Title IX Policy

Appendix B: Administrative or Informatal Resolution Process For Alleged Violations (Process B)

APPENDIX B: ADMINISTRATIVE OR INFORMAL RESOLUTION PROCESS FOR ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE POLICY ON EQUAL OPPORTUNITY, HARASSMENT, AND NONDISCRIMINATION (PROCESS B)

Iowa Wesleyan University will act on any formal or informal allegation or notice of violation of the Policy on Equal Opportunity, Harassment and Nondiscrimination that is received by the Title IX Coordinator, a designee, or a member of the administration, faculty, or other employee, with the exception of confidential resources.

The procedures described below apply to all allegations of harassment, discrimination and/or retaliation on the basis of protected class status involving students, staff, faculty members, or third parties, and does not include allegations of misconduct covered under the 2020 Title IX Regulations: sexual harassment (Quid Pro Quo and/or sexual harassment-hostile environment), sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, and/or stalking (which are addressed through Process A).

  • Process B is applicable when the Title IX Coordinator determines Process A is inapplicable, or offenses subject to Process A have been dismissed.
  • If Process A is applicable, Process A must be applied in lieu of Process B.
  • Iowa Wesleyan University may substitute any alternative process instead of Process B, if desired.
  • These procedures may also be used to address collateral misconduct arising from the investigation of or occurring in conjunction with harassing or discriminatory conduct (e.g., vandalism, physical abuse of another).
  • All other allegations of misconduct unrelated to incidents covered by this policy will be addressed through the procedures elaborated in the respective student, faculty, and staff handbooks.

Initial Assessment

Following intake, receipt of notice, or a complaint of an alleged violation of the Policy on Equal Opportunity, Harassment and Nondiscrimination, which does not fall under the jurisdiction of the 2020 Title IX regulations, the Title IX Coordinator, Director of Human Resources, Director of Student Conduct, or any other Official With Authority (identified as Conduct Official throughout the remainder of Appendix B) engages in an initial assessment, which is typically one (1) to five (5) business days in duration. The steps in an initial assessment can include:

  • The Conduct Official reaches out to the Complainant to offer supportive measures.
  • The Conduct Official may work with the Complainant to ensure they have an Advisor.
  • The Conduct Official works with the Complainant to determine which option to pursue: a supportive response, an Informal Resolution or Administrative Resolution.
    • If a supportive response is preferred, the Conduct Official works with the Complainant to identify their wishes and then seeks to facilitate implementation. An Administrative Resolution process is not initiated, though the Complainant can elect to initiate it later, if desired.
    • If an Informal Resolution option is selected, the Conduct Official assesses whether the complaint is suitable for Informal Resolution and may seek to determine if the Respondent is also willing to engage in Informal Resolution. Informal resolution is not an option when the Respondent is and employee and the Complainant is a student.
    • If Administrative Resolution is selected, the Conduct Official initiates the investigation process and determines whether the scope of the investigation will address:
      • Incident, and/or
      • A potential pattern of misconduct, and/or
      • A culture/climate issue.
  • In some cases, the Conduct Official may determine that a Violence Risk Assessment should be conducted as part of the initial assessment. A Violence Risk Assessment can aid in ten critical and/or required determinations, including:
    • Interim suspension of a Respondent who is a threat to health/safety;
    • Whether the Conduct Official should pursue Administrative Resolution absent a willing/able Complainant;
    • Whether to put the investigation on the footing of incident and/or pattern and/or climate;
    • Whether a complaint is amenable to Informal Resolution;
    • Whether to permit a voluntary withdrawal by the Respondent;
    • Whether to impose transcript notation or communicate with a transfer institution about a Respondent;
    • Assessment of appropriate sanctions/remedies;
    • Whether a Clery Act Timely Warning/Trespass order/Persona-non-grata is needed.

