600.040 Equity Resolution Process for Resolving Complaints of Discrimination and Harassment against a Faculty Member or Student or Student Organization - for matters involving conduct alleged to have occurred on or after August 14, 2020

Bd. Min. 2-5-15; Amended 2-09-17 with an effective date of 3-1-17; Revised 7-28-20 with effective date of 8-14-20; Amended 2-4-21; Amended 6-27-24.

General. The University will promptly and appropriately respond to any report of violation of the University’s Anti-Discrimination policies. The procedures described below apply to such reports when the Respondent is a Faculty Member(s), a student(s), or a student organization. Further, when the report involves allegations against the President or a Chancellor, upon consultation between the Office of the General Counsel and the Equity Officer, the investigation may be conducted by an outside investigator. This procedure does not govern complaints alleging conduct that would be defined as sexual harassment under Section 600.020 of the Collected Rules and Regulations.
Jurisdiction. Jurisdiction of the University of Missouri generally shall be limited to conduct which occurs on the University of Missouri premises or at University-sponsored or University-supervised functions. However, the University may take appropriate action, including, but not limited to, the imposition of sanctions under Section 600.040 of the Collected Rules and Regulations against Faculty Members, Students, or Student Organizations for conduct occurring in other settings, including off-campus, (1) in order to protect the physical safety of students, employees, and visitors or other members of the University community, or (2) if there are effects of the conduct that interfere with or limit any person’s ability to participate in or benefit from the University’s educational programs, activities or employment, or (3) if the conduct is related to the Faculty Member’s fitness or performance in the professional capacity of teacher or researcher or (4) if the conduct occurs when the Faculty Member is serving in the role of a University employee.

If a Complainant simultaneously alleges or the investigation suggests violations of the University’s Anti-Discrimination Policies and (1) violation, misinterpretation, or arbitrary application of another written University rule, policy, regulation, or procedure which applies personally to the Faculty member; and/or (2) that there has been an infringement on the academic freedom of the Faculty member, the University shall have the authority to investigate and take appropriate action regarding each of the Complainant’s allegations pursuant to this Equity Resolution Process. In conducting such investigations, the Provost, Equity Officer, and/or the Investigator may consult with and/or seek guidance from the Human Resources staff or other appropriate administrators as necessary.

If a Complainant alleges or the investigation suggests that a student conduct policy violation occurred in concert with the alleged violation of the University’s Anti-Discrimination Policies, the University shall have the authority to investigate and take appropriate action regarding each of the alleged violations of the student conduct policy pursuant to this Equity Resolution Process. In conducting such investigations, the Equity Officer and/or the Investigator may consult with and/or seek guidance from the Student Conduct Coordinator or Residential Life Coordinator as appropriate.

If a Complainant alleges or the investigation suggests that a discrimination or harassment policy violation as defined in Section 600.010 of the Collected Rules and Regulations occurred in concert with an alleged violation of the University’s Title IX policies, the University shall investigate and take appropriate action regarding the alleged violation(s) of the discrimination or harassment policy pursuant to University’s Title IX process. If the allegation(s) in the Complaint that fall under the Title IX policy are dismissed, the University may discontinue the process under the Title IX policy and then proceed under this equity resolution process for any remaining reports of alleged violation(s) of Section 600.010 in the Complaint.

At-Will Employment Status. Nothing contained in this policy is intended and no language contained herein shall be construed as establishing a “just cause” standard for imposing discipline, including but not limited to, termination of employment. Further, nothing contained in this policy is intended and no language contained herein shall be construed to alter in any manner whatsoever the at-will employment status of any at-will University employee.
Definitions:
1. Administrative Resolution. A voluntary resolution process where a decision-maker makes a finding on each of the alleged policy violations in a Complaint and a finding on sanctions and remedies without a hearing.
2. Complainant. “Complainant” refers to the person alleged to have been subjected to discrimination or harassment in violation of the University’s Anti-Discrimination Policies. The University may serve as the Complainant when the person alleged to have been subjected to discrimination or harassment in violation of the University’s Anti-Discrimination Policies chooses not to act as the Complainant in the resolution process or requests that the complaint not be pursued. If the University decides to pursue a report of discrimination by a visitor, third party or applicant through the applicable equity resolution process, the University will act as the Complainant. Former University Faculty or Staff members may act as the Complainant in the applicable equity resolution process only when their employment is terminated and they allege that the termination of employment was discriminatory. For any other allegations of discrimination by former University Faculty or Staff members, the University will appropriately respond to reports of a violation of the University’s Anti-Discrimination policies and if the University decides to pursue a report of discrimination through the applicable equity resolution process, the University will act as the Complainant.
3. Complaint. A document prepared by the Equity Officer when a verbal or written report of alleged discrimination or harassment becomes known to the University, or a document filed and signed by a Complainant alleging discrimination or harassment against a Respondent and requesting that the University investigate the allegation.
4. Conflict Resolution. A voluntary resolution process using alternative dispute resolution mechanisms such as mediation, facilitated dialogue, or restorative justice.
5. Equity Resolution Appellate Officer. For Student(s) or Student Organization Respondents, a trained, senior-level administrator appointed by the Chancellor (or Designee) to hear all requests for reconsideration of summary determination and appeals stemming from the Equity Resolution Process. For Faculty Respondents, the Chancellor (or Designee).
6. Equity Resolution Hearing Panel (“Hearing Panel”). The Hearing Officer and two (2) trained Equity Resolution Hearing Panelist Pool members who serve as the Hearing Panel for a specific Complaint. A good faith attempt will be made for the Hearing Panel to include at least one faculty member and one administrator or staff member.
7. Equity Resolution Hearing Panelists Pool (“Hearing Panelist Pool”). A group of at least five (5) faculty and five (5) administrators and/or staff selected by the Chancellor (or Designee) to serve as hearing panel members in the Hearing Panel Resolution process. The faculty hearing panel members selected by the Chancellor (or Designee) shall be selected from a list of no less than ten (10) faculty members proposed by the faculty council/senate. Selection of hearing panel pool members shall be made with an attempt to recognize the diversity of the University community. Hearing Panel members from one University may be asked to serve on a hearing panel involving another University.
8. Equity Officer. The Equity Officer is a trained administrator designated by the Chancellor (or Designee) to receive and assist with the investigation and resolution of Complaints regarding violation of the University’s Anti-Discrimination Policies. All references to “Equity Officer” throughout this policy refer to the Equity Officer or the Equity Officer’s Designee.
9. Equity Support Person: An individual selected by a Party to provide support and guidance throughout the Equity Resolution Process. Each Party is allowed one Equity Support Person.
10. Faculty Member. For purposes of Section 600.040, Faculty Member includes all regular and non-regular academic staff appointments as defined in Sections 310.020 and 310.035 of the Collected Rules and Regulations.
11. Hearing Officer. A trained individual appointed by the Chancellor (or Designee) to preside over a hearing and act as a member of the Hearing Panel.
12. Hearing Panelist Pool Chair (“Pool Chair”). The Hearing Panelist Pool Chair is selected by the Chancellor (or Designee). The Pool Chair randomly selects and coordinates the hearing panel members to serve on the Hearing Panel for a specific Complaint. The Pool Chair may serve as a panel member for a specific Complaint.
13. Hearing Panel Resolution. Resolution of a Complaint by an Equity Resolution Hearing Panel making the finding on each of the alleged policy violations. In faculty matters, the Hearing Panel will make recommendations as to any sanctions, if applicable, and the Provost will make the finding on sanctions. In matters involving students or student organizations, the Hearing Panel will make a finding on sanctions and remedial actions.
14. Investigators. Investigators are trained individuals appointed by the Equity Officer to conduct investigations of the alleged violations of the University’s Anti-Discrimination Policies.
15. Parties. The Complainant and the Respondent are collectively referred to as the Parties.
16. Record of the Case. The Record of the Case in the Section 600.040 Process includes, when applicable: All Notices to the Parties, investigative report, recordings of Party and witness interviews, exhibits used at a hearing, the hearing record (an audio or audiovisual record of the hearing); any determination of dismissal of all or part of a Formal Complaint; the determination on each of the alleged policy violations and sanctions by either the Hearing Panel or Decision-maker; and the decision on the appeal, if any, including the request for appeal, any additional evidence submitted for the appeal, and written arguments of the parties.
17. Report. Any verbal or written communication or notice of an alleged violation of the University’s Anti-Discrimination Policies.
18. Respondent. “Respondent” refers to the Faculty Member(s) or student(s) or student organization alleged to have violated the University’s Anti-Discrimination Policies.
19. Student. A person having once been admitted to the University who has not completed a course of study and who intends to or does continue a course of study in or through one of the Universities of the University System. For the purpose of these rules, student status continues whether or not the University’s academic programs are in session.
20. Student Organization. A recognized student organization which has received Official Approval in accordance with Section 250.010 of the Collected Rules and Regulations. Three members of the organization may represent the student organization as the Party.
21. Summary Resolution. Resolution of the Complaint upon a determination by the Equity Officer that there is an insufficient basis to proceed with the Complaint that the Respondent violated the University’s Anti-Discrimination Policies.
22. University’s Anti-Discrimination Policies. The University’s Anti-Discrimination Policies include the Equal Employment/Education Opportunity and Nondiscrimination Policy located at Section 600.010 of the Collected Rules and Regulations (CRR).
Making a Report. Any person (whether or not the person reporting is the person alleged to be the victim of conduct that could constitute discrimination or harassment) may report discrimination or harassment to the Equity Officer. A report may be made in person, or at any time (including during non-business hours) by mail, by telephone, or by electronic mail, using the contact information listed for the Equity Officer, by an online portal set up by the University for this purpose, or by any other means that results in the Equity Officer receiving the person’s verbal or written report. Individuals may also contact University police if the alleged offense may also constitute a crime. In order to foster reporting and participation, the University may provide amnesty to Parties and witnesses accused of minor student conduct violations ancillary to the incident.
Preliminary Contact and Inquiry. Upon receiving a report, the Equity Officer shall promptly contact the Complainant to discuss the availability of supportive measures as defined herein, consider the Complainant’s wishes with respect to supportive measures, inform the Complainant of availability of supportive measures with or without the filing of a Complaint, and explain to the Complainant the process for filing a Complaint. If the identity of the Complainant is unknown, the Equity Officer may conduct a limited investigation sufficient to identify the Complainant to the extent possible.

