Educational Conversation: The Complainant may request that the Title IX Coordinator address the allegations by meeting (with or without the Complainant) with the Respondent to discuss concerning behavior and institutional policies and expectations. These conversations are non-punitive and non-disciplinary. The Respondent is not required to attend such meetings, nor is the Respondent compelled to provide information if they attend. The conversation will be documented as the informal resolution for the matter, if it takes place. In light of this conversation, or the Respondent’s decision not to attend, the Title IX Coordinator may also implement remedial actions to ensure that policies and expectations are clear and to minimize the risk of recurrence of any behaviors that may not align with Policy.
   
• Accepted Responsibility: The Respondent may accept responsibility for any or all of the alleged Policy violations at any point during the Informal Resolution Process. If the Respondent indicates an intent to accept responsibility for all alleged Prohibited Conduct, the ongoing process will be paused, and the Title IX Coordinator will determine whether Informal Resolution is an option.

If Informal Resolution is available, the Title IX Coordinator will determine whether all Parties and the University are able to agree on responsibility, restrictions, Discipline, restorative measures, and/or Remedies. If so, the Title IX Coordinator implements the accepted finding that the Respondent is in violation of University Policy, implements agreed-upon restrictions and Remedies, and determines the appropriate responses in coordination with other appropriate administrators, as necessary. 

The Informal Resolution is not subject to appeal once all Parties indicate their written agreement to all resolution terms. When the Parties cannot agree on all terms of resolution, the Formal Resolution Process may either continue or resume.

When an Informal Resolution is reached, the appropriate Discipline or responsive actions are promptly implemented to effectively stop the Prohibited Conduct, prevent its recurrence, and remedy the effects of the Prohibited Conduct, both on the Complainant and the University community.

• Restorative Justice: Restorative justice is a concept and process that focuses on bringing the Parties together in facilitated dialogue about incidents that have caused harm. It centers the voice and experience of the impacted party, allowing them an opportunity to heal by processing, understanding, and articulating their experience and their needs. This process also helps individuals take active responsibility for harm they have caused and provides an opportunity for them to understand the impact of their actions on others.

If the Parties are interested in restorative justice, the Title IX Coordinator will assess whether restorative justice is appropriate. If so, then the case will be referred to the Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards. 

2.7.6 Violations of the Informal Resolution

The Complainant and Respondent must identify and agree upon the consequences for violating the terms of the Informal Resolution. The Complainant and Respondent cannot agree to suspension, expulsion, or termination of employment as consequences for violating the terms of the Informal Resolution. The Title IX Coordinator will consult with the relevant University officials such as a supervisor, department chair, senior dean, Office of the Provost, or University Human Resources when determining the permissibility or appropriateness of the proposed consequences. Failure to abide by the Informal Resolution Agreement may result in appropriate responsive and/or disciplinary actions, such as the dissolution of the agreement and resumption of the Formal Resolution Process, referral to the conduct process for failure to comply, and application of the enforcement of the agreement.

2.7.7 No Right of Appeal

The Informal Resolution Process is grounded in the voluntary participation of the Complainant and Respondent. For this reason, there is no right of appeal associated with the Informal Resolution Process.

2.7.8 Time Frame for the Informal Resolution Process

The University cannot promise a definitive timeframe for an Informal Resolution Process as the time to complete the Informal Resolution Agreement is unique to each set of Complainants and Respondents. The University will strive to complete the process within sixty (60) days beginning with the Parties agreeing to participate in the Informal Resolution Process through the signing of the Informal Resolution Agreement, if applicable.
 

2.8 Formal Resolution Process

2.8.1 Time Frame of the Formal Resolution Process

The University makes every reasonable effort to ensure that Complaints are resolved as expediently and efficiently as possible. Many Complaints may require extensive review, and time frames will vary depending on the complexity of the investigation and the severity and extent of the alleged Prohibited Conduct. A Formal Resolution Process may take approximately one hundred and twenty (120) days.

Time frames may be extended for good cause as necessary to ensure the integrity and completeness of the process. The reasons for the extension of the time frame also include, but are not limited to compliance with a request by law enforcement; a limited accommodation of the availability of Parties, their Advisors, and witnesses; Students on a leave of absence; exam periods, school breaks, or vacations; and accounting for complexities of a specific investigation, including the number of witnesses and volume of information provided by the Parties, whether there is a counterclaim or allegations of Retaliation, and the severity and extent of the alleged Prohibited Conduct. 

To enable prompt and efficient resolution of Complaints, the Title IX and Gender Equity Office expects that any individual involved in the disciplinary process will respond to outreach from the Office within two (2) days. In addition, the Title IX and Gender Equity Office expects its deadlines to be honored absent extraordinary circumstances. Requests for deadline extensions will be considered by the Title IX and Gender Equity Office on a case-by-case basis.

2.8.2 Title IX Coordinator-Initiated Complaints

In the absence of a Complaint made by a Complainant, or in the event of the withdrawal of any or all of the allegations in a Complaint, the Title IX Coordinator will determine whether to initiate a Complaint of Prohibited Conduct. Such a determination is fact-specific and will be made in consideration of factors including, but not limited to:

• The Complainant’s request not to proceed with initiation of a Complaint;
• The Complainant’s reasonable safety concerns regarding initiation of a Complaint;
• The risk that additional acts of Sex Discrimination would occur if a Complaint is not initiated;
• The severity of the alleged Sex Discrimination, including whether, if established, the University would require the removal of the Respondent from campus or impose other Discipline to end the Sex Discrimination and prevent its recurrence; 
• The age and relationship of the Parties, including whether the Respondent is an Employee;
• The scope of the alleged Sex Discrimination, including information suggesting a pattern, ongoing conduct, or conduct alleged to have impacted multiple individuals; 
• The availability of evidence to assist a Decision-Maker in determining whether Sex Discrimination occurred; and 
• Whether the University could end the alleged Sex Discrimination and prevent its recurrence without initiating the Grievance Procedure.

If, after considering these and other relevant factors, the Title IX Coordinator determines that the conduct as alleged presents an imminent and serious threat to the health or safety of the Complainant or other person, or that the conduct as alleged prevents the University from ensuring equal access on the basis of sex to its Education Program or Activity, the Title IX Coordinator may initiate a Complaint. Prior to doing so, the Title IX Coordinator will notify the Complainant and appropriately address reasonable concerns about their safety or the safety of others, including by providing Supportive Measures. Regardless of whether a Complaint is initiated, the Title IX Coordinator will take other appropriate prompt and effective steps to ensure that Sex Discrimination does not continue or recur within the University’s Education Program or Activity.