A Violence Risk Assessment assesses the risk of actionable violence, often with a focus on targeted/predatory escalations, and is supported by research from the fields of law enforcement, criminology, human resources, and psychology. This Assessment occurs in collaboration with the CARE (Campus Assistance, Response and Education) Team and must be understood as an on-going process, rather than a singular evaluation or meeting. A Violence Risk Assessment is not an evaluation for an involuntary behavioral health hospitalization, nor is it a psychological or mental health assessment.
Based on the initial assessment, the University will initiate one of these responses:

  • Supportive Response: measures to help restore the Complainant’s education access, as described in the policy.
  • Informal Resolution: typically used for less serious offenses and only when all parties agree to Informal Resolution, or when the Respondent is willing to accept responsibility for violating policy. This can also include a remedies-only response.
  • Administrative Resolution: investigation of policy violation(s) and recommended finding, subject to a determination by the Conduct Official and the opportunity to appeal.

The investigation and the subsequent Administrative Resolution determine whether the Nondiscrimination Policy has been violated. If so, the University will promptly implement effective remedies designed to end the discrimination, prevent recurrence, and address the effects.

The process followed considers the preference of the parties, but is ultimately determined at the discretion of the Conduct Official. At any point during the initial assessment or formal investigation, if the Conduct Official determines that reasonable cause does not support the conclusion that policy has been violated, the process will end, and the parties will be notified.

The Complainant may request that the Conduct Official review the reasonable cause determination and/or re-open the investigation. This decision lies in the sole discretion of the Conduct Official, but the request is usually only granted in extraordinary circumstances.

Resolution Process Pool

The resolution processes relies on a pool of officials for implementation. Members of the Pool may be the same as those listed for the Policy above. For allegations against employees, the Pool may include members of the Committee on Professional Grievances and Complaints.

When Administrative Resolution leads to a hearing, members of the Pool are trained in aspects of the resolution process, including a review of these policies and procedures, and can serve in any of the following roles, at the direction of the Conduct Official:

  • To provide sensitive intake for and initial advice pertaining to the allegations
  • To act as optional process Advisors to the parties
  • To facilitate Informal Resolution
  • To investigate allegations
  • To serve as a Decision-maker
  • To serve as an Appellate Officer

Counterclaims

Counterclaims by the Respondent may be made in good faith or may instead be motivated by a retaliatory intent. Iowa Wesleyan University is obligated to ensure that any process is not abused for retaliatory purposes.

The University permits the filing of counterclaims, but uses the initial assessment, described above in the Policy section, to assess whether the allegations are made in good faith. If they are, the allegations will be processed using the resolution procedures below, typically after resolution of the underlying allegation. Counterclaims made with retaliatory intent will not be permitted.

A delay in the processing of counterclaims is permitted, accordingly. Occasionally, allegations and counterclaims can be resolved through the same investigation, at the discretion of the Conduct Official. When counterclaims are not made in good faith, they will be considered retaliatory, and may constitute a violation of this Policy.

Optional Advisors to Complainants or Respondents

a. Expectations of an Advisor

Iowa Wesleyan University generally expects an Advisor to adjust their schedule to allow them to attend meetings when planned, but may change scheduled meetings to accommodate an Advisor’s inability to attend, if doing so does not cause an unreasonable delay in addressing the allegation.

The University may also make reasonable provisions to allow an Advisor who cannot attend meetings in person to attend by telephone, video conferencing, or other similar technologies as may be convenient and available.

Parties whose Advisors are disruptive or who do not abide by University policies and procedures may face the loss of that Advisor and/or possible Policy violations.

Advisors are expected to consult with their advisees without disrupting meetings or interviews. Advisors do not represent parties in the process; their role is only to advise.

b. Expectations of the Parties with Respect to Advisors

If advisors are allowed, each party may choose an Advisor who is eligible and available to accompany them throughout the process. The Advisor can be anyone but should not be someone who is also a witness in the process. A party may elect to change Advisors during the process and is not obligated to use the same Advisor throughout.