In addition to making preliminary contact, the Equity Officer shall conduct a preliminary inquiry to gather enough information to make a threshold decision regarding whether the report describes a possible violation of the University’s anti-discrimination policies.

If the report describes a possible violation, the Equity Officer will refer the matter to the appropriate procedural process and provide appropriate supportive measures. If the report does not describe a possible violation, the matter will be referred to the appropriate non-Equity process. Under those circumstances, the Equity Officer may counsel and suggest monitoring or training opportunities to correct for inappropriate behavior that does not rise to the level of a violation.

The preliminary inquiry shall be conducted promptly (typically within 7-10 business days) of receiving the report.
Filing a Complaint.
A Complaint is a document prepared by the Equity Officer after a verbal or written report of alleged discrimination or harassment becomes known to the University, or a document filed and signed by a Complainant alleging discrimination or harassment against a Respondent and requesting that the University investigate the allegation. As used herein, the phrase “document filed and signed by a complainant” means a document or electronic submission (such as by electronic mail or through an online portal provided for this purpose by the University) that contains the complainant’s physical or digital signature, or otherwise indicates that the Complainant is the person filing the Complaint.

All Complaints alleging discrimination or harassment under this policy will be investigated. The University may serve as the Complainant when the person alleged to have been subjected to discrimination or harassment in violation of the University’s Anti-Discrimination policies chooses not to act as the Complainant in the resolution process or requests that the Complaint not be pursued. If the University decides to pursue a report of discrimination by a visitor, third party or applicant through the applicable equity resolution process, the University will act as the Complainant. Where the Equity Officer prepares a Complaint, the Equity Officer is not a Complainant or otherwise a party under this policy.

The University may consolidate Complaints as to allegations of discrimination or harassment against more than one Respondent, or by more than one Complainant against one or more Respondents, or by one Party against the other Party where the allegations of discrimination or harassment, arise out of the same facts or circumstances. Where this process involves more than one Complainant or more than one Respondent, each Complainant and each Respondent shall be entitled and subject to all of the rights and obligations set forth herein.
Notice of Allegations
1. Upon receipt of a Complaint, the Equity Officer, will provide a written notice to the known Parties that includes the following:
  1. A description of the University’s available Equity Resolution processes, including Conflict Resolution;
  2. Notice of the allegations of discrimination and/or harassment, including sufficient details known at the time. Sufficient details include the identities of the parties involved in the incident, if known; the conduct allegedly constituting the discrimination and/or harassment; and the date and location of the alleged incident.
  3. A statement that the Respondent is presumed not responsible for the alleged conduct and that a determination regarding responsibility is made at the conclusion of the Equity Resolution process.
  4. A statement notifying the Parties of the availability of supportive measures.
  5. A statement notifying the Parties of their right to have an Equity Support Person of their choice, who may be, but is not required to be, an attorney.
  6. A statement notifying the Parties that they may have an Equity Support Person selected by a Party accompany the Party to all meetings, interviews, and proceedings to provide support for the Party throughout the Equity Resolution Process.
  7. A statement notifying the Parties that they will be permitted to inspect and review any evidence obtained as part of the investigation that is directly related to the allegations raised in the Complaint, including the evidence upon which the University does not intend to rely in reaching a determination regarding responsibility and including inculpatory or exculpatory evidence whether obtained from a Party or other source.
  8. A statement notifying the Parties that they must be truthful when making any statement or providing any information or evidence to the University throughout the grievance process, and all documentary evidence must be genuine and accurate. False statements and fraudulent evidence by an employee may be the basis for personnel action pursuant to CRR 370.010 or HR 601, or other applicable University policies, or for disciplinary action pursuant to CRR 200.010 for students.
  9. A statement that nothing in the Equity Process is intended to supersede nor expand any rights the individual may have under applicable state or federal statutory laws or the U.S. Constitution.
  10. A statement informing a Party that all notices hereafter will be sent via their University-issued email account, unless they provide to the Equity Officer an alternate method of notification. If a Party does not have a University-issued email account, all notices hereafter will be via U.S. Mail unless they provide the Equity Officer with a preferred method of notification.
2. The Notice of Allegations will be made in writing to the Parties by email to the Party’s University-issued email account, with a read-receipt or reply email requested. If a read-receipt or reply email is not returned within three (3) business days or the Party does not have a University-issued email account, the Notice of Allegations shall be sent via U.S. Mail postage pre-paid to the last known address of the Party. Notice also may be provided in person to either Party. Notice is presumptively deemed delivered, when: 1) provided in person, 2) emailed to the individual, or 3) when mailed.
Supportive Measures, Emergency Removal, Interim Suspension of Student Organization, and Administrative Leave
1. Supportive Measures. Supportive measures are non-disciplinary, non-punitive individualized services offered as appropriate, as reasonably available, and without fee or charge to the Complainant or the Respondent before or after the filing of a Complaint. These measures are designed to restore or preserve equal access to the University’s education programs, activities or employment without unreasonably burdening the other Party, including measures designed to protect the safety of all Parties or the University’s education environment, or deter discrimination and harassment. The University will maintain as confidential any supportive measures provided to the Complainant or Respondent, to the extent that maintaining such confidentiality would not impair the ability of the University to provide the supportive measures. The Equity Officer is responsible for the effective implementation of supportive measures. Supportive measures may include:
  1. Referral and facilitating contact for the Complainant or Respondent for counseling or other support services.
  2. Mutual restrictions on contact between the Parties.
  3. Providing campus escort services to the Parties.
  4. Increased security and monitoring of certain areas of the campus.
  5. Adjusting the extracurricular activities, work schedules, work assignments, supervisory responsibilities, or work arrangements of the Complainant and/or Respondent, as appropriate.
  6. If either Party is a student:
    