2.8.3 Dismissal

A Complaint may be dismissed, in whole or in part, if it is determined, at any time, that:

• The University cannot identify the Respondent after taking reasonable steps to do so;
• The Respondent is not, or is no longer, participating in the University’s Education Program or Activity and is not, or is no longer, employed by the University;
• The Complainant voluntarily withdraws any or all of the allegations in the Complaint, the Title IX Coordinator declines to initiate a Complaint, and without the Complainant’s withdrawn allegations, the conduct that remains alleged in the Complaint, if any, would not constitute Sex Discrimination even if established; and/or
• The conduct alleged (after reasonable efforts to clarify have been made, as appropriate), if established, would not constitute Sex Discrimination.

In the event of a dismissal, Supportive Measures may still be provided to the Complainant (and Respondent, if already notified of the Complaint), and the Title IX Coordinator may refer the matter to another, appropriate office for review and response. The University will provide written notice to the Complainant (and Respondent, if already notified of the Complaint) of the dismissal, the basis for the dismissal, and the right to appeal the dismissal.

2.8.3.1 Appeal of Dismissal of Complaints

The Complainant and/or Respondent (if dismissal occurs after the Respondent has been made aware of the allegations) have the right to appeal a decision to dismiss a Complaint and any allegations therein. All dismissal appeal requests must be filed within five (5) days of the notification of the dismissal.

The Associate Vice President for Institutional Equity, Accessibility and Compliance will hear appeals for dismissal. An appeal of dismissal must be submitted to the Associate Vice President for Institutional Equity, Accessibility and Compliance within five (5) days from the written notice of the decision to dismiss. Written requests for appeals submitted by one Party will be shared with the other Party. Each Party may respond in writing to any appeal submitted by the other Party to the Associate Vice President for Institutional Equity, Accessibility, and Compliance. Written responses must be submitted within five (5) days following delivery of the written appeal notice.

The appeal should specify at least one of the grounds (see below) and provide any reasons or supporting evidence for why the ground is met. If the request for appeal does not provide information that meets the grounds in this Grievance Procedure, the Associate Vice President for Institutional Equity, Accessibility and Compliance will deny the request. If any of the asserted grounds in the appeal satisfy the grounds described in the Grievance Procedure, the Associate Vice President for Institutional Equity, Accessibility and Compliance will issue a written decision describing the result of the appeal and the rationale for the result. The Associate Vice President for Institutional Equity, Accessibility and Compliance will provide the written decision simultaneously to both the Complainant and Respondent. All appeal determinations are final and not subject to further appeal or review. The Associate Vice President for Institutional Equity, Accessibility and Compliance has seven (7) days to review and decide the appeal, though extensions can be granted at the discretion of the Title IX Coordinator, and the Parties will be notified of any extension. Appeal decisions are deferential to the original determination.

The Associate Vice President for Institutional Equity, Accessibility and Compliance may consult with the Title IX Coordinator on questions of procedure or rationale for clarification, if needed. The Title IX Coordinator will maintain documentation of all such consultation.

The grounds for dismissal appeals are limited to the following:

• Procedural irregularity that affected the outcome;
• New evidence that could change the outcome and that was not reasonably available when the dismissal was decided; and
• The Title IX Coordinator or investigator had a conflict of interest or bias for or against Complainants or Respondents generally or the individual Complainant or Respondent that affected the outcome.

2.8.4 Withdrawal of Complaint by Complainant

As noted above, a Complaint may be dismissed if the Complainant notifies the Title IX Coordinator that they would like to withdraw the Complaint. Such notice must be in writing in all cases. If a Complainant requests dismissal, they can re-file the Complaint at a later date and request a continuation of the Formal Resolution Process or voluntarily agree to an Informal Resolution Process. 

The Title IX Coordinator will consider requests in light of the factors laid out in Section 2.8.2 above, relating to the Title IX Coordinator’s decision to initiate a Complaint when the Complainant does not wish to do so. If the Title IX Coordinator refuses a request by a Complainant to dismiss a Complaint, the Title IX Coordinator will notify the Complainant in writing of the decision and rationale.

2.8.4.1 Withdrawal or Separation with a Complaint Pending

The University will assess the allegations and make an individualized assessment to determine whether to continue or end the Grievance Procedure upon the separation from the University of the Complainant and/or Respondent. A Complainant or Respondent may appeal a decision to dismiss a Complaint in accordance with Section 2.8.3.1.

• If a Complainant withdraws or separates from Brown after the University has given notice to the Respondent but before a finding, the University may dismiss the Complaint or continue as the Complainant.
• If a Student Respondent withdraws from Brown after the University has given notice to the Respondent but before a Final Determination, the Complaint may be dismissed, and an entry will be made on their academic transcript maintained by the Office of the Registrar that indicates the Student has withdrawn with a disciplinary investigation and/or charges pending.
• If an Employee Respondent separates or is terminated from Brown after the University has given notice to the Respondent but before a Final Determination, the Complaint may be dismissed, and an entry will be made in their personnel file that indicates that the Employee separated with the disciplinary investigation and/or charges pending or employment terminated with a disciplinary investigation and/or charges pending.
• If a Complainant or Respondent withdraws or permanently separates from the University after submitting an appeal but before the appeal is decided, the University will dismiss the appeal and uphold the finding as the final resolution to the Complaint. The University may make a retroactive entry on the Student’s academic transcript or the Employee’s personnel file indicating the original Discipline (if applicable).

2.8.4.2 Leave of Absence with a Complaint Pending

If a Complainant or Respondent takes a leave of absence from Brown after the University has given notice to the Respondent but before a Final Determination, the resolution process may be put on hold or continue as appropriate. The Title IX Coordinator will make an individualized assessment to determine whether to hold or continue with the resolution process.

If the resolution process is held due to the leave of absence of a Student Respondent, their academic transcript will be held in accordance with the process provided for above, and a temporary entry may be made on their academic transcript indicating that the Student has taken a leave of absence with a disciplinary investigation or charges pending.

If the resolution process is held due to the leave of absence of an Employee Respondent, a temporary entry will be made in their personnel file indicating that the Employee has taken a leave of absence with disciplinary investigation or charges pending.

2.8.5 Consolidation of Complaints

In cases in which allegations of Prohibited Conduct are connected to allegations of discrimination or harassment by the Respondent based on another protected category, or are otherwise connected to other alleged misconduct by the Respondent, which would ordinarily be addressed by other Brown policy, the University may, in its sole discretion, address all related conduct in a consolidated manner. 

Similarly, the University may, in its sole discretion, consolidate Complaints of Prohibited Conduct brought against more than one Respondent, or by more than one Complainant against one or more Respondents, or by one Party against another Party (“cross-complaints”), where the allegations arise out of the same facts or circumstances. 

2.8.6 Notice of Investigation and Allegation

The Formal Resolution Process begins with the Title IX Coordinator sending the Parties a written Notice of Investigation and Allegation (“NOIA”).