Parties are expected to inform the conduct official, or investigator in case of a grievance hearing, of the identity of their Advisor at least two (2) business days before the date of their first meeting (or as soon as possible if a more expeditious meeting is necessary or desired). The parties are expected to provide timely notice if they change Advisors at any time.

If a grievance hearing is held, upon written request of a party, the University will copy the Advisor on all communications between the University and the party. The Advisor may be asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) regarding private, sensitive records.

Resolution Options

Proceedings are private. All persons present at any time during the resolution process are expected to maintain the privacy of the proceedings in accord with University Policy.

While there is an expectation of privacy around what is discussed during interviews, the parties have discretion to share their own experiences with others if they so choose, but are encouraged to discuss with their Advisors first before doing so.

a. Informal Resolution

Informal Resolution is applicable when the parties voluntarily agree to resolve the matter through Alternative Resolution or when the Respondent accepts responsibility for violating Policy, or when the Conduct Official can resolve the matter informally by providing remedies to resolve the situation.

It is not necessary to pursue Informal Resolution first in order to pursue Administrative Resolution, and any party participating in Informal Resolution can stop the process at any time and request the Administrative Resolution process. Further, if an Informal Resolution fails after the resolution is finalized, Administrative Resolution may be pursued.

i. Alternative Resolution

Alternative Resolution is an informal process by which the parties mutually agree to resolve an allegation. It may be used for less serious, yet inappropriate, behaviors and is encouraged as an alternative to the Administrative Resolution process (described below) to resolve conflicts. The parties must consent to the use of Alternative Resolution.

The Conduct Official determines if Alternative Resolution is appropriate, based on the willingness of the parties, the nature of the conduct at issue, and the susceptibility of the conduct to Alternative Resolution.

In an Alternative Resolution meeting, a Pool member facilitates a dialogue with the parties to an effective resolution, if possible. Institutionally-imposed sanctions are not possible as the result of an Alternative Resolution process, though the parties may agree to accept sanctions and/or appropriate remedies.

The Conduct Official maintains records of any resolution that is reached, and failure to abide by the resolution can result in appropriate enforcement actions.

Alternative Resolution is not typically the primary resolution mechanism used to address reports of violent behavior of any kind or in other cases of serious violations of policy, though it may be made available after the Administrative Resolution process is completed should the parties and the Conduct Official believes it could be beneficial. The results of Alternative Resolution are not appealable.

ii. Respondent Accepts Responsibility for Alleged Violations

The Respondent may accept responsibility for all or part of the alleged policy violations at any point during the resolution process. If the Respondent accepts responsibility, the Conduct Official makes a determination that the individual is in violation of University Policy.

The Conduct Official then determines appropriate sanction(s) or responsive actions, which are promptly implemented in order to effectively stop the harassment, discrimination, and/or retaliation; prevent its recurrence; and remedy the effects of the conduct, both on the Complainant and the community.

If the Respondent accepts responsibility for all of the alleged policy violations and appropriate sanction(s) or responsive actions have been determined and are promptly implemented, the process is over. The Complainant will be informed of this outcome.

If the Respondent accepts responsibility for some of the alleged policy violations and the Conduct Official has determined appropriate sanction(s) or responsive actions, which are promptly implemented, for those violations, then the remaining allegations will continue to be investigated and resolved through Administrative Resolution. The parties will be informed of this outcome. The parties are still able to seek Alternative Resolution on the remaining allegations, subject to the stipulations above.

iii. Administrative Resolution via an Investigation and Hearing

Administrative Resolution can be pursued for any behavior for which the Respondent has not accepted responsibility that constitutes conduct covered by the Equal Opportunity, Harassment, and Nondiscrimination Policy, yet does not fall under 2020 Title IX Regulations jurisdiction, at any time during the process. Administrative Resolution starts with a thorough, reliable, and impartial investigation.

If Administrative Resolution is initiated, the Conduct Official will provide written notification of the investigation to the parties at an appropriate time during the investigation. Typically, notice is given at least 48 hours in advance of an interview. Advanced notice may facilitate the parties’ ability to identify and choose an Advisor, if any, to accompany them to the interview.