    (1) Referral of that Party to academic support services and any other services that may be beneficial to the Party.
    (2) Adjusting the courses, assignments, and/or exam schedules of the Party.
    (3) Altering the on-campus housing assignments, dining arrangements, or other campus services for the Party.
  7. Providing limited transportation accommodations for the Parties.
  8. Informing the Parties of the right to notify law enforcement authorities of the alleged incident and offering to help facilitate such a report.
2. Emergency Removal. The Equity Officer may implement a removal of a Respondent from the University’s education program or activity on an emergency basis, if the Equity Officer, after conducting an individualized safety and risk analysis, determines that an immediate threat to the physical health or safety of any student or other individual arising from the allegations of discrimination or harassment, justifies removal.
  1. In all cases in which an Emergency Removal is imposed, the Respondent will immediately be given notice and an opportunity to challenge the decision of the Equity Officer either prior to such Removal being imposed, or as soon thereafter as reasonably possible but no later than five (5) business days following the Removal. Any challenge by Respondent shall be made in writing and directed to the Equity Officer and must show cause why the Removal should not be implemented. The Equity Officer will forward the challenge to the Emergency Removal Appeal Individual/Committee, which will make a final decision on Removal within three (3) business days.
  2. Violation of an Emergency Removal under this policy may be grounds for discipline under applicable University conduct policy.
3. Interim Suspension of Student Organization. The Equity Officer may suspend, on an interim basis, a Respondent Student Organization’s operations, University recognition, access to and use of the University campus/facilities/events and/or all other University activities or privileges for which the Respondent Student Organization might otherwise be eligible, pending the completion of the Equity Process when the Equity Officer finds and believes from available information that the presence of the student organization on campus would seriously disrupt the University or constitute a danger to the health, safety, or welfare of members of the University community. The appropriate procedure to determine the future status of the student organization will be initiated within seven (7) business days.
4. Administrative Leave. The Equity Officer may implement an administrative leave for an employee in accordance with University Human Resources Policies. Administrative leave for an employee is not an Emergency Removal under this policy.
Employees and Students Participating in the Equity Resolution Process. All University employees and students must be truthful when making any statement or providing any information or evidence to the University throughout the process, including but not limited to the Investigator, Equity Officer, Provost (or Designee), the Hearing Panel, and/or the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer, and all documentary evidence must be genuine and accurate. False statements or fraudulent evidence or refusal to cooperate with the Investigator, Equity Officer, Provost (or Designee), Hearing Panel, and/or the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer by an employee may be the basis for personnel action pursuant to CRR 370.010 or HR 601, or other applicable University policies, or if by a student may be the basis for disciplinary action pursuant to the provisions of CRR 200.010. However, this obligation does not supersede nor expand any rights the individual may have under applicable state or federal statutory law or the U.S. Constitution. For purposes of this policy, “refusal to cooperate” does not include refusal to participate in any proceedings involving sex discrimination. The fact that a determination has been made that a Respondent has or has not violated any policy is not sufficient grounds, by itself, to declare that a false statement or fraudulent evidence has been provided by a Party or witness.

No employee or student, directly or through others, should take any action which may interfere with the investigation. Employees and students are prohibited from attempting to or actually intimidating or harassing any potential witness. Failure to adhere to these requirements may lead to disciplinary action, up to and including expulsion or termination.
Rights of the Parties in the Equity Resolution Process
1. To be treated with respect by University officials.
2. To be free from retaliation.
3. To have access to University support resources (such as counseling and mental health services and University health services).
4. To request a no contact directive between the Parties.
5. To have an Equity Support Person of the Party’s choice accompany the Party to all interviews, meetings, and proceedings throughout the Equity Resolution Process.
6. To refuse to have an allegation resolved through Conflict or Administrative Resolution Processes.
7. To receive prior to a hearing or other time of determination regarding responsibility, an investigative report that fairly summarizes the relevant evidence in an electronic format or hard copy for their review and written response.
8. To have an opportunity to present a list of potential witnesses and provide evidence to the Investigator.
9. To have Complaints heard in substantial accordance with these procedures.
10. To receive written notice of any delay of the process or limited extension of time frames.
11. To be informed of the finding, rationale, sanctions and remedial actions.
12. To report the matter to law enforcement (if applicable) and to have assistance in making that report.
13. To have an opportunity to request reconsideration of the summary determination ending the process, and appeal the determination of a hearing panel or decision-maker.
14. When the Complainant is not the reporting Party, the Complainant has full rights to participate in any Equity Resolution Process.
15. Additional Rights for Students as a Party:
  1. To request reasonable housing, living and other accommodations and remedies consistent with Section 600.040.H.
  2. To receive amnesty for minor student misconduct that is ancillary to the incident, at the discretion of the Equity Officer.
16. Additional Rights for Hearing Panel Resolution:
  1. To receive notice of a hearing.
  2. To have the names of witnesses that may participate in the hearing and copies of all documentary evidence gathered in the course of the investigation and any investigative report prior to the hearing.
  3. To be present at the hearing, which right may be waived by either written notification to the Hearing Officer or by failure to appear.
  4. To have present an Equity Support Person during the hearing and to consult with such Equity Support Person during the hearing.
  5. To request to have an Equity Support Person of the University’s selection appointed for a Student Party where the Student Party does not have an Equity Support Person of their own choice at a hearing.
  6. To testify at the hearing or refuse to testify at the hearing.
  7. To have an equal opportunity to present witnesses and documents deemed relevant by the Hearing Officer, and to question witnesses present and testifying at the hearing.
  8. To request that the hearing be held virtually, with technology enabling participants simultaneously to see and hear each other.
Role of Equity Support Persons. Each Complainant and Respondent is allowed to have one Equity Support Person of their choice present with them for all Equity Resolution Process interviews, meetings and proceedings. The Parties may select whomever they wish to serve as their Equity Support Person, including an attorney or parent.

If requested by a Student Party, the Equity Officer may assign an Equity Support Person to explain the Equity Resolution process and attend interviews, meetings and proceedings with a Student Party. University Equity Support Person(s) are administrators, faculty, or staff at the University trained on the Equity Resolution Process. The Parties may not require that the assigned Equity Support Person have specific qualifications such as being an attorney. An Equity Support Person cannot be called upon as a witness by a Party in a hearing to testify about matters learned while that individual was acting in their capacity as an Equity Support Person.

The Equity Support Person may not make a presentation or represent the Complainant or Respondent during the hearing. At the hearing, the Parties are expected to ask and respond to questions on their own behalf, without representation by the Equity Support Person. The Equity Support Person may consult with the Party quietly or in writing, or outside the hearing during breaks, but may not speak on behalf of the Party to the hearing panelists. If the Equity Support Person fails to follow these guidelines, they will be warned or dismissed from the hearing at the discretion of the Hearing Officer.
Investigation. Upon the initiation of a formal investigation, the Equity Officer will promptly appoint a trained Investigator or a team of trained Investigators to investigate the Complaint.

The burden of proof and the burden of gathering evidence sufficient to reach a determination regarding responsibility rests on the University.

The University cannot access, consider, disclose, or otherwise use a Party’s records that are made or maintained by a physician, psychiatrist, 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 for use in the Equity Resolution process.

The Parties are not prohibited from discussing the allegations under investigation or from gathering and presenting relevant evidence. The Parties may present witnesses and other inculpatory and exculpatory evidence; all such evidence must be relevant.