The NOIA will include: 

• information about the availability of an Informal Resolution Process and a Formal Resolution Process, as outlined in this Grievance Procedure; 
• the identities of the Parties involved in the incident, if known, the conduct allegedly constituting Prohibited Conduct, and the date and location of the alleged of the alleged incident, if known; 
• a statement about the University’s prohibition on Retaliation;
• a statement that the Parties may inspect and review evidence (in accordance with “Evidence Review and Final Investigation Report” section below); 
• a statement that the Parties are entitled to an investigative report summarizing all present Relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence;
• a statement that the Respondent is presumed not responsible for the alleged Prohibited Conduct until a determination regarding responsibility is made at the conclusion of the Formal Resolution Process, after the Parties have had an opportunity to present Relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence to a trained, impartial Decision-Maker;
• information regarding the Parties’ right to have an Advisor of their choice, who may be, but is not required to be, an attorney; 
• a statement that Brown prohibits Parties from knowingly making false statements or knowingly submitting false information during any process outlined in this Grievance Procedure.

If the University has reasonable concerns for the safety of any person as a result of providing this NOIA, it may reasonably delay in providing it in order to address the safety concern appropriately. Reasonable concerns must be based on individualized safety and risk analysis and not on mere speculation or stereotypes.

Amendments and updates to the NOIA may be made if, as the investigation progresses, the University decides to investigate additional allegations of Prohibited Conduct not included in the original NOIA about the Respondent’s conduct toward the Complainant, or which are otherwise consolidated with the ongoing investigation.

2.8.7 Advisors

The parties may each have an Advisor of their choice present with them for all meetings and interviews within the resolution process if they choose. The parties may select whomever they wish to serve as their Advisor as long as the Advisor is eligible and available to abide by the time periods and deadlines stated in this process.

Choosing an Advisor who is also a witness in the process creates a potential for bias and conflict of interest. A party that chooses an Advisor who is also a witness can anticipate that the Decision-Maker will explore issues of potential bias.

The University may permit parties to have more than one Advisor, or an Advisor and support person, upon special request to the Title IX Coordinator. The decision to grant this request is at the sole discretion of the Title IX Coordinator and will be granted equitably to all parties.

A Party may elect to change Advisors during the process and is not obligated to use the same Advisor throughout. The Parties are expected to inform the investigator of the identity of their Advisor at least two (2) days before the date of their first meeting with the investigator, (or as soon as possible if a more expeditious meeting is necessary or desired). The Parties are expected to notify the Title IX Coordinator promptly if they change Advisors at any time. If a party changes Advisors, consent to share information with the previous Advisor is assumed to be terminated.

A pool of Employees are trained as process Advisors. Process Advisors are available to the Complainant or Respondent upon request, subject to the process Advisor’s availability. The Advisor is not required to be chosen from this pool or an individual from the University community.

2.8.7.1 Selection or Appointment of Advisors

The Advisor may be a friend, mentor, family member, attorney, or any other individual a Party chooses to advise, support, and/or consult with them throughout the resolution process. The parties may choose inside or outside of the Brown community.

The Title IX Coordinator will offer to assign a trained Advisor to any Party if the Party chooses. The University cannot guarantee equal advisory rights, meaning that 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 to advise that Party.

Advisors appointed by the University cannot be confidential Employees, and although they will not be asked to disclose details of their interactions with their advisees to institutional officials or Decision-Makers absent an emergency, they are still reminded of their mandatory reporter responsibilities.

2.8.7.2 Role of the Advisor

The Parties may be accompanied by their Advisor in all meetings, interviews, and any hearing at which the Party is entitled to be present, including intake and interviews. If a Party has more than one Advisor, only one Advisor may attend each meeting, interview, or hearing. Advisors should help the Parties prepare for each meeting and are expected to advise ethically, with integrity, and in good faith.

An Advisor cannot speak to the investigator, Decision-Maker, or other participants in the hearing or ask questions in any other step of the hearing. The Parties are expected to ask and respond to questions on their own behalf throughout the resolution process.

2.8.7.3 Privacy of Records Shared with Advisors

Advisors are expected to maintain the confidentiality of the records shared with them. Advisors may not disclose any University work product or evidence the University obtained solely through the resolution process for any purpose not explicitly authorized by the University. Accordingly, Advisors will be asked to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA). The University may decline to share materials with any Advisor who has not executed the NDA. The University may seek to restrict the role of an Advisor who does not respect the sensitive nature of the process or who fails to abide by the University’s privacy expectations.

2.8.7.4 Sharing Information with Advisors

The Title IX and Gender Equity Office staff will not directly share documentation and evidence related to the allegations with a Party's Advisor. Parties may share this information directly with their Advisors. Doing so may help the Parties participate more meaningfully in the resolution process.

If a Party requests that all communication be made through their Advisor, the University will not comply with that request unless the Party requests and the University approves this practice as a reasonable accommodation for a disability.

The Title IX and Gender Equity Office will not copy Advisors on emails or other correspondence to their advisees, as the expectation is that the Party is responsible for sharing appropriate information with their Advisors. The Title IX and Gender Equity Office will not respond to emails, telephone calls, or letters from Advisors, as the expectation is that the Party is responsible for communicating with the Title IX and Gender Equity Office. If an Advisor sends an email or letter or calls the Title IX and Gender Equity Office, the Title IX and Gender Equity Office will respond where appropriate to the Party. Advisors should not contact other University offices with any questions concerning the implementation of this process. 

2.8.7.5 Expectations of Advisors

The University generally expects an Advisor to adjust their schedule to allow them to attend meetings, interviews, and/or hearings when planned but may change scheduled meetings to accommodate an Advisor’s inability to attend upon a showing of good cause if doing so does not result in an unreasonable delay. 

The University may also make reasonable provisions to allow an Advisor who cannot attend in person to attend a meeting by telephone or video conferencing. 

All Advisors are subject to the same University policies and procedures, whether they are attorneys or not and whether they are selected by a Party or appointed by the University. Advisors are expected to advise their advisees without disrupting proceedings.

2.8.7.6 Advisor’s Violations of University Policy

Any Advisor who oversteps their role as defined in this Grievance Procedure, who shares information or evidence in a manner inconsistent with this Grievance Procedure, or who refuses to comply with the University’s established rules of decorum will be warned. If the Advisor continues to disrupt or otherwise fails to respect the limits of the Advisor role, the meeting/interview/hearing may be ended or other appropriate measures implemented, including the University requiring the Party to use a different Advisor or providing a different University-appointed Advisor. Subsequently, the Title IX Coordinator will determine how to address the Advisor’s non-compliance and future role. 

