VI. How a Complaint is Resolved

A. Initiating a Complaint

A Complaint may be filed with the IEX Office orally in person, by mail, or by email. Complainants are strongly encouraged, but not required, to submit a Complaint Form [pdf]. A Complainant may file a Complaint at any time, but significant delays between the time an incident occurs and conducting an investigation may impede or limit the availability of Relevant evidence and/or availability of witnesses.

Upon the filing of a Complaint, the IEX Office will contact the Complainant to confirm receipt of the Complaint and to confirm the allegations as understood by the IEX Office. Before initiating the grievance procedures, the IEX Office will review the Complaint to determine whether there is any basis to dismiss the Complaint, as detailed in Section VI.B below. Otherwise, the IEX Office will initiate the grievance procedures and commence an investigation as detailed in Section VI.C below. The Complainant may also wish to pursue the Alternative Resolution Process, an alternative track discussed further below, instead of or after filing a Complaint.

Consistent with Section VI.D.ii.e, when a complaint names a Respondent who is an on-going affiliate of the university who is not a Faculty member, Staff member, Student, or Participant in a Summer Program, such as a volunteer or contractor, the IEX Office will determine the appropriate manner of resolution in accordance with the university's commitment to a prompt and equitable process and consistent with any applicable state and federal law and regulation.

In certain circumstances, the IEX Office may file a Complaint and initiate an investigation in the absence of an identifiable Complainant or when a Complainant is unwilling to proceed with a Complaint. In making the determination to initiate a Complaint, the IEX Office may consider the following factors:

1. The Complainant's request not to proceed with the initiation of a Complaint;
2. The Complainant's reasonable safety concerns regarding the initiation of a Complaint;
3. The risk that additional acts of Prohibited Conduct would occur if a Complaint is not initiated;
4. The severity of the alleged Prohibited Conduct, including whether the alleged misconduct, if established, would require the removal of a Respondent from the university's campus or imposition of another Disciplinary Sanction to end the Prohibited Conduct and prevent its recurrence;
5. The age and relationship of the parties, including whether the Respondent is an Employee of the university;
6. The scope of the alleged Prohibited Conduct, including information suggesting a pattern, ongoing Prohibited Conduct, and/or Prohibited Conduct alleged to have impacted multiple individuals;
7. The availability of evidence to assist the Hearing Officer or other decisionmakers in determining whether Prohibited Conduct occurred;
8. Whether the university could end the alleged Prohibited Conduct and prevent its recurrence without initiating a Complaint; and
9. Whether the alleged Prohibited Conduct, if true, would constitute Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct.

After consideration, the IEX Office may initiate a Complaint and commence an investigation. If the Title IX Coordinator determines that the allegations in the Formal Complaint, if true, would constitute Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct, the Title IX Coordinator must commence an investigation as set forth below.

If the IEX Office decides to initiate a Complaint, the IEX Office will notify the Complainant (if identifiable) prior to the initiation of the Complaint in order to address any reasonable safety concerns, including via options for Supportive Measures under Section V.

The IEX Office may consolidate complaints of Prohibited Conduct against more than one Respondent, or by more than one Complainant against one or more Respondents, or by one party against another party ("cross complaints"), when the allegations of Prohibited Conduct arise out of the same alleged facts or circumstances. When the university receives a report of alleged conduct that could constitute Prohibited Conduct under this Policy and could also violate other university policies, the university, in its discretion, will determine which policy/ies and procedures apply and whether action will be taken under multiple policies.

Both the Complainant and the Respondent may select an Advisor of their choice to be present at any hearing or pre-hearing meetings or interviews. Details concerning the role of the Advisor are set forth in the applicable adjudication procedures under Section VI.D.

The Respondent is presumed to be Not Responsible for any alleged Prohibited Conduct until a determination is made at the conclusion of the adjudication procedures set forth in this Policy.

The university will not discipline a party, witness, or others who participate in the investigation or adjudication of a Complaint for making a false statement based solely on the determination of responsibility for Prohibited Conduct under this Policy (put another way, a determination that a Respondent was not responsible for a Policy violation does not, without more, establish that the Complainant or any other party or witness has made a false allegation or statement in bad faith). Allegations that an individual has provided a false statement must be separately reviewed under applicable university policy (e.g., the Carnegie Mellon Student Handbook, the Staff Handbook, or the Code of Business Ethics) and such allegations, in general, will be stayed until the completion of the underlying proceedings in this Policy. Allegations of a violation of the Consensual and Intimate Relationship Policy Regarding Undergraduate Students must be separately reviewed under that policy.

The IEX Office will establish and maintain on its website reasonably prompt time frames for the major stages of the Complaint process.

For Complainants of alleged Prohibited Conduct that, if true, would constitute Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct, the following additional requirements apply:

• Prior to the initiation of an investigation or an Alternative Resolution Process, the IEX Office must receive a Complaint that contains Complainant's physical or digital signature or otherwise indicates that the Complainant is the person filing the Complaint;
• If the Complainant is under the age of 18 and not enrolled in an undergraduate or graduate program, the university will ordinarily also contact the Complainant's parent or guardian, as permitted by law, to explain the process for filing a Formal Complaint; and
• At the time of filing the Complaint, the Complainant must be participating in or attempting to participate in the University's Programs or Activities. If the Complainant is not participating in or attempting to participate in the University's Programs or Activities at the time the Formal Complaint is filed, the Complaint may still be investigated and adjudicated under this Policy as Other Prohibited Conduct. These requirements do not apply to Complaints filed by the IEX Office.

For allegations of Prohibited that occurred before the effective date of this Policy, the matter will be investigated and adjudicated using the procedures set forth in this Section VI of this Policy. For the purpose defining conduct that constitutes a violation of policy (i) for allegations of Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct, that occurred before the effective date of this policy, the University will use the current definitions in Section VII of this Policy (ii) for allegations of Other Prohibited Conduct, the university will use the definitions in the applicable policy that was in effect at the time of the alleged conduct.

B. Dismissal and Withdrawal of a Complaint

For allegations of Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct, if at any time during the pendency of a Complaint the IEX Office determines that the allegation if true, would not constitute Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct; did not occur in the University's Programs and Activities; or did not occur against a person in the United States, the IEX Office must dismiss the allegation as it relates to Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct. For any dismissed allegation of Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct, the IEX Office must also determine whether the allegation would constitute Other Prohibited Conduct. If the IEX Office determines that the allegation would not constitute Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct but would constitute Other Prohibited Conduct, the allegation may then proceed as Other Prohibited Conduct.

At any time during the pendency of any Complaint, the IEX Office may dismiss the Complaint or specific allegations within a Complaint as detailed below:

1. The Respondent is not or is no longer a Student or Employee of the university;
2. The Complainant voluntarily requests to withdraw any/all allegations in writing and the IEX Office declines to initiate/continue the Complaint/grievance procedures, as described further below, and/or without the Complainant's withdrawn allegations, the conduct that remains alleged in the Complaint, if any, would not constitute Prohibited Conduct even if established;
3. Specific circumstances prevent the University from gathering evidence sufficient to reach a determination; or
4. The IEX Office determines that even if proven, the alleged conduct would not constitute Prohibited Conduct.

The following ground for dismissal applies only to Other Prohibited Conduct:

1. When the IEX Office determines that the Complainant has not made good faith effort to cooperate in advancing an investigation or hearing (e.g. Complainant is non-responsive), the IEX Office has discretion to dismiss the case. The Complainant must be provided a warning before a Complaint is dismissed on this ground.
2. After the conclusion of the investigation under Section VI.C., the IEX Office determines that the evidence collected during the investigation is insufficient to support the allegations, such that reasonable person could not conclude that Prohibited Conduct occurred.

Upon dismissal of a Complaint and/or upon determination that an allegation of sexual misconduct does not constitute Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct, the IEX Office will provide prompt written notice to the Complainant of the basis for the dismissal and the right to appeal the dismissal decision under Section VI.F. If the dismissal occurs after the Respondent has been issued a Notice of Allegations, the IEX Office will also provide such written notice to the Respondent.

If a Complaint is dismissed before the IEX Office has issued a Notice of Allegations to the Respondent, only the Complainant will have the opportunity to appeal the decision to dismiss the Complainant. If the Complaint is dismissed after the IEX Office issued a Notice of Allegations to the Respondent, the Complainant and Respondent will have an equal opportunity to appeal the dismissal decision.

A Complainant who filed a Complaint may request withdrawal of such complaint at any time by submitting a written request to the Investigator assigned to the case or the IEX Office. After a Complainant requests withdrawal of a Complaint, the IEX Office will review the matter, considering the same factors as specified in Section VI.A, to determine whether to grant the request for withdrawal or to continue the Complaint. If the IEX Office refuses a request by a Complainant to dismiss a Complaint, the Complainant will be notified in writing of the decision and rationale.

C. Investigation Procedures

When commencing an investigation, the Title IX Coordinator will appoint an investigator to review, assess, and investigate the Complaint (the "Investigator"). The Investigator may be a staff member in the IEX Office, a staff member in Human Resources, a staff member in another department at the university, or an external professional. The Title IX Coordinator is responsible for ensuring that the Investigator has been appropriately trained and is free of conflicts of interest or bias — for or against Complainants or Respondents generally, or a specific Complainant or Respondent — that would impair the investigation. If a party has concerns about bias in favor of or against a specific Complainant or Respondent, bias in favor of or against Complainants or Respondents generally, or a potential conflict of interest which involves the Title IX Coordinator, facilitator of an Alternative Resolution Process, investigator, decisionmaker, or appeals decisionmaker, the party should direct those concerns to the Title IX Coordinator. Concerns regarding bias or conflict of interest on the part of the Title IX Coordinator will be referred to the Vice Provost for Culture, Community and Engagement (or designee) for review.

The IEX Office will send the Complainant and Respondent a written Notice of Allegations. If in the course of an investigation, the IEX Office decides to investigate additional allegations of Prohibited Conduct not included within the original notice or if it is necessary to make revisions to the allegations, the IEX Office will issue an amended Notice of Allegations to the Complainant and Respondent. The issuance of a Notice of Allegations may be reasonably delayed as necessary to address any reasonable concerns for the safety of any person as a result of providing such notice.

The Notice of Allegations will include:

• information about the Alternative Resolution Process and grievance procedures;
• the identities of the parties involved in the incident(s), the conduct alleged to constitute Prohibited Conduct, and the date(s) and location(s) of the alleged incident(s), if known;
• information about the university's prohibition on Retaliation;
• a statement that the parties are entitled to an investigative report summarizing all Relevant evidence and retain the equal right to access such evidence upon request and, in cases involving Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct, to inspect all directly related evidence;
• a statement that the Respondent is presumed not responsible for the alleged Prohibited Conduct until a determination is made at the conclusion of the grievance procedures, after the parties have had an opportunity to present Relevant (not otherwise impermissible) evidence to a trained, impartial decisionmaker;
• notice that the Parties have the right to be accompanied by an Advisor of choice, who may be but need not be an attorney;
• notice that knowingly making false statements or submitting false information is prohibited;
• information about Supportive Measures;
• a statement regarding the standard of proof to be used in considering the facts and evidence;
• the range of possible Disciplinary Sanctions and Remedies; and
• information about the appeals process.

The Investigator will conduct an investigation and prepare a preliminary investigative report that fairly summarizes the Relevant evidence gathered during the investigation. The Investigator will, prior to any interviews or meetings with the parties, provide written notice of the date, time, location, and purpose of the interview or meeting, with sufficient time for the party to prepare for the interview or meeting. A Party's decision not to participate in the investigation, in whole or in part, will be documented in the investigative report.

Prior to preparing any report, the Investigator will request Relevant information from the parties as well as work to gather other Relevant available evidence. The ultimate responsibility for gathering available Relevant evidence rests with the university. Throughout the investigation, the university will provide both parties equal opportunity for the parties to present witnesses, including fact and expert witnesses, and other inculpatory and exculpatory evidence. The parties may offer testimony from an expert witness, as specified in Appendix B to this Policy.

The preliminary investigative report will be made available to the Complainant, Respondent, and their respective Advisors in electronic or hard-copy format. In cases involving Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct, all directly related evidence will also be made available to the Complainant, Respondent, and their respective Advisors for inspection and review in electronic or hard-copy format. Any Relevant evidence collected during the investigation will also be made available to the Complainant, Respondent, and their respective Advisors for inspection and review in electronic or hard-copy format. The Complainant and Respondent will have at least ten (10) calendar days to review and respond to the preliminary investigative report. The Investigator will consider any responses submitted by the Complainant, Respondent and their respective Advisors and prepare a final investigative report ("Investigative Report").

D. Adjudication Procedures

The specific procedures for adjudicating allegations of Prohibited Conduct are based upon the nature of the parties' relationship to the university.

1. Federal Rule Misconduct:

   For Allegations of Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct — the matter will be handled in accordance with the Procedures set forth in Section VI.E using the Hearing Procedures for the Adjudication of Discriminatory and Sexual Misconduct - Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct [pdf] and the Appeal Procedures set forth in Section VI.F. This subsection supersedes and controls over all other provisions of Section VI.D.
   
   In cases involving multiple allegations which include allegations of both Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct and Other Prohibited Conduct, the university reserves the right to decide whether to adjudicate all allegations in a single process under Section VI.D.i or to separately adjudicate the allegations of Other Prohibited Conduct under the applicable procedures in Section VI.D.ii.

2. Other Prohibited Conduct:
   For Allegations of Other Prohibited Conduct — The specific procedures for adjudicating allegations of Prohibited Conduct other than Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct (i.e., Other Prohibited Conduct) are based upon the nature of the Respondent's relationship to the university.
   1. Where the Respondent is a Student — the matter will be handled in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section VI.E using the Hearing Procedures for the Adjudication of Discriminatory and Sexual Misconduct – Other Prohibited Conduct [pdf] and the Appeal Procedures set forth in Section VI.F.
      
      When a Respondent is both a Student and an Employee (a "Student Employee"), the university will undertake a fact- and circumstance-specific inquiry to determine how the matter will be adjudicated, including consideration of whether the party's primary relationship with the university is to receive an education, and whether the alleged Prohibited Conduct occurred while the party was performing employment-related work. Typically, if a Respondent who is a Student Employee may experience a change in their employment status as a result of the outcome of a grievance process, but not a change in their student status, the matter will proceed as though the Respondent was a Staff member.
   2. Where the Respondent is a Faculty member — the matter will be handled in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section VI.E using the Hearing Procedures for the Adjudication of Discriminatory and Sexual Misconduct – Other Prohibited Conduct [pdf] and the Appeal Procedures set forth in Section VI.F.
   3. Where the Respondent is a Staff member — the IEX Office will send the Investigative Report to the Assistant Vice President of Human Resources, People & Organizational Effectiveness in Human Resources and the matter will be handled in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Staff Handbook, Volume II, Section 10c. The Assistant Vice President of Human Resources, People & Organizational Effectiveness also has discretion to refer the matter for live hearing in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section VI.E using the Hearing Procedures for the Adjudication of Discriminatory and Sexual Misconduct – Other Prohibited Conduct [pdf] and the Appeal Procedures set forth in Section VI.F.
   4. Where the Respondent is a Participant in a Summer Program — the matter will be handled in accordance with the Summer Programs Code of Conduct.
   5. Where the Respondent is an on-going affiliate of the university who is not a Faculty member, Staff member, Student, or Participant in a Summer Program — the IEX Office will determine the appropriate manner of resolution in accordance with the university's commitment to a prompt and equitable process and consistent with any applicable state and federal law and regulations.
3. Voluntary Acceptance of Responsibility:
   For any proceedings under Section VI.D, at any time prior to the rendering of a finding as to responsibility by a decisionmaker, the Respondent may indicate that they do not wish to contest the disciplinary case against them and accept responsibility for all or part of the Prohibited Conduct alleged. Respondent will thereafter be notified of the Disciplinary Sanctions imposed and whether Remedies will be provided.
   
   The Complainant and Respondent will be notified of the outcome as applicable based on the notice that would have been provided if the allegations had proceeded through the grievance process under Section VI.D.i or Section VI.D.ii.
   
   This decision may be appealed under Section VI.F only as to the severity of the sanction imposed. In the event that the Respondent accepts responsibility for only part of the Prohibited Conduct alleged, the remaining allegations will proceed through grievance process under Section VI.D.i or Section VI.D.ii. and Remedies and Disciplinary Sanctions for all the Prohibited Conduct at issue will be assigned at the conclusion of the matter in its entirety.

E. Live Hearing Procedures

The following procedures apply to live hearings held under this Policy, as indicated in Section VI.D.

Appointment of Hearing Officer

After reviewing the Investigative Report prepared under Section VI.C, the IEX Office will appoint a hearing officer ("Hearing Officer") who will be the decision-maker, responsible for conducting a review of the case, presiding over a live hearing if necessary, and making findings of fact and a determination of responsibility with respect to each allegation in the Complaint. The Hearing Officer may be a University employee or an external professional.

Conduct of the Hearing & Written Determination

The Hearing Officer will conduct a live hearing in accordance with the Hearing Procedures for the Adjudication of Discriminatory and Sexual Misconduct [pdf] (for cases under Section VI.D.i) or the Hearing Procedures for the Adjudication of Discriminatory and Sexual Misconduct – Other Prohibited Conduct [pdf] (for cases under Section VI.D.ii). The hearing will take place no sooner than ten (10) calendar days after the parties are provided with the Investigative Report.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the Hearing Officer will objectively evaluate all Relevant evidence, both inculpatory and exculpatory, and make findings of fact and a determination of responsibility with respect to each allegation. The determination of responsibility will be made using the preponderance of evidence standard.

If the Hearing Officer determines that the Respondent is responsible for any allegation, the Hearing Officer will contact the appropriate sanctioning officer, as specified below, to review the findings of fact and determination(s) regarding responsibility ("Sanctioning Officer"). The Sanctioning Officer will have sole responsibility for determining the appropriate Disciplinary Sanctions and any Remedies related to any finding of responsibility made by the Hearing Officer. The Sanctioning Officer will provide a written determination regarding Disciplinary Sanctions and/or Remedies to the Hearing Officer. If the Hearing Officer determines that the Respondent is not responsible for any of the allegations, the Sanctioning Officer will not be contacted. Where the appointed Hearing Officer is an Employee of the university, the same individual may be appointed to serve as both the Hearing Officer and Sanctioning Officer.

The applicable Sanctioning Officer is based on the nature of the Respondent's relationship to the university:

• Sanctioning Officer for Students: Associate Vice President of Student Affairs for Community Life or designee (in consultation with the Community Standards Review Committee)
• Sanctioning Officer for Staff: Assistant Vice President for Human Resources, People & Organizational Effectiveness or designee
• Sanctioning Officer for Faculty: Vice Provost for Faculty or designee

The Hearing Officer will prepare a written determination regarding the findings of fact and the determination regarding responsibility for each allegation, with rationale and appeals information. Where applicable, the written decision of the Sanctioning Officer regarding Disciplinary Sanctions and/or whether Remedies will be provided will be attached to or incorporated into the written determination prepared by the Hearing Officer.

Notice of Written Determination

The written determination will be provided to the IEX Office. Except as detailed below regarding cases involving Student-Respondents, the IEX Office is responsible for providing the Complainant and Respondent with a copy of the written determination. Both parties must be provided the written determination simultaneously.

For Cases Involving Student-Respondents — Depending on the nature of the category of alleged Prohibited Conduct, the right of the Complainant to receive notice of the outcome(s), as well as the right to appeal the outcome(s), is restricted by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).;

Consistent with FERPA, VAWA, and applicable Title IX regulations, in Student-Respondent cases the outcome(s) applicable to a Student-Respondent will be disclosed to the Complainant only for the following offenses under this Policy:

• Sexual Harassment, including
  • Quid Pro Quo Sexual Harassment,
  • Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment,
• Sexual Assault,
• Dating Violence,
• Domestic Violence,
• Stalking, and/or
• Retaliation where the underlying protected activity is related to the exercise of rights related to and/or Complaints of the foregoing.

Consequently, as required by FERPA, in Student-Respondent cases, the outcome(s) applicable to a Student-Respondent will not be disclosed and the Complainant cannot appeal such outcome(s) for the following offenses under this Policy:

• Violation of Protective Measures;
• Discrimination and/or Discriminatory Harassment
• Retaliation where the underlying protected activity is not related to alleged Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct, Sexual Assault, Dating Violence, Domestic Violence, Stalking, and/or the exercise of rights under the Title IX Regulations at 34 C.F.R. § 106.31.

For Student-Respondent cases, the IEX Office will provide the Student-Respondent with a complete copy of the written determination for all allegations. Where applicable, the IEX Office will coordinate with the Hearing Officer to edit or redact the written determination issued to the Complainant in order to remove information related to the outcome(s) of alleged offenses which the university is not permitted to disclose, per the list above. Regardless of the type of allegation, any outcomes that apply to the Complainant (e.g., Remedies) will be shared with the Complainant.

Additional Procedures for Disciplinary Sanctions Against Faculty Respondents

In the case of sanctions against a Faculty Respondent, the Disciplinary Sanctions determined by the Sanctioning Officer for Faculty will be provided to the President as recommended Disciplinary Sanctions. The President will take no action on the recommended Disciplinary Sanctions until either (i) the completion of any appeal filed by any party under Section VI.F or (ii) the deadline to file an appeal under Section VI.F passes without any appeal being filed. If an appeal is filed, the President or the President's designee will render a decision on the appeal consistent with the procedures in Section VI.F. If any Disciplinary Sanctions remain after the completion of the appeal or where no appeal is filed by the appeal deadline, the President will thereafter render a decision based on both the recommendation of the Sanctioning Officer for Faculty as well as the underlying findings of fact and determination(s) of responsibility by the Hearing Officer (or Appeal Officer, if applicable). If the President decides to initiate the procedure for dismissal for cause or for the imposition of another Disciplinary Sanction against a Faculty Respondent, the matter will then follow the process set forth in the subsection "Procedure" of the section of the Appointment and Tenure Policy of Carnegie Mellon University titled, "Dismissal for Cause and Other Sanctions," but will be subject to the "Exceptions" provision of that subsection such that no Ad-Hoc Committee will be required.

F. Appeal Procedures

Except as specified in Section VI.E for Student-Respondent cases, both the Complainant and Respondent have the right to file an appeal regarding (i) the determination under Section VI.E or (ii) the dismissal of a Complaint under Section VI.B. An appeal must be submitted in writing to the Office of the President (with a copy to the IEX Office) within seven (7) calendar days of the official notification of the determination under Section VI.B or Section VI.E.

The written appeal request must state the basis for the appeal. The basis for an appeal will be limited to one or more of the following:

• Procedural irregularity that affected the outcome of the matter;
• 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;
• The Title IX Coordinator, Investigator(s), Hearing Officer, or Sanctioning Officer 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; and
• The sanctions imposed are disproportionate to the finding of responsibility.

The President or the President's designee will serve as the Appeal Officer. The Appeal Officer will inform the other party or parties that an appeal has been filed and provide such party or parties with a copy of the written appeal. The non-appealing party will have a reasonable, equal opportunity to submit a responsive written statement for consideration by the Appeal Officer. In Student-Respondent cases under Section VI.E where the Complainant does not have the right to appeal, the Complainant will not be not be provided a copy of the Respondent's Appeal and will not have the opportunity to submit a responsive written statement.

The Appeal Officer will review the written appeal and any response and determine whether, in the judgment of the Appeal Officer, sufficient grounds exist for at least one basis of appeal. An appeal that does not meet at least one of the acceptable bases for appeal may be dismissed without further review.

Appeals will be decided by the Appeal Officer in a timely manner as circumstances warrant. While an appeal is under review, the Appeal Officer will update the Respondent(s) and Complainant(s) as necessary about the anticipated timeline.

The Appeal Officer's review will be based only on the written record, as well as any recordings or transcripts. Any alleged new evidence related to the grounds for the appeal should be appended to the appeal. The appeal is not an opportunity for a re-investigation or re-hearing.

The Appeal Officer has the authority to modify the decision as deemed appropriate for resolution of the matter being appealed, which could entail (i) sending the matter back to an Investigator, the Hearing Officer, or a new Hearing Officer, as necessary to remedy the error or (ii) a decrease or change to the nature of the sanction(s). The Appeal Officer may also remand the matter for a new process under Section VI.D.

The Appeal Officer will issue a written decision describing the result of the appeal and the rationale for the result. The Appeal Officer will provide the written decision simultaneously to both the Complainant and Respondent. The IEX Office will also receive a copy of the decision. The decision is final.

G. Possible Disciplinary Sanctions and Remedies from Adjudication

Possible outcomes from a violation of this Policy range from educational outcomes to separation from the university. A detailed list of the possible remedies and sanctions is available in Appendix A to this Policy.

H. Alternative Resolution Process

Sections VI.A through VI.G of this Policy describe procedures for the grievance procedures for Complaints of Prohibited Conduct. Separate from these grievance procedures, the university offers an Alternative Resolution Process which may be available on a voluntary basis to resolve a matter under this Policy.

Individuals interested in an Alternative Resolution Process should contact the IEX Office to discuss options. For information regarding the types of Alternative Resolution Process that may be available please see the IEX Office website on Alternative Resolutions.