A Party whose participation is expected or invited at a hearing, interview, or other meeting, shall receive written notice of the date, time, location, participants, and purpose of all hearings, investigative interviews, or other meetings, with sufficient time for the Party to prepare to participate.

The Parties may be accompanied to any related meeting or interview by an Equity Support Person of their choice, who may be, but is not required to be, an attorney; however, the Equity Support Person may only participate in the proceedings as set forth in this policy.

The Investigator(s) will make reasonable efforts to conduct interviews with the Parties and relevant witnesses, obtain available evidence and identify sources of expert information, if necessary. The Investigator(s) will provide an investigative report to the Equity Officer. This report may contain the Investigator’s observations regarding the credibility of the Complainant, the Respondent, and any witnesses interviewed.

The final investigative report will fairly summarize the relevant evidence.

All investigations will be thorough, reliable and impartial. All interviews shall be recorded. In the event that recording is not possible due to technological issues, the investigator shall take thorough notes and such notes shall be provided to the Parties in lieu of recordings. The investigator shall document the reason the recording was not possible and such documentation shall become part of the Record of the Case.

The investigation of reported discrimination or harassment should be completed expeditiously, normally within thirty (30) business days of the filing of the Complaint. Investigation of a Complaint may take longer based on the nature and circumstances of the Complaint.
Impact of Optional Report to Law Enforcement. A delay may also occur when criminal charges on the basis of the same behaviors that invoke this process are being investigated, to allow for evidence collection by the law enforcement agency. However, University action will not typically be altered or precluded on the grounds that civil cases or criminal charges involving the same incident have been filed or that such charges have been dismissed or reduced.

The Equity Officer will not wait for the conclusion of a criminal investigation or criminal proceeding to begin the Equity Resolution process. However, an Equity investigation and resolution process may be temporarily delayed for good cause, which can include concurrent law enforcement activity. In such instances, written notice of the delay or extension with reasons for the action will be sent to each Party.

If delayed, the Equity Officer will promptly resume the Equity investigation as soon as notified by the law enforcement agency that it has completed the evidence-gathering process. The Equity Officer will implement appropriate supportive measures during the law enforcement agency’s investigation period to provide for the safety of all Parties, the University community and the avoidance of retaliation, discrimination, or harassment.
Summary Resolution. During or upon completion of investigation, the Equity Officer will review the investigation which may include meeting with the Investigator(s). The investigative report is not provided to the Parties during Summary Resolution, but is provided to the Parties at either the Administrative Resolution or Hearing Panel Resolution. Based on that review, the Equity Officer will make a summary determination whether, based on the evidence gathered, there is a sufficient basis to proceed with the Complaint that the Respondent is responsible for violating the University’s Anti-Discrimination Policies.

If the Equity Officer determines that there is a sufficient basis to proceed with the Complaint, then the Equity Officer will direct the process to continue. The Complaint will then be resolved through either Conflict Resolution, Administrative Resolution, or Hearing Panel Resolution. There is no right to request reconsideration or appeal the summary determination to continue the process.

If the Equity Officer determines that there is an insufficient basis to proceed with the Complaint, then the process will end and the Complainant and Respondent will simultaneously be sent written notification of the determination and advised of their right to request reconsideration. The Equity Officer may counsel and suggest monitoring or training opportunities to correct for inappropriate behavior that does not rise to the level of a violation.

The Parties may request that the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer reconsider summary determination ending the process by filing a written request with the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer within five (5) business days of notice of the summary determination. If the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer decides there is a sufficient basis to proceed with the Complaint, the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer will reverse the determination ending the process and direct the process to continue pursuant to this policy. The Equity Resolution Appellate Officer will simultaneously send the Parties notice of their decision. This decision to continue the process lies in the sole discretion of the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer and such decision is final. Further reconsideration of such decision is not permitted.

If the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer agrees with the summary determination ending the process by the Equity Officer that there is not a sufficient basis to proceed with the Complaint, then the process will end and the Complainant and the Respondent will simultaneously be sent written notification of the decision. This decision to end the process lies in the sole discretion of the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer and such decision is final. Further reconsideration of such decision is not permitted.
Conflict Resolution. The Parties may choose to engage in Conflict Resolution at any time during the Equity Resolution Process. The decision of the Parties to engage in Conflict Resolution must be voluntary, informed, and in writing. The Parties are not required to engage in Conflict Resolution as a condition of enrollment or continuing enrollment, or employment or continuing employment, or enjoyment of any other right. The Parties are not required to waive their right to an investigation of a Complaint or a right to a hearing. It is not necessary to pursue Conflict Resolution prior to pursuing the Administrative or Hearing Panel Resolution Process and either Party can stop the Conflict Resolution Process at any time and request either the Administrative Resolution Process or Hearing Panel Resolution Process. Conflict Resolution is never available to resolve allegations that an employee sexually harassed or engaged in sexual misconduct with a student. Upon receiving a request for Conflict Resolution, the Equity Officer will determine if Conflict Resolution is appropriate based on the willingness of the Parties, the nature of the conduct at issue and the susceptibility of the conduct to Conflict Resolution.

In Conflict Resolution, which includes mediation or facilitated dialogue, a neutral facilitator will foster dialogue with the Parties to an effective resolution, if possible. The Complainant’s and the Respondent’s Equity Support Person may attend the Conflict Resolution meeting. The Parties will abide by the terms of the agreed upon resolution. Failure to abide by the terms of the agreed upon resolution may be referred to the Equity Officer for review and referral to the appropriate University Process for discipline or sanctions. The Equity Officer will keep records of any Conflict Resolution that is reached.

In the event the Parties are unable to reach a mutually agreeable resolution, the matter will be referred back to the Administrative or Hearing Panel Resolution process. The content of the Parties’ discussion during the Conflict Resolution Process will be kept confidential in the event the matter proceeds to the Administrative or Hearing Panel Resolution processes. The Parties’ agreement to participate in, refusal to participate in, or termination of participation in Conflict Resolution shall not be factors in any subsequent decisions regarding whether a policy violation occurred.