Notification will include a meaningful summary of the allegations, will be made in writing, and may be delivered by one or more of the following methods: in person or emailed to the parties’ Iowa Wesleyan University-issued or designated email account.

Once emailed and/or received in-person, notice will be presumptively delivered. The notification should include the policies allegedly violated, if known at the time. Alternatively, the policies allegedly violated can be provided at a later date, in writing, as the investigation progresses, and details become clearer.

Iowa Wesleyan University aims to complete all investigations within a sixty (60) business day time period, which can be extended as necessary for appropriate cause by the Conduct Official, with notice to the parties as appropriate.

Once the decision is made to commence an investigation, the Conduct Official appoints a Pool member(s) to conduct the investigation, typically within two (2) business days of determining that an investigation should proceed.

The Conduct Official will vet the assigned Investigator(s) to ensure impartiality by ensuring there are no conflicts of interest or disqualifying bias.

The parties may, at any time during the resolution process, raise a concern regarding bias or conflict of interest, and the Conduct Official will determine whether the concern is reasonable and supportable. If so, another Investigator will be assigned and the impact of the bias or conflict, if any, will be remedied. If the bias or conflict relates to the Conduct Official, concerns should be raised with University President.

Investigations are completed expeditiously, normally within 20 business days, though some investigations take weeks or even months, depending on the nature, extent, and complexity of the allegations, availability of witnesses, police involvement, etc.

Iowa Wesleyan University will make a good faith effort to complete the investigations as promptly as circumstances permit and will communicate regularly with the parties to update them on the progress and timing of the investigation.

The University may undertake a short delay in its investigation (several days to weeks, to allow evidence collection) when criminal charges based on the same behaviors that invoke the University’s resolution process are being investigated by law enforcement. The University will promptly resume its investigation and resolution process once notified by law enforcement that the initial evidence collection process is complete.

University action(s) are not typically altered or precluded on the grounds that civil or criminal charges involving the underlying incident(s) have been filed or that criminal charges have been dismissed or reduced.

Investigations involve interviews with all relevant parties and witnesses, obtaining available, relevant evidence, and identifying sources of expert information, as necessary.

All parties have a full and fair opportunity, through the investigation process, to suggest witnesses and questions, to provide evidence, and to fully review and respond to all evidence, on the record.

Investigation

The Investigators typically take the following steps, if not already completed (not necessarily in this order):

  • Determine the identity and contact information of the Complainant
  • In coordination with campus partners (e.g., the Conduct Official and Pool members), initiate or assist with any necessary supportive measures
  • Identify all policies implicated by the alleged misconduct
  • Assist the Conduct Official with conducting an initial assessment to determine if there is reasonable cause to believe the Respondent has violated policy
  • If there is insufficient evidence to support reasonable cause, the process is closed with no further action
  • Commence a thorough, reliable, and impartial investigation by gathering a witness list, evidence list and order of interviews for all parties and witnesses
  • Meet with the Complainant to finalize their statement, if necessary
  • Prepare an initial Notice of Investigation and Allegation (NOIA) on the basis of the initial assessment. Notice may be one step or multiple steps, depending on how the investigation unfolds, and potential policy violations may be added or dropped as more is learned. Investigators will update the NOIA accordingly and provide it to the parties.
  • Notice should inform the parties of their right to have the assistance of a Pool member as a process Advisor appointed by University or an Advisor of their choosing present for all meetings attended by the advisee
  • When formal notice is being given, it should provide the parties with a written description of the alleged violation(s), a list of all policies allegedly violated, a description of the applicable procedures, and a statement of the potential sanctions/responsive actions that could result
  • Give an instruction to the parties to preserve any evidence that is directly related to the allegations
  • Provide the parties and witnesses with an opportunity to review and verify the Investigator’s summary notes from interviews and meetings with that specific party or witness
  • Make good faith efforts to notify the parties of any meeting or interview involving the other party, in advance when possible
  • Interview all relevant individuals and conduct follow-up interviews as necessary
  • Allow each party the opportunity to suggest questions they wish the Investigator(s) to ask of the other party and witnesses
  • Complete the investigation promptly and without unreasonable deviation from the intended timeline
  • Provide regular status updates to the parties throughout the investigation
  • Prior to the conclusion of the investigation, summarize for the parties the list of witnesses whose information will be used to render a finding
  • Write a comprehensive investigation report fully summarizing the investigation and all evidence
  • Provide the parties with a copy of the draft investigation report when it is completed, including all relevant evidence, analysis, credibility assessments, and recommended finding(s)
  • Provide each party with a full and fair opportunity to respond to the report in writing within seven (7) business days and incorporate that response, if any, into the report
  • Investigators may choose to respond in writing in the report to the responses of the parties, and/or to share the responses between the parties for their responses, while also ensuring that they do not create a never-ending feedback loop
  • Write a formal investigation report of gathered, assessed, and synthesized evidence
  • Provide the final report to the Conduct Official. Recommend a finding, based on the evidentiary standard as mandated by the Respondent’s status as a faculty member, staff member or student (whether a policy violation is more likely than not).