Either party may request to pursue an Alternative Resolution Process at any time before a finding of responsibility resulting from any process under Section VI.D or Section VI.E. Other than in Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct cases, Alternative Resolution Process may also be requested before the initiation of a Complaint. The Title IX Coordinator has discretion to determine whether the parties will be permitted to pursue an Alternative Resolution Process. In general, mediation and other procedures that are similar to mediation will not be used to resolve matters involving an allegation of sexual violence (i.e. Sexual Assault, Dating Violence, Domestic Violence, or any other form of Prohibited Conduct that involves the use of violence) or when an Employee is accused of sexually harassing a Student. An Alternative Resolution Process is not permitted if such a process would conflict with federal, state, or local law; the university may also decline to permit an Alternative Resolution Process when it determines that the alleged conduct presents a future risk of harm to others.

After receiving a request to pursue an Alternative Resolution Process, the IEX Office will contact both parties to assess mutual interest in the Alternative Resolution Process. If both parties wish to pursue Alternative Resolution, and the Title IX Coordinator agrees that Alternative Resolution is appropriate under the specific facts and circumstances of the case, the IEX Office will initiate the Alternative Resolution Process. While every Alternative Resolution Process will be tailored to the facts and circumstances of the individual case, in no case will the facilitator of the Alternative Resolution Process be the same as the investigator or decisionmaker for grievance procedures involving the same matter.

As participation is voluntary, the university does not require parties to waive the right to an investigation and adjudication as a condition of (continuing) enrollment or (continuing) employment, or the exercise of any other right. During any Alternative Resolution Process, either party has the right to withdraw from the process at any time prior to the conclusion of the process. In such cases, if a Complaint is pending at the time of the withdrawal from the Alternative Resolution Process, the matter will proceed to investigation under Section VI.C or to adjudication under Section VI.D, as appropriate.

Before initiating an Alternative Resolution Process, the university will notify the parties of:

• the allegations;
• the requirements and procedures of the Alternative Resolution Process;
• that each party has the right to withdraw their agreement to participate in the Alternative Resolution Process prior to agreeing to a resolution, and can at that time initiate or resume the grievance procedures, as applicable;
• that agreement to a resolution at the conclusion of the Alternative Resolution Process precludes the parties from initiating or resuming grievance procedures arising from the same allegations;
• the potential consequences and outcomes that may be requested or offered in an Alternative Resolution Process agreement, including notice that an alternative resolution agreement is binding only on the parties; and
• information regarding the confidentiality and/or accessibility of the records of the Alternative Resolution, including which records will be maintained as part of the Alternative Resolution Process and circumstances under which such records could be shared in the event that the Alternative Resolution Process is not completed and grievance procedures are initiated or resumed.
  • Specifically, if the grievance procedures are resumed after an attempted Alternative Resolution Process:
    • neither the university nor a party will access consider, disclose, or otherwise use information, including records, obtained solely through an Alternative Resolution Process as part of the investigation or outcome determination, and
    • in such cases, the Alternative Resolution Process facilitator could serve as a witness for purposes other than providing information obtained solely through the Alternative Resolution Process.

For cases involving alleged Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct, after receiving the above notice, both the Complainant and Respondent must provide written consent to the IEX Office in order to proceed with the Alternative Resolution Process. For cases involving alleged Federal Rule Sexual Misconduct, a complaint must be filed prior the initiation of any Alternative Resolution Process.

I. Student Emergency Removal; Employee Administrative Leave

Where there is an immediate threat to the physical health or safety of any Students or other individuals arising from alleged Prohibited Conduct, the university may remove an individual from the University's Program or Activity in whole or in part and issue any necessary related no-trespass and no-contact orders during the pendency of the investigation. The university will make the decision to remove an individual from the University's Program or Activity based on an individualized safety and risk analysis.

For Students, an emergency removal decision will be made in accordance with the Safety Intervention Protocol set forth in the Carnegie Mellon Student Handbook, subject to the limitation of this section. In the event the university removes any person on this basis, the university will provide the affected individual with notice of the decision and an opportunity to appeal, as specified in the Safety Intervention Protocol.

With respect to Employee Respondents, subject to the procedures in the Staff Handbook (for staff employees) or the Faculty Handbook and Appointment and Tenure Policy (for faculty employees), an Employee Respondent may be placed on administrative leave from employment during the pendency of grievance procedures under this Policy. Administrative leave may include complete removal from the workplace or limitations on access to the workplace, and may be imposed with or without pay. In the event administrative leave is imposed, the Respondent is given the opportunity to seek modification or reversal of the leave.