Among the resolutions which may be reached at this stage (or at any point prior to a finding through Administrative or Hearing Panel Resolution), the Respondent may voluntarily request to permanently separate from the University of Missouri System. If the Equity Officer accepts the Respondent’s proposal, the Respondent must sign a Voluntary Permanent Separation and General Release agreement to effectuate their separation and terminate the Equity Resolution process.
Procedural Details for Administrative Resolution and Hearing Panel Resolution. For both the Administrative Resolution and Hearing Panel Resolution, which are described in more detail below, the following will apply:
1. The standard of proof will be “preponderance of the evidence,” defined as determining whether evidence shows it is more likely than not that a policy violation occurred.
2. The Respondent is presumed not responsible for the alleged conduct until a determination regarding responsibility is made at the conclusion of the Equity Resolution process.
3. The decision-maker has the discretion to determine the relevance of any witness or documentary evidence and may exclude information that is irrelevant, immaterial, cumulative, or more prejudicial than informative. In addition, the following rules shall apply to the introduction of evidence:
  1. Questions and evidence about the Complainant’s pre-disposition or prior sexual behavior are not relevant, unless such questions and evidence about the Complainant’s prior sexual behavior are offered to prove that someone other than the Respondent committed conduct alleged by the Complainant, or if 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.
  2. Character evidence is information that does not directly relate to the facts at issue, but instead reflects upon the reputation, personality, or qualities of an individual, including honesty. Such evidence regarding either Party’s character is of limited utility and shall not be admitted unless deemed relevant by the decision-maker.
  3. Incidents or behaviors of a Party not directly related to the possible violation(s) will not be considered unless they show a pattern of related misconduct. History of related misconduct by a Party that shows a pattern may be considered only if deemed relevant by the decision-maker.
  4. 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 or maintained in connection with the provision of treatment to the Party, may not be used without that Party’s express consent.
  5. The decision-maker shall not require, allow, rely upon, or otherwise use questions or evidence that constitute, or seek disclosure of, information protected under a legally recognized privilege, unless the person holding such privilege has waived the privilege.
4. The Respondent may not directly question the Complainant and the Complainant may not directly question the Respondent. However, if both Complainant and Respondent request the opportunity, direct questioning between the Parties will be permitted in the Hearing Panel Resolution Process. Otherwise written questions will be directed to Hearing Officer, and those questions deemed appropriate and relevant will be asked on behalf of the requesting Party.
5. In the Administrative Resolution Process, the Respondent and the Complainant may provide a list of questions for the decision-maker to ask the other Party. If those questions are deemed appropriate and relevant, they may be asked on behalf of the requesting Party; answers to such questions will be shared with the requesting Party.
6. At any time prior to the deadline in the Notice of Administrative Resolution, the Complainant and/or the Respondent may request that the Complaint shift from the Administrative Resolution process to the Hearing Panel Resolution process. Upon receipt of such timely request from either Party, the Complaint will shift to the Hearing Panel Resolution Process.
7. The Resolution Processes may proceed regardless of whether the Respondent chooses to participate in the investigation, the finding or the hearing.
8. The Administrative Resolution or Hearing Panel Resolution Process will normally be completed within a reasonably prompt time period, not to exceed one hundred twenty (120) days, following the Equity Officer’s receipt of a Complaint. Unusual delays will be promptly communicated to both Parties.
9. For good cause, the decision-maker may, in their discretion, grant reasonable extensions to the time frames and limits provided.
Administrative Resolution:
1. Administrative Resolution can be pursued for any behavior that falls within the University’s Anti-Discrimination Policies. Administrative Resolution may be used when both Parties elect to resolve the Complaint using the Administrative Resolution Process.
2. The Administrative Resolution process consists of:
  1. A prompt, thorough and impartial investigation;
  2. A separate meeting with each Party and their Equity Support Person, if any, and the decision-maker, if requested;
  3. A written finding by the decision-maker on each of the alleged policy violations:
    
    (1) For Faculty Respondents by the Provost (or Designee)
    (2) For Student/Student Organization Respondents by the Equity Officer
  4. A written finding on sanctions for findings of responsibility:
    
    (1) For Faculty Respondents by the Provost
    (2) For Student/Student Organization Respondents by the Equity Officer
3. At least fifteen (15) business days prior to meeting with the decision-maker, or if no meeting is requested, at least fifteen (15) business days prior to the decision-maker rendering a finding(s), the decision-maker will send a letter (Notice of Administrative Resolution) to the Parties containing the following information:
  1. A description of the alleged violation(s) and applicable policy or policies that are alleged to have been violated.
  2. The name of the decision-maker.
  3. Reference to or attachment of the applicable procedures.
  4. A copy of the final investigative report.
  5. The option and deadline of ten (10) business days from the date of the notice to request a meeting with the decision-maker.
  6. An indication that the Parties may have the assistance of an Equity Support Person of their choosing at the meeting with the decision-maker, though the Equity Support Person’s attendance at the meeting is the responsibility of the respective Parties.
  7. The option and the deadline of ten (10) business days from the date of the Notice to request in writing that the matter be referred to the Hearing Panel Resolution process. If neither Party requests the Hearing Panel Resolution Process within the required time period, the matter will be decided through the Administrative Resolution Process and the right to the Hearing Panel Resolution Process is waived.
4. The Notice of Administrative Resolution will be sent to each Party by email to their University-issued email account, or by the method of notification previously designated in writing by the Party. Notice is presumptively deemed delivered, when: 1) provided in person 2) emailed to the individual to their University-issued email account or 3) when sent via the alternate method of notification specified by the Party.
5. Within ten (10) business days from the date of the Notice of Administrative Resolution, the Parties have the right to have the matter referred to the Hearing Panel Resolution Process. If neither Party requests the Hearing Panel Resolution Process within the required time period, the matter will be decided through the Administrative Resolution Process and the right to the Hearing Panel Resolution Process is waived.
6. The decision-maker can, but is not required to, meet with and question the Investigator and any identified witnesses. The decision-maker may request that the Investigator conduct additional interviews and/or gather additional information. The decision-maker will attempt to meet separately with the Complainant and the Respondent, and their Equity Support Person, if any, to review the alleged policy violations and the investigative report. The Respondent may choose to admit responsibility for all or part of the alleged policy violations at any point in the process. If the Respondent admits responsibility, in whole or in part, the decision-maker will render a finding that the individual is in violation of University policy for the admitted conduct. For any disputed violations, the decision-maker will render a finding utilizing the preponderance of the evidence standard. For Faculty Respondents, the Provost’s Designee may recommend appropriate sanctions and remedial actions but only the Provost will find sanctions or remedial actions. The findings and sanctions are subject to appeal.
7. The decision-maker will inform the Respondent and the Complainant simultaneously of the finding on each of the alleged policy violations and the finding of sanctions, if applicable, in writing by email to the Party’s University-issued email account, or by the method of notification previously designated in writing by the Party. Notice is presumptively deemed delivered, when: 1) provided in person 2) emailed to the individual to their University-issued email account or 3) when sent via the alternate method of notification specified by the Party.
8. Either Party may appeal a decision under Administrative Resolution in accordance with Section T of this policy.
Hearing Panel Resolution
1. Equity Resolution Hearing Panelist Pool. Each University will create and annually train a pool of not less than five (5) faculty and five (5) administrators and/or staff to serve as hearing panel members in the Hearing Panel Resolution Process. The faculty hearing panel members selected by the Chancellor (or Designee) shall be selected from a list of no less than ten (10) faculty members proposed by the faculty council/senate. Panelists are selected by the Chancellor (or Designee) and serve a renewable two-year term. Selection of hearing panel pool members shall be made with an attempt to recognize the diversity of the University community. Hearing Panel members from one University may be asked to serve on a hearing panel involving another University.
  
  The Chancellor (or Designee) will select a Hearing Panelist Pool Chair (“Pool Chair”). The Pool Chair randomly selects and coordinates the hearing panel members to serve on the Hearing Panel for a specific Formal Complaint. The Pool Chair may serve as a panel member for a specific Formal Complaint.
  
  Administrators, faculty, and staff will be removed from the Hearing Panelist Pool if they fail to satisfy the annual training requirements, as determined by the Equity Officer. Under such circumstances, the Equity Officer will notify the Chancellor (or Designee), who will inform the administrator, faculty, or staff member of the discontinuation of their term.
2. Equity Resolution Hearing Panel (“Hearing Panel”). When a Complaint is not resolved through the Administrative Resolution Process, the Hearing Panelist Pool Chair will randomly select two (2) members from the Hearing Panelist Pool to serve on the specific Hearing Panel together with the Hearing Officer. A good faith attempt will be made for the Hearing Panel to include at least one faculty member and one administrator or staff member. Up to two (2) alternates may be designated to sit in throughout the process as needed. The University reserves the right to have its attorney present during the hearing and during deliberations to advise the Hearing Panel.
3. Notice of Hearing.
  1. At least twenty (20) business days prior to the hearing, the Equity Officer will send a letter (Notice of Hearing) to the Parties with the following information:
    