Determination

Within two (2) to three (3) business days of receiving the Investigator’s recommendation, the Conduct Official reviews the report and all responses, and then makes the final determination on the basis of the evidentiary standard as mandated by the Respondent’s status as a faculty member, staff member or student.

If the record is incomplete, a re-opening of the investigation may occur, or the Conduct Official may direct or conduct any additional inquiry necessary, including informally meeting with the parties or any witnesses, if needed.

The recommendation of the investigation, if any, should be strongly considered but is not binding on the Conduct Official, who may invite and consider impact statements from the parties if and when determining appropriate sanction(s), if any.

The Conduct Official then timely provides the parties with a written Notice of Outcome to include findings, any sanction(s), and a detailed rationale, delivered simultaneously (without undue delay) to the parties

Additional Details of the Investigation Process

a. Witness responsibilities

Witnesses (as distinguished from the parties) who are faculty or staff of Iowa Wesleyan University are expected to cooperate with and participate in the University’s investigation and resolution process. Failure of a witness to cooperate with and/or participate in the investigation or resolution process constitutes a violation of Policy and may be subject to discipline.

b. Remote processes

Parties and witnesses may be interviewed remotely by phone, video conferencing, or similar technologies if the Conduct Official determine that timeliness, efficiency or other causes dictate a need for remote interviewing. Witnesses may also provide written statements in lieu of interviews, or respond to questions in writing, if deemed appropriate by the Investigator(s), though this approach is not ideal. When remote technologies are used, the University makes reasonable efforts to ensure privacy, and ensures that any technology does not work to the detriment of any party or subject them to unfairness.

c. Recording

No unauthorized audio or video recording of any kind is permitted during the resolution process, including investigative interviews. If Investigator(s) elect to audio and/or video record interviews, all involved parties must be made aware of and consent to audio and/or video recording.

d. Evidence

Any evidence that is relevant and credible may be considered, including an individual’s prior misconduct history as well as evidence indicating a pattern of misconduct, subject to the limitations in (e) below. The process should exclude irrelevant or immaterial evidence and may disregard evidence lacking in credibility or that is improperly prejudicial.
*
+e. Sexual history/patterns+*

Unless the Title IX Coordinator only determines it is appropriate, the investigation and the finding do not consider: (1) incidents not directly related to the possible violation, unless they evidence a pattern; (2) the irrelevant sexual history of the parties (though there may be a limited exception made with regard to the sexual history between the parties); or (3) irrelevant character evidence.

f. Previous allegations/violations

While previous conduct violations by the Respondent are not generally admissible as information supporting the current allegation, the Investigator(s) may supply the Conduct Official with information about previous good faith allegations and/or findings, when that information suggests potential pattern and/or predatory conduct.