Advisors should not address University officials in a meeting or interview unless invited to (e.g., asking procedural questions). The Advisor may not make a presentation or represent their advisee during any meeting or proceeding and may not speak on behalf of the advisee to the investigator or Decision-Maker. 

2.8.8 Investigation

2.8.8.1 Timeframes for the Investigation

The investigation will be adequate, reliable, fair, and impartial, and will be completed in a reasonably prompt timeframe, typically ninety (90) days.

Any timelines provided herein create no rights for the Parties and may be extended or changed by the University for good cause shown, in the University’s sole discretion. Good cause may exist if additional time is necessary to: accommodate the availability of a Party or witness; comply with a request by law enforcement for a temporary delay to gather evidence, address the need for language assistance or accommodation of disabilities; ensure the integrity and completeness of the investigation, including to account for case complexities, e.g., the number of Witnesses and the volume of information provided by the Parties; account for University breaks or vacations; or for other legitimate reasons. Extensions to accommodate an Advisor’s schedule, including scheduling of interviews or hearings, will be considered if they do not unduly delay the process, which is considered to be a delay of three (3) or more days.

In the event a deadline is extended or changed, the Title IX Coordinator will provide the Complainant and Respondent with written notice of the reason for and expected duration of the delay or extension of timeframes.

2.8.8.2 Role of the Investigator

The University will appoint a trained investigator or investigators – who may or may not be the Title IX Coordinator – to conduct the fact-finding for the case, objectively evaluate the Relevance of all evidence, and prepare an investigation report that contains a fair summary of the Relevant evidence. The Title IX Coordinator will have the discretion to determine whether the Investigator will be internal (an Employee at Brown) or external (a qualified individual outside of the Brown community), or a combination of both internal and external investigators.

Each Party will have the equal opportunity to gather and present Relevant evidence (both inculpatory and exculpatory) and fact witnesses to the investigator. However, the burden of gathering evidence, and satisfying the standard of proof, is on the University.

The Investigator will meet with each Party and Relevant witnesses. Video or audio recordings of investigative interviews are not permitted by the Parties, their Advisors, or witnesses. After an interview, Parties and witnesses will have the opportunity to review a summary of their statement to the investigator before it is included in the draft investigation report. If a Party or witness does not provide comments to the summary of their statement within three (3) days, objections to the accuracy of the summary will be deemed to have been waived, and no changes will be permitted.

2.8.8.3 Witnesses

As noted above, the Complainant, Respondent, and witnesses are permitted to provide names of potential witnesses to the investigator. The investigator will determine which of those potential witnesses, or other persons, may have Relevant evidence about the alleged conduct and may request statements, either orally or in writing. Witnesses may include individuals from outside of the Brown community.

Employees (not including Complainant and Respondent), and others authorized by the University to provide aid, benefits, or services as part of the University’s Education Program or Activity, are required to cooperate with and participate in the University’s investigation and resolution process, including by attending all scheduled meetings and proceedings and, upon request, participating as a witness. Student witnesses and witnesses from outside Brown’s community cannot be required to participate. Although the University cannot compel Parties or non-Employee witnesses to answer questions during the interview or submit documents, all Parties and witnesses are encouraged to do so. A person’s decision not to participate in the investigation, in whole or in part, will be documented in the investigative report.

Witnesses do not have a right to an Advisor. Witnesses cannot participate in an investigation and remain anonymous.

An Advisor may not be called as a witness to speak to what their advisee has told them during their role as an Advisor unless the Party being advised consents to that information being shared. 

2.8.8.4 Evidence 

Complainants, Respondents, and witnesses are permitted to provide evidence to the investigator.  Evidence includes but is not limited to text messages, email exchanges, timelines, receipts, photographs, and videos. The investigator may also gather and consider additional documents, items, and other Relevant information.

• Pattern Evidence: A report of Prohibited Conduct which could reasonably establish a pattern of conduct. The investigator may consider this as pattern evidence regardless of whether there has been a prior finding of a Policy violation. Pattern evidence may occur before or after the alleged Prohibited Conduct in question. This information may be deemed Relevant to determine whether the conduct alleged violates the Policy and/or to assign appropriate Discipline. 
• Character Evidence: Information that does not directly relate to the facts at issue, but instead reflects upon the reputation, personality, qualities, or habits of an individual is character evidence. Character evidence is generally not Relevant. 
• Complainant’s Sexual Interests and Prior Sexual History: Questions and evidence about the Complainant’s sexual interests and prior sexual behavior are generally not Relevant. Questions and evidence about the Complainant’s prior sexual behavior are only considered Relevant in two circumstances: when the questions and evidence are offered to prove that someone other than the Respondent committed the conduct alleged by the Complainant; and when the questions and evidence concern specific incidents of the Complainant’s prior sexual behavior with respect to the Respondent and are offered to prove consent. The fact of prior consensual sexual conduct between the Complainant and Respondent does not by itself demonstrate or imply the Complainant’s consent or preclude a determination that sex-based harassment occurred.
• Other Disciplinary Cases: Information about prior, concurrent, or pending campus disciplinary cases or criminal charges involving the Complainant or Respondent is typically viewed as not Relevant to the investigation unless determined to be pattern evidence, as described above. Such information may be considered in determining appropriate Discipline upon a determination of responsibility. Barring a pattern allegation, this information is only considered at the discipline stage of the process and is not shared until then.
• Privileged Information: The University will not require, allow, rely upon, or otherwise permit questions or use of evidence that constitute, or seek disclosure of, information protected under a legally recognized privilege. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if a person holding such a privilege has waived the privilege in writing, then the information may be used during an investigation and/or live hearing. In gathering evidence, the University will not access, consider, disclose, or otherwise use a Party’s records that are made or maintained by a physician, psychiatrist, psychologist, or other recognized professional or paraprofessional acting in the professional’s or paraprofessional’s capacity, or assisting in that capacity, and which are made and maintained in connection with the provision of treatment to the Party, unless the University obtains that Party’s voluntary, written consent to do so. 

2.8.8.5 Evidence Review and Draft Investigation Report

At the conclusion of the investigation, the Investigator prepares a draft investigation report containing a fair summary of the Relevant evidence collected during the investigation that will be submitted to both Parties for their review and response. The Investigator may include credibility assessments in the investigation report, where appropriate, based on the investigator’s interviews with the Complainant, Respondent, and witnesses, and review of the Relevant evidence. The credibility assessment may include direct observations, reasonable inferences drawn from the facts, and any consistencies or inconsistencies between the various sources of information.

The Title IX Coordinator will review the draft investigation report before it is provided to the Parties. The Title IX Coordinator may return the draft investigation report to the investigator to address questions or provide clarification.

To protect the privacy of the Parties and safeguard the contents of the investigation report, the draft investigation report will be sent through an electronic format that limits the Parties’ ability to edit, download, or print the draft investigation report.