    (1) A description of the alleged violation(s) and applicable policy or policies that are alleged to have been violated.
    (2) A description of or attachment of the applicable procedures.
    (3) A statement that the Parties may have the assistance of an Equity Support Person of their choosing, at the hearing; at the hearing, though the Equity Support Person’s attendance at the hearing is the responsibility of the respective Parties.
    (4) The time, date and location of the hearing.
    (5) A list of the names of each of the Hearing Panel members, including the Hearing Officer, and alternates, and information on how to raise an objection to any member of the Hearing Panel and the timeline in which to raise any objections.
    (6) A copy of the final investigative report and exhibits.
    (7) Notification to the Parties that all of the evidence gathered in the course of the investigation that is directly related to the allegations is available to the Parties and instructions regarding how to request access to that information.
    (8) Notice that the Parties may request a virtual hearing and/or any necessary accommodations.
  2. The Notice of Hearing letter will be sent to each Party by email to their University-issued email account, or by the method of notification previously designated in writing by the Party. Notice is presumptively deemed delivered, when: 1) provided in person, 2) emailed to the individual to their University-issued email account, or 3) when sent via the alternate method of notification specified by the Party.
4. Pre-Hearing Witness List and Documentary Evidence.
  1. At least fifteen (15) business days prior to the hearing, the Complainant and Respondent will provide to the Investigator a list of the names of the proposed witnesses and copies of all proposed documentary evidence that a Party intends to call or use at the hearing.
  2. At least ten (10) business days prior to the hearing, the Investigator will provide to each Party the names of proposed witnesses and proposed documentary evidence that the other Party intends to call or use at the hearing.
  3. No employee or student, directly or through others, should take any action which may interfere with the investigation or hearing procedures. Employees and students are prohibited from attempted or actual intimidation or harassment of any potential witness. Failure to adhere to these requirements may lead to disciplinary action, up to and including expulsion or termination.
  4. At least five (5) business days prior to the hearing date, the final investigative report and all exhibits will be provided to the Hearing Panel members.
5. Objection to or Recusal of Hearing Panel Member.
  1. Hearing Panel members, including the Hearing Officer, shall not have a conflict of interest or bias for or against Complainants or Respondents generally or an individual Complainant or Respondent. If a Hearing Panel member feels that they have a conflict of interest or bias, or cannot make an objective determination, they must recuse themselves from the proceedings in advance of the hearing.
  2. The Parties will have been given the names of the Hearing Panel members in the Notice of Hearing. Should any Complainant or Respondent object to any panelist, they must raise all objections, in writing, to the Equity Officer at least fifteen (15) business days prior to the hearing.
  3. Hearing panel members will only be unseated and replaced if the Equity Officer concludes that good cause exists for the removal of a panel member. Good cause may include, but is not limited to, bias that would preclude an impartial hearing or circumstances in which the Hearing Panel member’s involvement could impact the Party’s work or learning environment due to current or potential interactions with the Hearing Panel member (e.g., a panel member being in the same department as either Party). If the Equity Officer determines that a Hearing Panel member other than the Hearing Officer should be unseated and replaced, then the Equity Officer will ask the Hearing Panel Pool Chair to randomly select another member from the pool to serve on the Hearing Panel. If the Equity Officer determines that the Hearing Officer should be unseated and replaced, the Equity Officer shall select an alternate Hearing Officer to serve on the Hearing Panel. The Equity Officer will provide a written response to all Parties addressing any objections to the Hearing Panel members.
6. Request for Alternative Attendance or Questioning Mechanisms. The Hearing Officer, in consultation with the Parties and investigators, may decide in advance of the hearing that certain witnesses do not need to be physically present if their testimony can be adequately summarized by the Investigator(s) in the investigative report or during the hearing. All Parties will have ample opportunity to present facts and arguments in full and question all present witnesses during the hearing, though formal cross-examination is not used between the Parties.
  
  All hearings will be live. However, at the request of either Party, or by the University’s designation, the live hearing may occur with the Parties located in separate rooms with technology enabling the Hearing Panel and their legal advisor, if any, the Parties and their Equity Support Person, and the Investigator, to simultaneously see and hear the Party or the witness answering questions. Should any hearing take place in this manner, the Equity Officer (or Designee) shall be in charge of the technology during the hearing. The University will make reasonable accommodations for the Parties in keeping with the principles of equity and fairness.
7. Requests to Reschedule the Hearing Date. For good cause, the Hearing Officer may grant requests to reschedule the hearing date.
8. Conduct of Hearing. The Hearing Officer shall preside at the hearing, call the hearing to order, call the roll of the Hearing Panel and alternates in attendance, ascertain the presence or absence of the Investigator, the Complainant and the Respondent, confirm receipt of the Notice of Allegations and Notice of Hearing by the Parties, report any extensions requested or granted, and establish the presence of any Equity Support Persons. Formal rules of evidence shall not apply.
  1. Order of Evidence. The order of evidence shall be the following:
    
    (1) Investigator’s Report and Testimony. The Investigator(s) will first present the written investigative report and may give a narrative report of the investigation, and then be subject to questioning by the Complainant, the Respondent and the Hearing Panel. The Investigator(s) may also call witnesses who will be subject to questioning by the Investigator, the Complainant, the Respondent and the Hearing Panel. The Investigator may also submit documentary evidence. The investigator(s) will remain present during the entire hearing process.
    (2) Complainant’s Evidence. The Complainant may give testimony and be subject to questioning by the Investigator, the Respondent (through the Hearing Officer as discussed in Section 600.040.P above) and the Hearing Panel. The Complainant may also call and question witnesses who may also then be questioned by the Respondent, the Investigator and the Hearing Panel. The Complainant may also submit documentary evidence.
    (3) Respondent’s Evidence. The Respondent may give testimony and be subject to questioning by the Investigator, the Complainant (through the Hearing Officer as discussed in Section 600.040.P above) and the Hearing Panel. The Respondent may also call and question witnesses who may also then be questioned by the Complainant, the Investigator and the Hearing Panel. The Respondent may also submit documentary evidence.
    (4) Record of Hearing. The Hearing Officer shall arrange for recording of the hearing, whether by audio, video, digital or stenographic means. The recording of the hearing will become part of the Record of the Case in the Section 600.040 Process.
9. Process Rules and Rights of the Hearing Panel.
  1. The relevancy and admissibility of any evidence offered at the hearing shall be determined by the Hearing Officer, whose ruling shall be final, unless the Hearing Officer shall present the question to the Hearing Panel at the request of a member of the Hearing Panel, in which event, the ruling of the Hearing Panel by majority vote shall be final.
  2. To question witnesses or evidence introduced by the Investigator, the Complainant or the Respondent at any time during the hearing process.
  3. To call additional witnesses and submit documentary evidence.
  4. To exclude a witness proposed by the Investigator, the Complainant or the Respondent if it is determined their testimony would be redundant or not relevant.
  5. To dismiss any person from the hearing who interferes with or obstructs the hearing or fails to abide by the rulings of the Hearing Officer.
  6. To have present a legal advisor to the Hearing Panel, who shall be designated by the Office of the General Counsel.
  7. To have the names of witnesses that may be called by the Investigator, the Complainant and the Respondent, all relevant documentary evidence that may be introduced by those Parties, and a complete copy of the investigative report at least five (5) business days prior to the hearing.
  8. Procedural questions which arise during the hearing and which are not covered by these general rules shall be determined by the Hearing Officer, whose ruling shall be final unless the Hearing Officer shall present the question to the Hearing Panel at the request of a member of the Hearing Panel, in which event, the ruling of the Hearing Panel by majority vote shall be final.
10. Findings of the Hearing Panel.
  1. The Hearing Panel will deliberate with no others present, except any legal advisor to the Hearing Panel, to find whether the Respondent is responsible or not responsible for the policy violation(s) in question. The Hearing Panel will base its finding on a preponderance of the evidence (i.e., whether it is more likely than not that the Respondent committed each alleged violation).
  2. If a Student or Student Organization Respondent is found responsible by a majority of the Hearing Panel, the Hearing Panel will determine the appropriate sanctions which will be imposed by the Equity Officer. If a Faculty Respondent is found responsible by a majority of the Hearing Panel, the Hearing Panel will recommend appropriate sanctions to the Provost, who will determine and impose the appropriate sanctions.
  3. The Hearing Officer will prepare a written determination regarding responsibility (“Hearing Panel Decision") and deliver it to the Provost (or Designee) (for Faculty Respondents) or the Equity Officer (for Student Respondents) detailing the following:
    