Previous disciplinary action of any kind involving the Respondent may be considered in determining the appropriate sanction(s), if the University uses a progressive discipline system

Character witnesses or evidence may be offered. The investigation and potential hearing will determine if the character evidence is relevant. If so, it may be considered. If not, it will be excluded.

g. Notification of outcome

If the Respondent admits to the violation(s), or is found in violation, the Conduct Official (in consultation with other administrators, as appropriate) determines sanction(s) and/or responsive actions, which are promptly implemented in order to effectively to stop the harassment, discrimination, and/or retaliation; prevent its recurrence; and remedy the effects of the discriminatory conduct, both on the Complainant and the community.

The Conduct Official informs the parties of the determination within three (3) business days of the resolution, ideally simultaneously, but without significant time delay between notifications. Notifications are made in writing and may be delivered by one or more of the following methods: in person or emailed to the parties’ University-issued or designated email account. Once emailed and/or received in-person, notice is presumptively delivered.

The Notification of Outcome specifies the finding for each alleged policy violation, any sanction(s) that may result which the University is permitted to share pursuant to state or federal law, and the rationale supporting the findings to the extent the University is permitted to share under state or federal law.

The notice will detail when the determination is considered final (see the section on Appeals below) and will detail any changes that are made prior to finalization.

Unless based on an acceptance of violation by the Respondent, the determination may be appealed by either party. The Notification of Outcome also includes the grounds on which the parties may appeal and the steps the parties may take to request an appeal of the findings. More information about the appeal procedures can be found below.

Sanctions

Factors considered when determining any sanction(s)/responsive action(s) may include, but are not limited to:

  • The nature, severity of, and circumstances surrounding the violation
  • An individual’s disciplinary history
  • Previous allegations or allegations involving similar conduct
  • The need for sanctions/responsive actions to bring an end to the discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation
  • The need for sanctions/responsive actions to prevent the future recurrence of discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation
  • The need to remedy the effects of the discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation on the Complainant and the community
  • The impact on the parties
  • Any other information deemed relevant by the Conduct Official

The sanction(s) will be implemented as soon as is feasible. The sanctions described in this policy are not exclusive of, and may be in addition to, other actions taken, or sanctions imposed by outside authorities.

a. Student Sanctions

The following are the sanctions that may be imposed upon students or student organizations singly or in combination:

  • Warning: A formal statement that the behavior was unacceptable and a warning that further infractions of any University policy, procedure, or directive will result in more severe sanctions/responsive actions.
  • Probation: A written reprimand for violation of the University Policy, providing for more severe disciplinary sanctions in the event that the student or organization is found in violation of any University policy, procedure or directive within a specified period of time. Terms of the probation will be articulated and may include denial of specified social privileges, exclusion from co-curricular activities, exclusion from designated areas of campus, no-contact orders, and/or other measures deemed appropriate.
  • Suspension: Termination of student status for a definite period of time not to exceed two years, and/or until specific criteria are met. Students who return from suspension are automatically placed on probation through the remainder of their tenure as a student at Iowa Wesleyan University.
  • Expulsion: Permanent termination of student status, revocation of rights to be on campus for any reason or attend Iowa Wesleyan University-sponsored events. This sanction will be noted as a Conduct Expulsion on the student’s official transcript.
  • Withholding Diploma and/or Official Transcripts: The University may withhold a student’s diploma and/or official transcripts for a specified period of time, and/or deny a student participation in commencement activities as a sanction if the student is found responsible for an alleged violation.
  • Organizational Sanctions: Deactivation, loss of recognition, loss of some or all privileges (including Iowa Wesleyan University registration), for a specified period of time.
  • Other Actions: In addition to or in place of the above sanctions, the University may assign any other sanctions as deemed appropriate.

b. Employee Sanctions

Responsive actions for an employee who has engaged in harassment, discrimination, and/or retaliation include:

  • Warning – Verbal or Written
  • Performance Improvement/Management Process
  • Required Counseling
  • Required Training or Education
  • Probation
  • Loss of Annual Pay Increase
  • Loss of Oversight or Supervisory Responsibility
  • Demotion
  • Suspension with pay
  • Suspension without pay
  • Termination*
  • Other Actions: In addition to or in place of the above sanctions/responsive actions, Iowa Wesleyan University may assign any other responsive actions as deemed appropriate.

*This policy does not provide the authority to terminate a tenured faculty member due to the contractual rights that accompany a faculty member’s tenured faculty appointment. Accordingly, if the outcome of an adjudication under this policy results in a sanction calling for separation/termination from the University, a recommendation will be made from the Title IX Coordinator to the University Provost to pursue the separation/termination.

Withdrawal or Resignation While Charges are Pending

*+a. Students:+ *

Iowa Wesleyan University does not permit a student to withdraw if that student has an allegation pending for violation of the policy on Equal Opportunity, Harassment, and Nondiscrimination. The University may place a hold, bar access to an official transcript, and/or prohibit graduation as necessary to permit the resolution process to be completed.

b. Employees:

Should an employee resign with unresolved allegations pending, the records of the Conduct Official will reflect that status, and any Iowa Wesleyan University responses to future inquiries regarding employment references for that individual will include the former employee’s unresolved status.

Appeals

All requests for appeal consideration must be submitted in writing to the Conduct Official within five (5) business days of the delivery of the written finding of the Conduct Official. Any party may appeal the findings only under the grounds described below.

An Appellate Officer chosen from the Pool will be designated by the Conduct Official from those who have not been involved in the process previously. Any party may appeal, but appeals are limited to the following grounds:

  • A procedural error or omission occurred that significantly impacted the outcome of the hearing (e.g., substantiated bias, material deviation from established procedures, [failure to correctly apply the evidentiary standard as mandated by the Respondent’s status as a faculty member, staff member or student]).
  • To consider new evidence, unknown or unavailable during the investigation, that could substantially impact the original finding or sanction. A summary of this new evidence and its potential impact must be included in the appeal.
  • The sanctions imposed fall outside the range of sanctions the Iowa Wesleyan University has designated for this offense and the cumulative record of the Respondent.

When any party requests an appeal, the Conduct Official will share the appeal request with the other party(ies) or other appropriate persons such as the Investigator(s), who may file a response within three (3) business days. The other party may also bring their own appeal on separate grounds.

If new grounds are raised, the original appealing party will be permitted to submit a written response to these new grounds within five (5) business days. These responses or appeal requests will be shared with each party. The Appellate Officer will review the appeal request(s) within three (3) business days of completing the pre-appeal exchange of materials. If grounds are not sufficient for an appeal, or the appeal is not timely, the Appellate Officer dismisses the appeal.

When the Appellate Officer finds that at least one of the grounds is met by at least one party, additional principles governing the review of appeals include the following:

  • Decisions by the Appellate Officer are to be deferential to the original decision, making changes to the finding only when there is clear error and to the sanction(s)/responsive action(s) only if there is compelling justification to do so.
  • Appeals are not intended to be full re-hearings of the allegation(s). In most cases, appeals are confined to a review of the written documentation or record of the investigation and pertinent documentation regarding the grounds for appeal.
  • An appeal is not an opportunity for the Appellate Officer to substitute their judgment for that of the original Investigator(s) or Conduct Official merely because they disagree with the finding and/or sanction(s).
  • Appeals granted based on new evidence should normally be remanded to the Investigator(s) for reconsideration. Other appeals should be remanded at the discretion of the Appellate Officer.
  • Sanctions imposed as the result of the Administrative Resolution are implemented immediately unless the Conduct Official stays their implementation in extraordinary circumstances, pending the outcome of the appeal.
    • For students: Graduation, study abroad, internships, etc., do NOT in and of themselves constitute exigent circumstances, and students may not be able to participate in those activities during their appeal.
  • All parties will be informed in writing within three (3) business days of the outcome of the appeal without significant time delay between notifications, and in accordance with the standards for Notice of Outcome as defined above.
  • When appeals result in no change to the finding or sanction, that decision is final. When an appeal results in a new finding or sanction, that finding or sanction can be appealed one final time on the grounds listed above, and in accordance with these procedures.
  • In rare cases when a procedural [or substantive] error cannot be cured by the original Investigator(s) and/or Conduct Official (as in cases of bias), the Appellate Officer may recommend a new investigation and/or Administrative Resolution process, including a new resolution administrator.
  • In cases in which the appeal results in Respondent’s reinstatement to Iowa Wesleyan University or resumption of privileges, all reasonable attempts will be made to restore the Respondent to their prior status, recognizing that some opportunities lost may be irreparable.

Long-Term Remedies/Actions

Following the conclusion of the resolution process, and in addition to any sanctions implemented, the Conduct Official may implement long-term remedies or actions with respect to the parties and/or the campus community to stop the harassment, discrimination, and/or retaliation; remedy its effects; and prevent its reoccurrence.

These remedies/actions may include, but are not limited to:

  • Referral to counseling and health services
  • Referral to the Employee Assistance Program
  • Education to the community
  • Permanent alteration of housing assignments
  • Permanent alteration of work arrangements for employees
  • Provision of campus safety escorts
  • Climate surveys
  • Policy modification
  • Provision of transportation accommodations
  • Implementation of long-term contact limitations between the parties
  • Implementation of adjustments to academic deadlines, course schedules, etc.

At the discretion of the Conduct Official, long-term remedies may also be provided to the Complainant even if no policy violation is found.

When no policy violation is found, the Conduct Official will address any remedial requirements owed by Iowa Wesleyan University to the Respondent.

Failure to Complete Sanctions/Comply with Interim and Long-term Remedies/Responsive Actions

All Respondents are expected to comply with conduct sanctions, responsive actions, and corrective actions within the timeframe specified by the Conduct Official.

Failure to abide by the sanction(s)/action(s) imposed by the date specified, whether by refusal, neglect, or any other reason, may result in additional sanction(s) and responsive/corrective action(s), including suspension, expulsion, and/or termination from Iowa Wesleyan University and may be noted on a student’s official transcript.

A suspension will only be lifted when compliance is achieved to the satisfaction of the Conduct Official.

Recordkeeping

In implementing this policy, records of all allegations, investigations, resolutions, and hearings will be kept indefinitely, or as required by state or federal law or institutional policy, by the Title IX Coordinator in the Title IX case database or Conduct Official in a similar conduct database.

See Appendix A for a Statement of the Rights of the Parties

Disabilities Accommodation in the Resolution Process

Iowa Wesleyan University is committed to providing reasonable accommodations and support to qualified students, employees, or others with disabilities to ensure equal access to the resolution process at Iowa Wesleyan University. Students needing such accommodations or support should contact the Director of Accessibility and employees should contact the Director of Human Resources, who will review the request and, in consultation with the person requesting the accommodation, and the Conduct Official, determine which accommodations are appropriate and necessary for full participation in the process.

Revision

These policies and procedures will be reviewed and updated annually by Iowa Wesleyan University. The University reserves the right to make changes to this document as necessary and once those changes are posted online, they are in effect.

Iowa Wesleyan University may make minor modifications to these procedures that do not materially jeopardize the fairness owed to any party, such as to accommodate summer schedules.

The University may also vary procedures materially with notice (on the University website, with the appropriate effective date identified) upon determining that changes to law or regulation require policy or procedural alterations not reflected in this policy and procedure.

Procedures in effect at the time of the resolution will apply to resolution of incidents, regardless of when the incident occurred.

Policy in effect at the time of the offense will apply even if the policy is changed subsequently but prior to resolution, unless the parties consent to be bound by the current policy.

If government regulations change in a way that impacts this document, this document will be construed to comply with the most recent government regulations.

This document does not create legally enforceable protections beyond the protection of the background state and federal laws which frame such policies and codes, generally.

This policy and procedure was implemented in August, 2020.