The Parties will have seven (7) days from the date of delivery to review the draft investigation report and the evidence and submit a written response to the Title IX Coordinator for the investigator to consider prior to the finalization of the investigation report. In their written response, the Complainant and Respondent may offer comments, clarify information previously shared, suggest additional witnesses, question Relevance determinations, and/or identify any other Relevant evidence or witnesses to assure the thoroughness and sufficiency of the investigation. 

2.8.8.6 Final Investigation Report

Upon consideration of the responses submitted by the Parties, the investigator may request additional information or interview additional witnesses. Upon completion of the investigation, the investigator finalizes the investigation report and provides the report to the Title IX Coordinator. The Title IX Coordinator will review the report and may return the report to the investigator to address questions or provide clarification. 

When it is deemed final, the Title IX Coordinator reviews the report containing a fair summary of the Relevant evidence collected and within seven (7) days determines whether the University will proceed to a hearing or dismiss the Complaint as described above. 

At least seven (7) days prior to the hearing, the Title IX Coordinator will provide electronic access to the final investigation report to the Parties and to the Decision-Maker. 

To protect the privacy of the Parties and safeguard the contents of the investigation report, the final investigation report will be sent to the Parties through an electronic format that limits the Parties’ ability to edit, download, save, or print the final investigation report. 

The Parties may review the final investigation report and the evidence and submit a written response to the Decision-Maker at least three (3) days before the hearing date. In their written response, the Complainant and Respondent may offer comments, clarify information previously shared, suggest additional witnesses, question relevance determinations, and/or identify any other Relevant evidence or witnesses to assure the thoroughness and sufficiency of the investigation. 

2.8.9 Standard of Evidence

The University applies the preponderance of the evidence standard (more likely than not) in all stages of the process when determining whether the Policy has been violated.

2.8.10 Hearing Procedures

Section 2.8.10.2.1 below describes the role and responsibilities of the “Hearing Officer,” who presides at the live hearing in a case involving a Student and Staff Respondent. Sections 2.8.10.2.2 through 2.8.10.2.4 below describe the respective roles of the “Chair of the Title IX Council,” the “Hearing Panel,” and the “Presiding Officer,” who each participate in the live hearing in a case involving a Faculty Respondent. Within the Grievance Procedure, all references to the “Hearing Officer” shall apply only to a Student and Staff Respondent case, while all references to the “Chair of the Title IX Council,” the “Hearing Panel,” and the “Presiding Officer” shall apply only to a Faculty Respondent case. 

The Title IX Coordinator will select a date for a live hearing based on the availability of the Decision-Maker and will consider participants’ academic or work schedules when identifying the hearing date. The Title IX Coordinator will not consider an Advisor’s schedule when selecting a hearing date. Advisors will need to work with their advisees around scheduling. 

A hearing will be scheduled for a date at least seven (7) days after the final investigative report is provided to the Parties. Typically a hearing will be held within fifteen (15) days from the date that the final investigative report was provided. This timeframe may be extended for good cause as provided for in this Grievance Procedure. If granted, the reason for the extension will be shared with the Parties in writing. 

The live hearing will be scheduled to take place via an online platform through which each Party, their Advisors, witness, and the Decision-Maker can see and hear each other in real-time when the individual is speaking. The University requires the Parties to be on camera during questioning and when making statements. The Parties will be muted and off-camera during the other phases of the hearing. An audiovisual recording of any live hearing will be made by the University. No other recording or transcription is permitted.

If the matter involves more than one Respondent, the Title IX Coordinator, in their discretion, may permit the hearing concerning each Respondent to be conducted either jointly or separately. In joint hearings, separate determinations of responsibility will be made for each Respondent.

The Parties will be notified in writing of the date, time, and access information for the hearing.

2.8.10.1 Pre-Hearing Meetings

The Decision-Maker will offer to convene a pre-hearing meeting with the Parties and their Advisors and invite them to submit the questions or topics they wish to ask or discuss at the hearing. This allows the Decision-Maker to consider their relevance ahead of time to avoid any improper evidentiary introduction in the hearing and to provide recommendations for more appropriate phrasing.

This advance review opportunity does not preclude the Parties from submitting a question at the hearing for the first time or asking for a reconsideration on a Decision-Maker's pre-hearing decision based on any new information or questioning offered at the hearing. The Decision-Maker will document and share their rationale for any evidence or question exclusion, if any, at a pre-hearing meeting with each Party.

The Decision-Maker will work with the Parties to finalize a witness list for the hearing, and the Title IX Case Manager will notify any witnesses of the hearing’s logistics. 

The pre-hearing meeting will not be recorded. The pre-hearing meetings will typically be conducted as separate meetings with each Party and their Advisor and may be conducted via video conferencing. The Decision-Maker will work with the Parties to establish the format and timing of the meetings and will circulate a summary of any rulings made to ensure all Parties and Advisors are aware.

2.8.10.2 Hearing Participants

Persons who may be present for a hearing include the Decision-Maker, investigator, the Parties and their Advisors, Presiding Officer, anyone providing authorized accommodations, interpretation, and/or assistive services, anyone else deemed necessary by the Decision-Maker, and staff from the Title IX and Gender Equity Office providing administrative support. Witnesses are present only during their portion of the questioning.

2.8.10.2.1 Hearing Officer (Student and Staff Respondent Cases Only)

A single Hearing Officer presides at the hearing and decides a case involving a Student and Staff Respondents The Hearing Officer receives training to hear and decide Complaints investigated under the Policy. 

The Hearing Officer is responsible for administering the hearing process, including procedural matters and decisions leading up to the hearing. The Hearing Officer has the discretion and authority to make relevancy determinations during the hearing, including appropriate and inappropriate lines of questioning. The Hearing Officer is also responsible for drafting the determination letter that summarizes the findings, rationale, and Discipline (if applicable).

Following the hearing, the Hearing Officer shall determine whether or not the Student or Staff Respondent has violated the Policy by a preponderance of the evidence and make the determination regarding responsibility or non-responsibility and Discipline (if applicable). The Hearing Officer shall draft a written determination in accordance with Section 2.8.11.1 below.

2.8.10.2.2 Chair of the Title IX Council (Faculty Respondent Cases Only)

During the hearing in a case involving a Faculty Respondent, the Chair of the Title IX Council (“Chair”) participates as a trained non-voting member. The Chair is responsible for administering the hearing process and conducting the deliberations process, including procedural matters and decisions leading up to the hearing. The Chair is also responsible for drafting the written determination letter in accordance with Section 2.8.11.1 below which summarizes the hearing's findings, rationale, and recommended Discipline (if applicable). 