    (1) Identification of the allegations potentially constituting discrimination or harassment, as defined in CRR 600.010, and the determination of the Hearing Panel.
    (2) A description of the procedural steps taken from the receipt of the Complaint through the determination, including any notifications to the Parties, interviews with Parties and witnesses, site visits, methods used to gather other evidence and hearings held;
    (3) Findings of fact supporting the determination and any information the Hearing Panel excluded from its consideration and why;
    (4) Conclusions regarding the application of the University’s Anti-Discrimination policies to the facts;
    (5) A statement of, and rationale for, the result as to each allegation, including a determination regarding responsibility;
    (6) For Student Respondents, any disciplinary sanctions to be imposed on the Respondent, and whether remedies designed to restore or preserve equal access to the University’s education programs or activities will be provided by the University to the Complainant;
    (7) For Faculty Respondents, any disciplinary sanctions the Hearing Panel recommends to be imposed on the Respondent and any recommended remedies designed to restore or preserve equal access to the University’s education programs or activities to be provided by the University to the Complainant; and
    (8) The procedures and permissible bases for the Complainant and the Respondent to appeal.
  4. The Hearing Panel Decision will be provided to the Equity Officer (for Student Respondents) within five (5) business days of the end of deliberations. The Hearing Panel Decision will be provided to the Provost (or Designee) (for Faculty Respondents) within five (5) business days of the end of deliberations.
  5. The Provost (or Designee) (for Faculty Respondents) or the Equity Officer (for Student Respondents) will inform the Respondent and the Complainant simultaneously of the Hearing Panel Decision and the Provost’s finding of sanctions, if applicable, within five (5) business days of receipt of the Hearing Panel Decision; such notification will be sent in writing by email to the Party’s University-issued email account, or by the method of notification previously designated in writing by the Party. Notice is presumptively deemed delivered, when: 1) provided in person 2) emailed to the individual to their University-issued email account or 3) when sent via the alternate method of notification specified by the Party.
  6. The Hearing Panel Decision will become final either on the date that the Parties are provided with the written determination of the result of the appeal, if an appeal is filed, or if an appeal is not filed, the date on which an appeal would no longer be considered timely.
  7. The Equity Officer is responsible for effective implementation of any remedies.
Sanctions and Remedial Actions.
1. Factors Considered When Finding Sanctions/Remedial Actions. When recommending or imposing sanctions and/or remedial actions, factors to consider include but are not limited to the following:
  1. The nature, severity of, and circumstances surrounding the violation;
  2. The disciplinary history of the Respondent;
  3. The need for sanctions/remedial actions to bring an end to the conduct;
  4. The need for sanctions/remedial actions to prevent the future recurrence of conduct;
  5. The need to remedy the effects of the conduct on the Complainant and the University community; and
  6. Any other information deemed relevant by the decision-maker(s).
2. Types of Sanctions.
  1. The following sanctions may be imposed upon any Faculty Member found to have violated the University’s Anti-Discrimination Policies. Multiple sanctions may be imposed for any single violation. Sanctions include but are not limited to:
    
    (1) Warning - verbal or written;
    (2) Performance Improvement Plan;
    (3) Required counseling;
    (4) Required training or education;
    (5) Loss of annual pay increase;
    (6) Loss of supervisory responsibility;
    (7) Recommendation of discipline in a training program, including recommendation of termination, suspension or other corrective or remedial actions;
    (8) For Non-Regular Faculty, immediate termination of term contract and employment;
    (9) For Regular, Untenured Faculty, immediate termination of term contract and employment. Notice of not reappointing would not be required;
    (10) Suspension without pay;
    (11) Non-renewal of appointment; and
    (12) For Regular, Tenured Faculty, suspension without pay, removal from campus and referral to the Chancellor to initiate dismissal for cause as detailed in Section 310.060 of the Collected Rules and Regulations.
  2. The following sanctions may be imposed upon any Respondent Student or Respondent Student Organization found to have violated the University’s Anti-Discrimination Policies. Multiple sanctions may be imposed for any single violation. Sanctions include but are not limited to:
    
    (1) Warning. A notice in writing to the Respondent Student or Respondent Student Organization that there is or has been a violation of institutional regulations.
    (2) Probation. A written reprimand for violation of specified regulations. Probation is for a designated period of time and includes the probability of more severe sanctions if the Respondent Student or Respondent Student Organization is found to be violating any institutional regulation(s) during the probationary period.
    (3) Loss of Privileges. Denial of specified privileges for a designated period of time.
    (4) Restitution. Compensating the University for loss, damage, or injury to University property. This may take the form of appropriate service and/or monetary or material replacement.
    (5) Discretionary Sanctions. Work assignments, service to the University, or other related discretionary assignments, or completion of educational programming or counseling.
    (6) Residence Hall Suspension. Separation of the Respondent Student from the residence halls for a definite period of time, after which the Respondent Student is eligible to return. Conditions for readmission may be specified.
    (7) Residence Hall Expulsion. Permanent separation of the Respondent Student from the residence halls.
    (8) Campus Suspension. Respondent Student is suspended from being allowed on a specific University campus for a definite period of time. Logistical modifications consistent with the sanction imposed, may be granted at the discretion of the Chief Student Affairs Officer (or Designee).
    (9) University System Suspension. Separation of the Respondent Student from the University System for a definite period of time, after which the Respondent Student is eligible to return. Conditions for readmission may be specified.
    (10) Withdrawal of Recognition. Respondent Student Organization loses its Official Approval as a recognized student organization. May be either temporary or permanent.
    (11) University System Expulsion. Permanent and complete separation (i.e., not eligible for online courses either) of the Respondent Student from the University System.
  3. Remedial Actions. The following remedial actions may also be imposed to address the effects of the violation(s) of the University’s Anti-Discrimination Policies on the Complainant. Such remedial actions will vary depending on the circumstances of the policy violation(s), but may include:
    
    (1) Where the Complainant is a student:
    
    (a) Permitting the student to retake courses;
    (b) Providing tuition reimbursement;
    (c) Providing additional academic support;
    (d) Removal of a disciplinary action; and
    (e) Providing educational and/or on-campus housing accommodations.
    
    (2) Where the Complainant is an employee:
    
    (a) Removal of a disciplinary action;
    (b) Modification of a performance review;
    (c) Adjustment in pay;
    (d) Changes to the employee’s reporting relationships; and
    (e) Workplace accommodations.
    
    In addition, the University may offer or require training and/or monitoring as appropriate to address the effects of the violation(s) of the University’s Anti-discrimination Policies.
  4. When Implemented.
    
