Investigation and Hearing

Investigation of Formal Complaints

• The respondent will be presumed to be not responsible for the alleged conduct unless and until a finding of responsibility is made at the conclusion of the formal resolution process.
• The director of Campus Safety is generally appointed to lead the investigation and is usually assisted by another TIX Investigator or the appropriate Title IX Deputy Coordinator for students (if the respondent is a student) or the Title IX Deputy Coordinator for faculty/staff (if the respondent is a faculty or staff).
• According to established practices, the investigation is a neutral fact-gathering process and will follow the trail of evidence regarding the alleged Sexual Harassment.
• The investigator(s) will meet in separate settings with the complainant and the respondent, as well as with other witnesses, and review texts, emails, communications and other documentary evidence to gather facts.
• Both the complainant and the respondent have the right to the same opportunities to present their account of events, identify witnesses who may have relevant information and provide other inculpatory and exculpatory evidence.
• Faculty or staff of Andrews University are expected to cooperate with and participate in the University’s Title IX investigative and resolution process.
• Follow-up interviews with the parties and witnesses may be warranted, to respond to new information or to allow the investigator(s) to resolve inconsistencies or questions.
• Both parties have an equal opportunity to inspect and review any evidence obtained as part of the investigation that is directly related to the allegations raised in the formal complaint.
• Before completing the investigative report, the appropriate Title IX Deputy Coordinator will send to each party and the party's advisor (if any) such directly related evidence in an electronic format or a hard copy, and the parties will be given at least 10 calendar days to submit a written response (the “Evidence Response Period”).
• The investigator(s) will consider any responses from either party prior to completing the final investigative summary report.
• Notwithstanding the foregoing provision, the University cannot access, consider, disclose or otherwise use any party’s record that is protected by a legally recognized privilege (e.g., attorney-client, physician-patient, psychologist-patient, clergy-parishioner, etc.) unless that party (or that minor party’s parent) has voluntarily provided written consent to do so.
• After the Evidence Response Period has passed, an investigative summary report describing the relevant evidence will be completed. The investigative summary report does not include any investigator(s) recommendations or conclusions.
• The final investigative summary report, directly related evidence, and any written responses from both parties will be provided to the Title IX Coordinator who will review and confirm that the report is complete or deem it necessary to request further fact gathering from the investigator(s).
• If deemed complete, the Title IX Coordinator will authorize that the final investigative summary report be sent to both parties and their advisor/support persons, in an electronic format. The parties will be given at least ten days before the hearing in which to prepare their written responses (the “Investigative Summary Response Period”).
• While the final investigative summary report seeks to provide a fair and accurate summary of the most relevant testimony from the directly-related evidence, the investigative summary report should not be treated by the parties or the Decision-Maker Panel as a substitute for reading and reviewing for themselves the written submissions and interview transcripts. If there are discrepancies between (1) the written submissions and interview transcripts and (2) the final investigative summary report's content, the Decision-Maker Panel must rely on the written submissions and transcripts in determining the facts.
• If a finding of responsibility is determined, each party will be allowed to present a written impact/mitigation statement. This statement is to be given to the Title IX Official who will present it to the Decision-Maker Panel for consideration at the sanction stage.
• If the respondent accepts responsibility for the specific allegations, they may prepare for the Panel a written acceptance of the facts of the allegation. In such cases where the respondent accepts responsibility, the Title IX Coordinator may direct the Panel to convene solely to determine appropriate corrective disciplinary action.

University Hearing

• To resolve formal complaints involving University students, a live hearing to determine responsibility will be held after the Investigative Summary Response Period has ended. At the University’s discretion, formal complaints involving K–12 students may, but need not, be resolved through a hearing process.
• Prior to the hearing, a Notice of Hearing will be sent to both parties with hearing instructions.
• Participants may include the complainant and complainant’s advisor support person, the respondent and the respondent’s advisor/support person, witnesses (if called), the investigator(s) (if called), the Decision-Maker Panel, and the Title IX official designee, who is non-voting and serves to facilitate the hearing process.
• A three-person panel, called the Decision-Maker Panel, will be convened for live hearings to serve as the decision-makers in determining the question of responsibility for Sexual Harassment as well as determining any corrective action. A fourth person will be assigned to chair the Panel and will be non-voting.
• The makeup of the Decision-Maker Panel will vary, depending on whether the respondent is a student or a University employee.
  • If the respondent is a student, the Panel will be selected from the members of the Student Life Deans Council.
  • If the respondent is a University staff or faculty member, a Panel will be selected from a pool of trained faculty, staff or administrators.
  • The parties will be notified of the make-up and names of the Panel no less than five days prior to the hearing. Any concerns regarding bias or a potential conflict of interest of a Decision-Maker Panel member must be submitted in writing to the Title IX Coordinator at least three days prior to the hearing.
• The Decision-Maker Panel will presume the respondent is not responsible for the alleged conduct unless and until a finding of responsibility is made at the conclusion of the formal resolution process.
• The Decision-Maker Panel will be instructed that the burden of proof and the burden of gathering evidence sufficient to reach a determination regarding responsibility rest on the University and not on the parties.
• The Panel will objectively review the investigative summary report, all relevant evidence—both inculpatory and exculpatory—developed during the investigation, and the parties’ written responses. Credibility determinations must not be based on a person’s status as complainant, respondent or witness.
• The Panel will also provide a hearing for the parties before deliberating and making any determination regarding responsibility or corrective disciplinary actions.
• Both the complainant and the respondent will have the same opportunity to participate in the live hearing with the Panel.
• All parties and witnesses will appear at the live hearing virtually while located in separate rooms, with technology to see and hear each other.
• The live hearing portion of the process will be recorded by the Title IX official. No other recordings will be permitted.
• During the live hearing, both parties will have an equal opportunity to pose cross-examination questions and limited follow-up questions, deemed relevant in advance by the chair, that their advisor/support person may ask to the other party or any witness. Such questions must be asked directly, orally and in real time. At no time will a party personally be permitted to ask questions to the other party or any witness. Except when asking cross-examination questions during a live hearing, neither party’s advisor/support person is permitted to speak during a University proceeding.
• If any party plans to appear at the hearing without his or her own advisor/support person, the University will assign (at no cost) a non-attorney advisor/support person of the University’s choice to conduct cross-examination on behalf of such party.
• A party may not dismiss an assigned advisor during the hearing, but if the party correctly asserts that the advisor is refusing to conduct cross examination on the party’s behalf, the University will provide the party an advisor to perform that function, whether that means counseling the assigned advisor to perform the requested role or pausing the hearing to assign a different advisor.
• If a party or witness does not attend or submit to questions at the live hearing, the Decision-Maker Panel cannot draw an inference of responsibility or lack of responsibility based solely on a party’s or witness's absence from the live hearing or unwillingness to answer questions.
• The Decision-maker(s) may rely on whatever relevant evidence is available through the investigation and hearing in making the ultimate determination of responsibility.

Determination and Outcome ⇒