2.8.10.2.3 Hearing Panel (Faculty Respondent Cases Only) 

The Hearing Panel decides cases involving Faculty Respondents. The Hearing Panel is comprised of individuals who receive training to hear Complaints investigated under the Policy. The Title IX Coordinator will send the Hearing Panel a copy of the final investigation report at least seven (7) days before the date of the hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Hearing Panel will convene to deliberate and render a decision, by majority vote, regarding whether or not the Respondent has violated the Policy by a preponderance of the evidence and recommend Discipline to the Provost (if applicable). No member may abstain from voting. 

A Hearing Panel where the Complainant is a faculty member will consist of three (3) faculty members drawn from the Title IX Council. If the Complainant is a staff member, the Hearing Panel will consist of four (4) faculty members and one (1) staff member drawn from the Title IX Council. If the Complainant is a Student, the Hearing Panel will consist of four (4) faculty members and one (1) Student drawn from the Title IX Council. The Hearing Panel will deliberate and make a determination regarding responsibility and a recommendation regarding Discipline (if applicable). The Senior Academic Dean of the Respondent may be substituted for the Hearing Panel in instances in which the Title IX and Gender Equity Office is unable to populate a hearing panel due to urgency, time of year, or conflict of interest. 

2.8.10.2.4 Presiding Officer (Faculty Respondent Cases Only)

During the live hearing in a case involving a Faculty Respondent, the Presiding Officer has the responsibility and authority to ensure the overall decorum of the hearing. The Presiding Officer is also responsible for making relevancy determinations about information that will be considered or not during the hearing, including appropriate and inappropriate lines of questioning. The Presiding Officer does not participate in the Hearing Panel’s deliberations nor make any recommendations regarding the determination of the case. The Title IX Coordinator will send the Presiding Officer a copy of the final investigation report at least seven (7) days before the date of the hearing.

2.8.10.3 Evidentiary Considerations

The Parties must provide all evidence to the investigator prior to completion of the final investigative report. Relevant evidence not provided in advance of the hearing may be accepted for consideration in the discretion of the Decision-Maker. The Decision-Maker typically will not accept newly offered evidence, even if Relevant, if it was reasonably available to the offering Party prior to the conclusion of the final investigation report.

If the Decision-Maker decides to accept newly offered Relevant evidence, the Decision-Maker may, in their discretion, take any of the following actions: pause or adjourn the hearing so that the Parties may review the evidence; or remand the matter to the Investigator for further investigation and analysis.

2.8.10.4 Introductions and Hearing Procedure Explanation

The Hearing Officer (for Student and Staff Respondent cases) and the Presiding Officer (for Faculty Respondent cases) will explain the hearing procedures and introduce the participants and will answer any procedural questions prior to and as they arise throughout the hearing.

2.8.10.5 Opening Statements

The Complainant and Respondent will have the opportunity to provide a verbal opening statement. If both the Complainant and the Respondent choose to make an opening statement, the Complainant will make an opening statement first, and the Respondent will make an opening statement second. 

The Decision-Maker will disregard opening statements or any portions thereof that are not Relevant and will note that decision on the record. 

2.8.10.6 Investigator Presentation of Final Investigation Report

The Investigator will present a summary of the final investigation report, including a review of the facts that are contested and those that are not. The investigator will be questioned first by the Decision-Maker and then by the Parties. The investigator may attend the duration of the hearing or be excused after their questioning at the Decision-Maker’s discretion.

2.8.10.7 Questioning 

At the hearing, the Decision-Maker will 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 the allegations of Prohibited Conduct. Any credibility determinations will not be based on a person’s status as a Complainant, Respondent, or witness. The Decision-Maker will accomplish this by asking the Parties and witnesses Relevant (not otherwise impermissible questions) and follow-up questions, including questions challenging credibility.

Parties may suggest questions to be posed by the Decision-Maker during the pre-hearing meetings and/or by submission of written questions during the hearing. During the hearing, all questions by the Parties must be directed toward and asked through the Decision-Maker and are subject to a relevance determination before they are asked. At the hearing, Parties can submit their questions to the Title IX Case Manager, through the direct message function, who will then submit the questions to the Decision-Maker. Questions that the Parties want to have posed can be questions for that Party, themselves, the other Party, or witnesses. 

The Hearing Officer (for Student and Staff Respondent cases) and Presiding Officer (for Faculty Respondent cases) will limit or disallow questions that are not Relevant, including questions that are unduly repetitious (and thus irrelevant), or that seek or pertain to impermissible evidence. All Relevant (not otherwise impermissible) questions will be asked by the Decision-Maker. Questions that are unclear or harassing of the Party or witness being questioned may be excluded, but prior to doing so, the Decision-Maker will give the Party posing the question the opportunity to clarify or revise the question. The Hearing Officer (for Student and Staff Respondent cases) and Presiding Officer (for Faculty Respondent cases) make the final decision on all questions and determinations of relevance and appropriateness.

The Hearing Officer (for Student and Staff Respondent cases) and Presiding Officer (for Faculty Respondent cases) will explain any decision to exclude questions not Relevant, or to reframe it for relevance. 

The Decision-Maker(s) then poses the questions deemed Relevant, not impermissible, and appropriate to the Party and/or witness. 

2.8.10.8 Refusal to Submit to Questioning and Inferences

If a Party or witness, after being provided notice, does not appear at the hearing, the hearing will take place in their absence. When a Party or witness does not appear for the hearing, or appears but refuses to answer questions, the Decision-Maker will make their determination using the evidence available. The 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 otherwise impermissible). The Decision-Maker may not draw any inference solely from a Party’s or witness’s absence from the hearing or refusal to answer any or all questions.

Employee witnesses are required to participate in the hearing if they are reasonably available. 

2.8.10.9 Closing Statements, Impact Statements and Mitigation Statements 

The Complainant and Respondent will be granted the opportunity to make a verbal closing statement to the Decision-Maker. The Decision-Maker will disregard closing statements or any portions thereof that are not Relevant.

In addition to a closing statement, Complainants and Respondents may submit a written Impact Statement or Mitigation Statement to the Decision-Maker, which must be submitted to the Title IX Coordinator three (3) days before the hearing. The Impact Statement and Mitigation Statement should be no more than ten (10) 8 ½ by 11 pages, double spaced, in 12-point font, with one-inch margins, and should not include information that is more prejudicial than probative, introduces new allegations, or introduces evidence that is not Relevant. Any such information, allegations, or evidence will be redacted or removed by the Title IX Coordinator before the statement is shared with the Decision-Maker. 

2.8.11 Determining Responsibility and Appropriate Discipline

After closing statements from the Parties, the Decision-Maker will deliberate in a closed session to objectively evaluate all Relevant evidence, both inculpatory and exculpatory, and determine whether the Respondent is responsible for the alleged Policy violation based on a preponderance of evidence. 

If the Decision-Maker for Student and staff Respondent cases determines that a Respondent is responsible for one or more violations of the Policy, it will then impose an appropriate Discipline. If the Decision-Maker for faculty Respondent cases determines that a Respondent is responsible for one or more violations of the Policy, it will then recommend appropriate Discipline to the Provost. The Decision-Maker for all Respondents shall consider, among others, the following factors in determining (for Student and staff Respondent cases) and recommending (for faculty Respondent cases) appropriate Discipline: 

• Whether or not the circumstances suggest there is an increased risk of the Respondent committing additional acts of Prohibited Conduct or violence, considering, for example, whether there have been other sexual violence Complaints about the same Respondent, whether the Respondent has a history of violence, whether the Respondent threatened further sexual violence or other violence against the Complainant or others; 
• Whether or not the circumstances suggest there is an increased risk of future acts of Prohibited Conduct under similar circumstances, considering, for example, whether the circumstances reveal a pattern of perpetration, for instance via illicit use of drugs or alcohol, at a given location, or by a particular group; 
• Whether or not the Prohibited Conduct was perpetrated with a weapon or had other aggravating considerations;
• Whether the Respondent, upon return to campus, would be likely to pose a threat to the safety and/or well-being of the Complainant and/or the Brown community generally, and if so, the nature and extent of the threat and steps to  effectively mitigate the impact; 
• Whether the Respondent has been found responsible for prior violations of Brown policies; 

• The impact and mitigation statements submitted by the Complainant and Respondent;
• The impact of the conduct on the Brown community and the need for any Discipline or remedies to eliminate, prevent, or address the existence of any hostile environment caused in the Brown community or to maintain a safe and respectful environment conducive to learning, working, and living; and 
• Any other mitigating, aggravating, or compelling circumstances in order to reach a just and appropriate resolution in the case. 

2.8.11.1 Written Determination

The Decision-Maker will typically prepare a written determination within five (5) days from the date of the hearing. The Hearing Officer or Chair may ask for additional time for deliberation. The Title IX Coordinator will notify the parties in writing if additional time is needed. 

The written determination will include: (1) a description of the alleged Prohibited Conduct; (2) information about the policy and procedures used to evaluate the allegations; (3) the Decision-Maker’s evaluation of the Relevant (not otherwise impermissible) evidence; (4) the determination of whether the Respondent was responsible or not responsible for Prohibited Conduct; (5) if responsible, the specific behaviors for which Respondent was found to be responsible; and (6) appeal information. In the event a Student or staff Respondent is found responsible for a violation of this Policy, the determination will include the Discipline imposed and/or whether Remedies will be provided, as appropriate. In the event a faculty Respondent is found responsible for a violation of this Policy, the determination will include the Discipline recommended and/or whether Remedies will be recommended, as appropriate. The process for imposing Discipline on Faculty Respondents is provided for in Section 2.8.11.2.

In all cases, the Complainant and Respondent will be provided notice of the written determination regarding responsibility simultaneously. The appropriate campus officials, e.g., the senior dean, department chair, University Human Resources and supervisors, and deans in the Division of Campus Life, will receive a copy of the outcome as appropriate. 

In cases of expulsion or termination (except in cases of termination of a term appointment or revocation of tenure of faculty Respondents, which is provided for in Section 2.8.11.2), once the appeal deadline has passed or an expulsion or termination is upheld by the Appeal Decision-Maker, the Respondent’s enrollment or employment will end and the Respondent must vacate campus immediately. 

In cases of suspension of a Student Respondent: once the appeal deadline has passed or a suspension is upheld by the Appeal Decision-Maker, the start of the Respondent’s suspension will be determined by the date on which the final decision is made. Suspensions imposed before the end of the sixth week of classes will begin immediately and apply to the current semester. Suspensions imposed after the sixth week of classes will apply to the next semester. 

2.8.11.2 Determining Discipline for Faculty Respondents

The Hearing Panel’s written decision finding that the faculty Respondent violated the Policy and recommending Discipline will be forwarded to the Provost within two (2) days of the decision being shared with the Complainant and Respondent. The Provost shall consider the written decision setting out the Hearing Panels finding and recommendation and may consider any part of the record before the Hearing Panel that the Provost deems appropriate. The Provost may meet with the Hearing Panel to discuss their recommendation and may afford the Complainant and Respondent the opportunity to discuss the Hearing Panel’s recommendation. The Provost shall also consider the factors set forth in Section 2.8.11.

If the Provost determines that termination of a term appointment or revocation of tenure is the appropriate Discipline for violating the Policy, then such a determination will be a recommendation to the President that such Discipline be imposed and will be forwarded to the President in writing for consideration. The President will consider any recommendation by the Provost to terminate a faculty Respondent’s term appointment or to revoke a faculty Respondent’s tenure. In considering the Provost’s recommendation, the President may also review the written decision setting out the Hearing Panel’s finding and recommendation and consider any part of the record before the Hearing Panel that the President deems appropriate. The President may afford the Complainant and Respondent the opportunity to discuss the recommendation. If the President determines that the circumstances require a recommendation to the Corporation that the faculty Respondent be dismissed during either a term appointment or tenure, the President shall so recommend in writing to the Corporation. The Corporation’s decision on the President’s recommendation will be final.

If the Provost determines that Discipline other than termination of a term appointment or revocation of tenure is the appropriate Discipline for violating the Policy is appropriate, then that Discipline will be final unless either Party appeals. The Provost’s determination will be communicated simultaneously in writing to the Parties, the President, the appropriate senior dean, and the Chair of the Faculty Executive Committee or Chair of the Medical Faculty Executive Committee (as appropriate). 

The Provost will complete the process for recommending/imposing Discipline as set forth in this section within ten (10) days of receipt of the Hearing Panel’s written decision.

2.8.12 Appeal Process

The Complainant and Respondent both have the right to appeal a determination of responsibility and/or Discipline on the limited grounds of (a) a procedural irregularity that affected the outcome of the matter; (b) new evidence that could affect the outcome and that was not reasonably available at the time the determination regarding responsibility was made;  (c) in situations where the Respondent is suspended, expelled, or terminated, the Discipline fall outside the range of Discipline designated for this offense, considering the cumulative conduct/disciplinary record of the Respondent; or (d) 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 affected the outcome of the matter. Any alleged new evidence related to the grounds for the appeal should be appended to the appeal. The appeal is not an opportunity for a re-investigation or re-hearing.

Written requests for appeal must be submitted to the Title IX and Gender Equity Office within five (5) days following delivery of the written determination regarding responsibility. Written requests for appeals submitted by one Party will be shared with the other Party. Each Party may respond in writing to any appeal submitted by the other Party. Written responses to an appeal must be submitted within five (5) days following delivery of the notice of the written appeal. The Request for Appeal will be forwarded to the appropriate Appeal Decision-Maker. 

Appeals are heard by the President in cases with a faculty Respondent, the Vice President of Human Resources in cases with a staff Respondent, and a three (3) member appeal panel drawn from the Title IX Council in cases with a Student Respondent. The individuals hearing appeals are referred to in the Grievance Procedure as Appeal Decision-Makers. The Appeal Decision-Maker’s responsibility will be strictly limited to determining if the written appeal meets the limited grounds on which an appeal is submitted. The appeal will be granted if the Appeal Decision-Maker finds that the grounds for appeal are met. Otherwise, the appeal will be denied.  If the appeal is denied, the matter is closed and the original written determination regarding responsibility and Discipline, if applicable, stands as the final decision.

Appeal decisions are to be deferential to the original determination and the review will be based only on the written record, as well as any recordings. All decisions are made by a majority vote (for appeal panels).

The Appeal Decision-Maker may consult with the Title IX Coordinator, original Decision-Maker, and/or legal counsel on questions of procedure or rationale, for clarification, if needed. The Title IX Coordinator will maintain documentation of all such consultation.

An appeal may be granted or denied. If the Appeal Decision-Maker grants the appeal, they may (a) modify the determination of responsibility and/or Discipline, or (b) remand (or partially remand) the case to the original Decision-Maker or a new Decision-Maker with corrective instructions for reconsideration. In rare circumstances where an error cannot be cured by the original or new Decision-Maker or the Appeal Decision-Maker, the Appeal Decision-Maker or Decision-Maker may reopen the investigation or order a new investigation.

A Notice of Appeal Outcome letter will be sent to all Parties simultaneously. The outcome will specify the finding on each ground for appeal, any specific instructions for remand or reconsideration, any Discipline that may result which the University is permitted to share according to federal or state law, and the rationale supporting the essential findings to the extent the University is permitted to share under federal or state law.

Any Discipline as a result of the determination will not be implemented during the appeal process, and Supportive Measures may be maintained or reinstated until the appeal determination is made.

2.8.13 Prohibition on Recording 

Parties, Advisors, and witnesses are prohibited from audio or video recording any part of the resolution process. The resolution process includes but is not limited to (a) telephone calls and virtual or in-person meetings with any member of the Title IX and Gender Equity Office staff; (b) telephone calls and virtual or in-person interviews or meetings with the investigator; and (c) the hearing. 

Allegations of non-compliance will be reviewed by the Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards for Students, University of Human Resources for staff, and the Office of the Provost for faculty and may result in discipline, up to and including separation from the University. The Parties are responsible for their Advisors’ compliance with this provision and may be subject to discipline for any violation by their Advisor. 

2.8.14 Failure to Comply with Discipline or Informal Resolution Agreement

All Respondents are expected to comply with the assigned Discipline or Informal Resolution Agreement terms within the timeframe specified by the Decision-Maker, including the Appeal Decision-Maker or the Informal Resolution Agreement.

Failure to abide by the Discipline imposed by the date specified, whether by refusal, neglect, or any other reason, may result in additional Discipline, including suspension, expulsion, and/or termination from the University.

Supervisors are expected to enforce the completion of Discipline for their Employees.

A suspension imposed for non-compliance with Discipline will only be lifted when compliance is achieved to the Title IX Coordinator’s satisfaction.

2.8.15 Disability Accommodations and Support During the Resolution Process

Brown is committed to providing reasonable accommodations and support to qualified Students, Employees, or others with disabilities that would enable them to participate in all processes provided for under this Grievance Procedure, including, but not limited to, making a Report or Complaint and participating in an Informal Resolution Process or Formal Resolution Process.

Students with disabilities who would like to request a reasonable accommodation should contact Student Accessibility Services (SAS) at SAS@brown.edu or 401-863-9588. Faculty and staff with disabilities who would like to request a reasonable accommodation should contact University Human Resources (UHR) and visit this website for more information: UHR Employee Accommodation Services. The Title IX Coordinator may consult, as appropriate, with SAS and/or UHR. 

A Party should not assume that the Title IX Coordinator is on notice that they are a Student or Employee with a Disability, even if the Party is registered to receive accommodations through SAS or UHR.

Brown University will address reasonable requests for support for the Parties and witnesses, including (1) language services and interpreters; (2) access and training regarding the use of technology throughout the resolution process and (3) other support as deemed reasonable and necessary to facilitate participation in the resolution process.

 

3.0 Definitions

Defined terms used and not otherwise defined in this Grievance Procedure are defined in the Title IX Policy.

 

4.0 Responsibilities 

All individuals to whom this Grievance Procedure applies are responsible for becoming familiar with and following it. University supervisors are responsible for promoting the understanding of this Grievance Procedure and for taking appropriate steps to help ensure compliance. 

Division of Campus Life: Oversees the response to reports, submission of a Complaint, and the implementation of the Grievance Procedure. 

The University’s response is coordinated by the following individuals: 

• Title IX Coordinator: The Title IX Coordinator oversees the review of Reports and Complaints associated with Prohibited Conduct. The Title IX Coordinator also oversees the implementation of Supportive Measures, the Informal Resolution Process, and the Formal Resolution Process. The Title IX Coordinator is also charged with monitoring compliance with Title IX, providing education and training, and tracking and reporting annually on all incidents in violation of the Policy.
• The Institutional Equity Officers and Institutional Equity Investigator: Serve as internal neutral fact finders. 
• The Associate Vice President for Institutional Equity, Accessibility and Compliance: Hears appeals of Complaint dismissal decisions.
   

5.0 Related Information

The following information compliments and supplements this document. The information is intended to help explain this Grievance Procedure and is not an all-inclusive list of policies, procedures, laws, and requirements.

5.1 Related University Policies: 

• Title IX Policy

• Corporation Policy Statement on Equal Opportunity, Nondiscrimination and Affirmative Action

• Nondiscrimination and Anti-Harassment Policy

• Conflict of Interest and Commitment Policy

• Brown University Code of Student Conduct

• Pregnancy and Parenting Policy

• University Code of Conduct

• Non-Retaliation Policy

5.2 Related SOPs: 

• Student Conduct Procedures

• Discrimination and Harassment Complaint Resolution SOP

5.3 Related Forms: N/A

5.4 Frequently Asked Questions: N/A

5.5 Other Related Information: N/A

 

6.0 SOP Owner and Contact

6.1 SOP Owner: Vice President for Campus Life & Student Services

6.2 SOP Approved by: Vice President for Campus Life & Student Services

6.3 Contact Information:

Title IX Coordinator
titleixoffice@brown.edu 
401-863-2026

 

7.0 SOP History

7.1 SOP Issue Date: August 14, 2020

7.2 SOP Effective Date: August 1, 2024

7.3 SOP Update/Review Summary: N/A