    (1) Sanctions imposed against Student Respondents are stayed until the end of any appeal period or once an appeal, if any, is final, unless the Equity Officer determines the sanctions should be imposed immediately.
    (2) Sanctions against Staff Respondents shall be implemented immediately.
    (3) Sanctions against Faculty Respondents shall be implemented immediately; however, for Regular, Tenured Faculty Respondents, the sanction of suspension without pay will be a suspension with pay while the appeal is pending, but not for the duration of any dismissal for cause proceedings.
    (4) When the sanction is termination, actual termination will be stayed until the end of any appeal period or once an appeal, if any, is final; however, the Respondent will be suspended without pay during any appeal period or once an appeal, if any, is final.
3. Withdrawal While Charges Pending. Should a Respondent decide to leave the University and not participate in the investigation and/or hearing without signing a Voluntary Permanent Separation and General Release Agreement and without the approval of the Equity Officer, the Complaint may be dismissed, or the Equity Officer may determine that the process will nonetheless proceed in the Respondent’s absence to a reasonable resolution and, if the Respondent is found responsible, the Respondent will not be permitted to return to the University unless all sanctions have been satisfied.
Appeal. Both Complainant and Respondent are allowed to appeal a determination regarding responsibility in the Administrative Resolution Process or the finding(s) in the Hearing Panel Resolution Process.
1. Grounds for appeal. Grounds for appeals are limited to the following:
  1. A procedural irregularity that affected the outcome of the matter (e.g., material deviation from established procedures, etc.);
  2. To consider new evidence that was not reasonably available at the time the determination regarding responsibility or dismissal was made that could affect the outcome of the matter;
  3. The Equity Officer, Investigator(s), or decision-maker(s) 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; or
  4. The sanctions fall outside the range typically imposed for this offense, or for the cumulative conduct record of the Respondent.
2. Requests for Appeal. Both the Complainant and the Respondent may appeal to the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer. The Equity Resolution Appellate Officer must not have a conflict of interest or bias for or against Complainants or Respondents generally or an individual Complainant or Respondent; if the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer does not believe that they can make an objective decision about an appeal, they should recuse themselves. For Student and Student Organization Respondents, the Chancellor (or Designee) shall appoint an alternate Equity Resolution Appellate Officer to hear the pending appeal; For Faculty Respondents, the President (or Designee) shall appoint an alternate Equity Resolution Appellate Officer to hear the pending appeal. All requests for appeal must be submitted in writing to the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer within five (5) business days of the delivery of the Notice of Administrative Resolution or Hearing Panel Decision. When any Party requests an appeal, the other Party will be notified and receive a copy of the request for appeal from the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer.
3. Response to Request for Appeal. Within five (5) business days of the delivery of the notice and copy of the request for appeal, the non-appealing Party may file a response to the request for appeal. The response can address that sufficient grounds for appeal have not been met and/or the merits of the appeal.
4. Review of the Request to Appeal. The Equity Resolution Appellate Officer will make an initial review of the appeal request(s). The Equity Resolution Appellate Officer will review the request for appeal to determine whether:
  1. The request is timely;
  2. The appeal is on the basis of any of the articulated grounds listed above; and
  3. When viewed in the light most favorable to the appealing Party, the appeal states grounds that could result in an adjusted finding or sanction.
  The Equity Resolution Appellate Officer will reject the request for appeal if any of the above requirements are not met. The decision to reject the request for appeal is final and further appeals and grievances are not permitted. The Equity Resolution Appellate Officer will render a written decision whether the request for appeal is accepted or rejected within fifteen (15) business days from receipt of the request for appeal. If no written decision is provided to the Parties within fifteen (15) business days from receipt of the request, the appeal will be deemed accepted.
5. Review of the Appeal. If all three requirements for appeal listed in Paragraph 4 above are met, the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer will accept the request for appeal and proceed with rendering a decision on the appeal applying the following additional principles:
  1. Appeals are not intended to be full re-hearings of the Complaint and are therefore deferential to the original findings. In most cases, appeals are confined to a review of the written documentation and Record of the Case, Administrative Resolution determination, or Hearing Panel Resolution, and relevant documentation regarding the grounds for appeal. Appeals granted based on new evidence should normally be remanded to the original decision- maker for reconsideration.
  2. The Equity Resolution Appellate Officer will normally render a written decision on the appeal to all Parties within ten (10) business days from accepting the request for appeal. In the event the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer is unable to render a written decision within ten (10) business days from accepting the request for appeal, the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer will promptly notify the Parties in writing of the delay.
  3. Once an appeal is decided, the outcome is final. Further appeals and grievances are not permitted.
6. Extensions of Time. For good cause, the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer may grant reasonable extensions of time (e.g.: 7-10 business days) to the deadlines in the appeal process. The Equity Resolution Appellate Officer will notify the Parties in writing if such extensions are granted.
Failure to Complete Sanctions/Comply with Interim and Long-term Remedial Actions. All Respondents are expected to comply with all sanctions and remedial actions within the time frame specified. Failure to follow through on these sanctions and remedial actions by the date specified, whether by refusal, neglect or any other reason, may result in additional sanctions and remedial actions through the applicable process.
Records. In implementing this policy, records of all Complaints, resolutions (including Conflict resolution and result therefrom, and Administrative Resolution and result therefrom), and hearings will be kept by the Equity Officer. For the purpose of review or appeal, the Record of the Case will be accessible at reasonable times and places to the Respondent and the Complainant. The Record of the Case will be kept for seven (7) years following final resolution.

Each Equity Officer, including the Equity Officer for the academic medical center, shall maintain statistical, de-identified data on the race, gender and age of each Party to a Complaint for that university/ academic medical center, and will report such data on an annual basis to the President of the University of Missouri. Additionally, statistical data relating to each university in the University of Missouri System shall be reported on an annual basis to that university’s Chancellor and chief officers for human resources, student affairs, and diversity, equity and inclusion; the academic medical center shall report such statistical data for the academic medical center on an annual basis to the Executive Vice-Chancellor for Health Affairs. Data relating to the University of Missouri System shall be reported on an annual basis to the University of Missouri System’s chief officers for human resources, student affairs, and diversity, equity and inclusion.
Dismissal for Cause Referral. If the recommended sanction for a Regular, Tenured Faculty member is referral to the Chancellor to initiate Dismissal for Cause, the Record of the Case will be forwarded to the appropriate Faculty Committee on Tenure. Because the Dismissal for Cause proceeding is not a re-hearing of the Complaint, the Record of the Case will be included as evidence and the findings will be adopted for proceeding as detailed in Section 310.060: Procedures in Case of Dismissal for Cause in the Collected Rules and Regulations.
Retaliation. The University strictly prohibits retaliation against any person for making any good faith report of discrimination or harassment, or for filing, testifying, assisting, or participating in any investigation or proceeding involving allegations of discrimination or harassment. For matters involving discrimination or harassment other than sex discrimination under this policy, employees have an obligation to cooperate with University officials including the Investigator, Equity Officer, Provost (or Designee), Hearing Panel, and/or the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer.

For matters involving sex discrimination under this policy, no person may intimidate, threaten, coerce, or discriminate against any individual for the purpose of interfering with any right or privilege secured by law, or because the individual has made a report or complaint, testified, assisted, or participated or refused to participate in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing. Intimidation, threats, coercion, or discrimination, including charges against an individual for policy violations that do not involve sex discrimination or sexual harassment, but arise out of the same facts or circumstances as a report or complaint of sex discrimination, or a report or Complaint of sexual harassment, for the purpose of interfering with any right or privilege secured by law, constitutes retaliation.

The University must keep confidential the identity of any individual who has made a report or complaint of sex discrimination, including any individual who has made a report or filed a Complaint of sexual harassment, any Complainant, any individual who has been reported to be the perpetrator of sex discrimination, any Respondent, and any witness, except as may be permitted by the FERPA statute, 20 U.S.C. 1232g, or FERPA regulations, 34 CFR part 99, or as required by law, or to carry out the purposes of applicable law, including the conduct of any investigation, hearing, or judicial proceeding arising thereunder. Complaints alleging retaliation may be filed with the Equity Officer in accordance with CRRs 600.010, 600.040, and 600.050.

Any person who engages in such retaliation shall be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including expulsion or termination, in accordance with applicable procedures. Any person who believes they have been subjected to retaliation is encouraged to notify the Equity Officer. The University will promptly investigate all complaints of retaliation in accordance with this policy.

The exercise of rights protected under the First Amendment does not constitute retaliation prohibited under this section.

Charging an individual with a policy violation for making a materially false statement in bad faith in the course of any proceedings under this policy does not constitute retaliation provided, however that a determination regarding responsibility, alone, is not sufficient to conclude that any Party made a materially false statement in bad faith.

600.040 Equity Resolution Process for Resolving Complaints of Discrimination and Harassment against a Faculty Member or Student or Student Organization - for matters involving conduct alleged to have occurred on or after August 14, 2020

Search Collected Rules: