Procedures and Reporting Sexual Harassment

Upon receipt of a complaint or notice of an alleged policy violation by the Title IX Coordinator, the Title IX Coordinator initiates a prompt initial assessment to determine the next steps the University needs to take. The Title IX Coordinator will contact the Complainant to offer supportive measures and determine whether the Complainant wishes to file a Formal Complaint. This contact with Complainant will include the following information:

• Loma Linda University has received a report that the Complainant may have been subjected to sexual harassment. 
• A statement that retaliation for filing a complaint or participating in a complaint process, or both, is prohibited. 
• Counseling resources within the institution or the community. 
• Notice that the Complainant has the right, but not the obligation, to report the matter to law enforcement.
• Loma Linda University’s investigation procedures. 
• A list of potential supportive measures, such as no-contact directives, housing changes, and academic schedule changes. 
• The importance of preserving evidence. 
• A request for Complainant to meet with the Title IX Coordinator to discuss options for responding to the report. 
• Information on how the University responds to reports of sexual harassment and a description of potential disciplinary consequences.

The Title IX Coordinator will then initiate at least one of four responses: 

1. Offering supportive measures because the Complainant does not want to file a Formal Complaint
2. An Informal Resolution (upon submission of a Formal Complaint) 
3. A Formal Grievance Process including an investigation and a hearing (upon submission of a Formal Complaint)
4. A Formal Grievance Process including an investigation and final determination

The University uses a Formal Grievance Process as described below to determine whether the Policy has been violated. If so, the University will promptly implement effective remedies designed to ensure that it is not deliberately indifferent to harassment or discrimination, their potential recurrence, and/or their effects.

If the Title IX Coordinator receives notice from a third party who is not the actual Complainant, the Coordinator will take appropriate steps to address and remedy any potential hostile environment, to the extent possible based on the information received.

Following receipt of notice, or a complaint of an alleged violation of this Policy, the Title IX Coordinator engages in an initial assessment, typically within two to seven (2-7) business days. The steps in an initial assessment can include:

• The Title IX Coordinator seeks to determine if the person impacted wishes to make a Formal Complaint, and will assist them to do so, if desired. 
  • If they do not wish to do so, the Title IX Coordinator determines whether to initiate a complaint themselves.
• If a Formal Complaint is received, the Title IX Coordinator assesses its sufficiency and works with the Complainant to make sure it is correctly completed.
• The Title IX Coordinator or their designee within the Title IX team reaches out to the Complainant to offer supportive measures. 
• The Title IX Coordinator or their designee within the Title IX team works with the Complainant to ensure they are aware of the right to have an Advisor.
• The Title IX Coordinator or their designee within the Title IX team works with the Complainant to determine whether the Complainant prefers a supportive and remedial response, an Informal Resolution option, or a formal investigation and grievance process. 
  •  If a supportive and remedial response is preferred, the Title IX Coordinator or their designee within the Title IX team works with the Complainant to identify their needs, determine appropriate supports, and implements accordingly. No Formal Grievance Process is initiated, though the Complainant can elect to initiate one later, if desired. 
  • If an Informal Resolution option is preferred, the Title IX Coordinator assesses whether the complaint is suitable for Informal Resolution and may seek to determine if the Respondent is also willing to engage in Informal Resolution. 
  • If a Formal Grievance Process is preferred by the Complainant, the Title IX Coordinator determines if the alleged misconduct falls within the scope of the 2020 Title IX regulations: 
    • If it does, the Title IX Coordinator will initiate the formal investigation and grievance process, directing the investigation to address, based on the nature of the complaint:
• an incident, and/or 
• a pattern of alleged misconduct, and/or 
• a culture/climate issue 
  • If alleged misconduct does not fall within the scope of the Title IX regulations, the Title IX Coordinator determines that the regulations do not apply (and will “dismiss” that aspect of the complaint, if any), assesses which policies may apply and will refer the matter accordingly. Please note that dismissing a complaint under the 2020 Title IX regulations is solely a procedural requirement under Title IX, which does not limit the University’s authority to address a complaint with an appropriate process and remedies.
     

Loma Linda University must dismiss a Formal Complaint or any allegations therein if, at any time during the investigation or hearing, it is determined that:

1. The conduct alleged in the Formal Complaint would not constitute Title IX sexual harassment as defined above, even if proved
2. The conduct did not occur in an educational program or activity controlled by the University and/or the University does not have control of the Respondent
3. The conduct did not occur against a person in the United States
4. At the time of filing a Formal Complaint, a Complainant is not participating in or attempting to participate in the University’s education program or activity 

The University may dismiss a Formal Complaint or any allegations therein if, at any time during the investigation or hearing: 

1. A Complainant notifies the Title IX Coordinator in writing that the Complainant would like to withdraw the Formal Complaint or any allegations therein
2. The Respondent is no longer enrolled in or employed by the University 
3. Specific circumstances prevent the recipient from gathering evidence sufficient to reach a determination as to the Formal Complaint or allegations therein

A Complainant who decides to withdraw a complaint may later request to reinstate it or refile it. 
Upon any dismissal, the University will promptly send written notice of the dismissal and the rationale for doing so simultaneously to the parties. 
This dismissal decision is appealable by any party under the procedures for appeal.

The University is obligated to ensure that the grievance process is not abused for retaliatory purposes, thus counterclaims made with retaliatory intent will not be permitted. The University permits the filing of counterclaims but uses an initial assessment, described above, to assess whether the allegations in the counterclaim are made in good faith. 

Counterclaims determined to have been reported in good faith will be processed using the Resolution Process below. Investigation of such claims may take place after resolution of the underlying initial complaint, in which case a delay may occur. 

Counterclaims may also be resolved through the same investigation as the underlying complaint, at the discretion of the Title IX Coordinator. When counterclaims are not made in good faith, they will be considered retaliatory and may constitute a violation of this policy.

The parties may each have an Advisor of their choice present with them for all meetings, interviews, and hearings within the Resolution Process, if they so choose. The parties may select whoever they wish to serve as their Advisor as long as the Advisor is eligible and available. 
Choosing an Advisor who is also a witness in the process creates potential for bias and conflict of interest. A party who chooses an Advisor who is also a witness can anticipate that issues of potential bias will be explored by the hearing Decision-maker(s).

A.    Who Can Serve as an Advisor

The Advisor may be a friend, mentor, family member, attorney, or any other individual a party chooses to advise, support, and/or consult with them throughout the Resolution Process. The parties may choose Advisors from inside or outside of the Loma Linda University community. 

The Title IX Coordinator will also offer to assign a trained Advisor to any party if the party so chooses. If the parties choose an Advisor from the pool
 available from the University, the Advisor will have been trained by the University and be familiar with the University’s Resolution Process. 

If the parties choose an Advisor from outside the pool of those identified by the University, the Advisor may not have been trained by the University and may not be familiar with Loma Linda University policies and procedures. 

Parties also have the right to choose not to have an Advisor in the initial stages of the Resolution Process, prior to a hearing.

B.    Advisor’s Role in Meetings and Interviews

The parties may be accompanied by their Advisor in all meetings and interviews at which the party is entitled to be present, including intake and interviews. Advisors should help the parties prepare for each meeting and are expected to advise ethically, with integrity, and in good faith. 

The University cannot guarantee equal Advisory rights, meaning that if one party selects an Advisor who is an attorney, but the other party does not or cannot afford an attorney, the University is not obligated to provide an attorney. 

C.    Advisors in Hearings/University-Appointed Advisor

Under the Title IX Regulations, a form of indirect questioning is required during the hearing but must be conducted by the parties’ Advisors. The parties are not permitted to directly question each other or any witnesses. If a party does not have an Advisor for a hearing, the University will appoint a trained Advisor for the limited purpose of conducting any questioning of the parties and witnesses.

However, if the Title IX aspects of the complaint have been dismissed or if the complaint does not meet the Title IX definition of Sexual Harassment, questions must be submitted to the Decision Maker. Only the Decision Maker will be allowed to directly question the parties involved.

D.    Advisor Violations of Recipient Policy

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

The parties are expected to ask and respond to questions on their own behalf throughout the investigation phase of the Resolution Process. Although the Advisor generally may not speak on behalf of their advisee, the Advisor may consult with their advisee, either privately as needed, or by conferring or passing notes during any Resolution Process meeting or interview. For longer or more involved discussions, the parties and their Advisors should ask for breaks to allow for private consultation.

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

E.    Sharing Information with the Advisor
The University expects that the parties may wish to have the University share documentation and evidence related to the allegations with their Advisors. The University requires consent that authorizes the University to share such information directly with a party’s Advisor. The parties must provide documentation demonstrating consent to a release of information to the Advisor before University is able to share records with an Advisor. 

If a party requests that all communication be made through their attorney Advisor, the University may comply with that request with that request at the discretion of the Title IX Coordinator. 

F.    Privacy of Records Shared with Advisor

Advisors are expected to maintain the privacy of the records shared with them. These records may not be shared with third parties, disclosed publicly, or used for purposes not explicitly authorized by Recipient. Advisors will be asked to sign Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs). Recipient may restrict the role of any Advisor who does not respect the sensitive nature of the process or who fails to abide by the Recipient’s privacy expectations.

G.    Expectation of an Advisor

The University generally expects an Advisor to adjust their schedule to allow them to attend University meetings/interviews/hearings when planned, but the University may change scheduled meetings/interviews/hearings to accommodate an Advisor’s inability to attend, if doing so does not cause an unreasonable delay. 

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

H.    Expectations of the Parties with Respect to Advisors

A party may elect to change Advisors during the process and is not obligated to use the same Advisor throughout. The parties are expected to inform the Investigator(s) of the identity of their Advisor at least two (2) business days before the date of their first meeting with Investigators (or as soon as possible if a more expeditious meeting is necessary or desired). 

The parties are expected to provide timely notice to the Title IX Coordinator if they change Advisors at any time. It is assumed that if a party changes Advisors, consent to share information with the previous Advisor is terminated, and a release for the new Advisor should be secured. Parties are expected to inform the Title IX Coordinator of the identity of their hearing Advisor at least two (2) business days before the hearing.

Resolution proceedings are private. All persons present at any time during the Resolution Process are expected to maintain the privacy of the proceedings in accordance with Loma Linda University Policy. 

Although there is an expectation of privacy around what Investigators share with parties during interviews, the parties have discretion to share their own knowledge and evidence with others if they so choose, except for information the parties agree not to disclose as part of an Informal Resolution. The University encourages parties to discuss any sharing of information with their Advisors before doing so. 

The Formal Grievance Process is the University’s primary resolution approach unless Informal Resolution is elected by all parties and the University.

A.    Informal Resolution

Three options for Informal Resolution may be available:

1. Supportive Resolution. When the Title IX Coordinator can resolve the matter informally by providing supportive measures (only) to remedy the situation
2. Alternative Resolution. When the parties agree to resolve the matter through an alternative resolution mechanism, often before a formal investigation takes place 
3. Accepted Responsibility. When the Respondent accepts responsibility for violating policy, and desires to accept the recommended sanction(s) and end the Resolution Process

To initiate Informal Resolution, a Complainant must submit a Formal Complaint, as defined above. A Respondent who wishes to initiate Informal Resolution should contact the Title IX Coordinator. The parties may agree, as a condition of engaging in Informal Resolution, that statements made, or evidence shared, during the

Informal Resolution process will not be considered in the Formal Grievance Process unless all parties consent. 

It is not necessary to pursue Informal Resolution first in order to pursue a Formal Grievance Process, and any party participating in Informal Resolution can stop the process at any time and begin or resume the Formal Grievance Process. The Title IX Coordinator has discretion to determine if an investigation will be paused during Informal Resolution, or if it will be limited, or will continue during the Informal Resolution process. 

Prior to implementing Informal Resolution, the University will provide the parties with written notice of the reported misconduct and any sanctions (only in the case of Accepted Responsibility) or measures that may result from participating in such a process, including information regarding any records that will be maintained or shared by the University. 

The University will obtain voluntary, written confirmation that all parties wish to resolve the matter through Informal Resolution before proceeding and will not pressure the parties to participate in Informal Resolution.

a. Alternative Resolution Approaches

Alternative Resolution is an informal approach, by which the parties reach a mutually agreed upon resolution of a complaint. All parties must consent to the use of an Alternative Resolution approach.

The Title IX Coordinator may consider the following factors to assess whether Alternative Resolution is appropriate, or which form of Alternative Resolution may be most successful for the parties:

• The parties’ amenability to Alternative Resolution
• Likelihood of potential resolution, considering any power dynamics between the parties 
• The nature and severity of the alleged misconduct
• The parties’ motivation to participate
• Civility of the parties
• Results of a violence risk assessment/ongoing risk analysis
• Disciplinary history of the Respondent 
• Whether an emergency removal is needed
• Skill of the Alternative Resolution facilitator with this type of complaint
• Complaint complexity
• Emotional investment/capability of the parties
• Rationality of the parties
• Goals of the parties
• Adequate resources to invest in Alternative Resolution (time, staff, etc.)

The ultimate determination of whether Alternative Resolution is available or successful is made by the Title IX Coordinator. The Title IX Coordinator is authorized to facilitate a resolution that is acceptable to all parties, and/or to accept a resolution that is proposed by the parties, usually through their Advisors, including terms of confidentiality, release, and non-disparagement. 

The Title IX Coordinator maintains records of any resolution that is reached, and failure to abide by the resolution agreement may result in appropriate responsive/disciplinary actions (e.g., referral for formal resolution, referral to the conduct process for failure to comply). Results of complaints resolved by

Alternative Resolution are not appealable.

b. Respondent Accepts Responsibility for Alleged Violations The Respondent may accept responsibility for all or part of the alleged policy violations at any point during the Resolution Process. If the Respondent indicates an intent to accept responsibility for all of the alleged misconduct, the formal process will be paused, and the Title IX Coordinator will determine whether Informal Resolution can be used according to the criteria above.

If Informal Resolution is applicable, the Title IX Coordinator will determine whether all parties and the University are able to agree on responsibility, restrictions and/or remedies. If so, the Title IX Coordinator implements the accepted finding that the Respondent is in violation of University policy and implements agreed-upon restrictions and remedies and determines the appropriate sanction(s) in coordination with other appropriate administrator(s), as necessary. 

This result is not subject to appeal once all parties indicate their written assent to all agreed upon resolution terms. When the parties cannot agree on all terms of resolution, the Formal Grievance Process will resume at the same point where it was paused. Parties may not want discussions that take place within Informal Resolution to be admissible in a later Formal Grievance Process, but essential facts must and do transfer from the informal process to the formal. 

When a resolution is accomplished, the appropriate sanction(s) or responsive actions are promptly implemented to effectively stop the harassment or discrimination, prevent its recurrence, and remedy the effects of the discriminatory conduct, both on the Complainant and the community.

The Formal Grievance Process relies on a pool of administrators to carry out the process. 

A.    Member Roles

Members of the Pool are trained annually, and can serve in in the following roles:

• To act as an Advisor to the parties
• To investigate complaints
• To serve as a hearing facilitator (process administrator, no decision-making role)
• To serve as a Decision-maker regarding the complaint
• To serve as an Appeal Decision-maker

B.    Member Training
Pool members receive comprehensive, trauma-informed training based on their respective roles. This training includes, but is not limited to: 

• The scope of the University’s Policy  and Procedures
• How to conduct investigations and hearings that protect the safety of Complainants and Respondents, and promote accountability
• Implicit bias and racial inequities, both broadly and in school disciplinary processes
• Disparate treatment 
• Reporting, confidentiality, and privacy requirements
• Applicable laws, regulations, and federal regulatory guidance
• How to implement appropriate and situation-specific remedies
• How to investigate in a thorough, reliable, timely, and impartial manner 
• How to conduct a sexual harassment investigation
• Trauma-informed investigatory and hearing practices that help ensure an impartial and equitable process 
• How to uphold fairness, equity, and due process
• How to weigh evidence 
• How to conduct questioning 
• How to assess credibility
• Impartiality and objectivity 
• How to render findings and generate clear, concise, evidence-based rationales 
• The definitions of all offenses 
• How to apply definitions used by the University with respect to consent (or the absence or negation of consent) consistently, impartially, and in accordance with policy 
• How to conduct an investigation and grievance process including hearings, appeals, and Informal Resolution Processes 
• How to serve impartially by avoiding prejudgment of the facts at issue, conflicts of interest, and bias against Respondents and/or for Complainants, and on the basis of sex, race, religion, and other protected characteristics 
• Any technology to be used at a live hearing 
• Issues of relevance of questions and evidence
• Issues of relevance to create an investigation report that fairly summarizes relevant evidence
• How to determine appropriate sanctions in reference to all forms of harassment, discrimination, and/or retaliation allegations
• Recordkeeping
• Statistics on the prevalence of sexual harassment and sexual violence in the educational setting, and the differing rates at which students experience sexual harassment and sexual assault in the educational setting based on their race, sexual orientation, disability, gender, and gender identity. 

The materials used to train members are publicly posted on Sex Discrimination & Sexual Misconduct Title IX | Loma Linda University (llu.edu).

1. Formal Grievance Process: Notice of Investigation and Allegations

The Title IX Coordinator or designated member of the Title IX team will provide written Notice of the Investigation and Allegations (the “NOIA”) to the Respondent upon commencement of the Formal Grievance Process. This facilitates the Respondent’s ability to prepare for the interview and to identify and choose an Advisor to accompany them. The NOIA is also copied to the Complainant, who will be given advance notice of when the NOIA will be delivered to the Respondent. 

The NOIA will include:

• A meaningful summary of all allegations
• The identity of the involved parties (if known)
• The precise misconduct being alleged
• The date and location of the alleged incident(s) (if known)
• The specific policies implicated
• A description of the applicable procedures
• A statement of the potential sanctions/responsive actions that could result
• A statement that the University presumes the Respondent is not responsible for the reported misconduct unless and until the evidence supports a different determination
• A statement that the investigation and hearing, if applicable, are not adversarial processes between Complainant(s), Respondent(s), and witnesses, but rather a process Loma Linda University uses to comply with its obligations under existing law
• A statement that the Complainant does not have the burden to prove, nor does the Respondent have a burden to disprove, the underlying allegations(s) of misconduct
• A statement that any evidence available but not disclosed during the investigation might not be subsequent considered if intentionally withheld
•  A statement that determinations of responsibility are made at the conclusion of the process and that the parties will be given an opportunity during the review and comment period to inspect and review all directly related and/or relevant evidence obtained 
• A statement about the University’s policy on retaliation
• Information about the confidentiality of the process
• Information on the need for each party to have an Advisor of their choosing and suggestions for ways to identify an Advisor
• A statement informing the parties that the University’s policy prohibits knowingly making false statements, including knowingly submitting false information during the Resolution Process
• Detail on how the party may request disability accommodations during the Resolution Process
• The name(s) of the Investigator(s), along with a process to identify to the Title IX Coordinator, in advance of the interview process, any conflict of interest that the Investigator(s) may have
• An instruction to preserve any evidence that is directly related to the allegations

Amendments and updates to the NOIA may be made as the investigation progresses and more information becomes available regarding the addition or dismissal of various allegations. 

Notice will be made in writing and may be delivered by one or more of the following methods: in person, mailed to the local or permanent address(es) of the parties as indicated in official Recipient records or emailed to the parties’ University-issued email or designated accounts. Once mailed, emailed, and/or received in-person, notice will be presumptively delivered.

2. Resolution Timeline

Loma Linda University makes a good faith effort to complete the Resolution Process within a sixty to ninety (60-90) business-day time period, including appeal if any, which can be extended as necessary for appropriate cause by the Title IX Coordinator, who will provide notice and rationale for any extensions or delays to the parties as appropriate, as well as an estimate of how much additional time will be needed to complete the process.

Loma Linda University will not unreasonably deny a student party’s request for an extension of a deadline related to a complaint during periods of examinations or school closures.

3. Ensuring Impartiality

Any individual materially involved in the administration of the Resolution Process, including the Title IX Coordinator, Investigator(s), and Decision-maker(s), may neither have nor demonstrate a conflict of interest or bias for a party generally, or for a specific Complainant or Respondent.

At any time during the Resolution Process, the parties may raise a concern regarding bias or conflict of interest, and the Title IX Coordinator will determine whether the concern is reasonable and supportable. If so, another Pool member will be assigned and the impact of the bias or conflict, if any, will be remedied. If the source of the conflict of interest or bias is the Title IX Coordinator, concerns should be raised with the Title IX Officer.

The Formal Grievance Process involves an objective evaluation of all relevant evidence obtained, including evidence that supports that the Respondent engaged in a policy violation and evidence that supports that the Respondent did not engage in a policy violation. Credibility determinations may not be based solely on an individual’s status or participation as a Complainant, Respondent, or witness. 

The University operates with the presumption that the Respondent is not responsible for the reported misconduct unless and until the Respondent is determined to be responsible for a policy violation by the applicable standard of proof.

Investigations are completed expeditiously, normally within sixty (60) business days, though some investigations may take many weeks or even months, depending on the nature, extent, and complexity of the allegations, availability of witnesses, law enforcement involvement, etc. 

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

1. Investigation Process Delays and Interactions with Law Enforcement

Investigations are completed expeditiously, normally within sixty (60) business days, though some investigations may take many weeks or even months, depending on the nature, extent, and complexity of the allegations, availability of witnesses, law enforcement involvement, etc. 

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

2. Investigation Process Steps

All investigations are thorough, reliable, impartial, prompt, and fair. Investigations involve interviews with all available relevant parties and witnesses; obtaining available, relevant evidence; and identifying sources of expert information, as necessary. 

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

At the discretion of the Title IX Coordinator, investigations can be combined when complaints implicate a pattern, collusion, and/or other shared or similar actions.
The Investigator(s) and/or Title IX Coordinator typically take(s) the following steps, if not already completed (not necessarily in this order):

• Determine the identity and contact information of the Complainant
• Identify all policies implicated by the alleged misconduct and notify the Complainant and Respondent of all of the specific policies implicated
• Conduct a prompt initial assessment to determine if the allegations indicate a potential policy violation 
• Commence a thorough, reliable, and impartial investigation by identifying issues and developing a strategic investigation plan
• Meet with the Complainant to finalize their interview/statement, if necessary
• Prepare the initial Notice of Investigation and Allegation (NOIA). The NOIA may be amended with any additional or dismissed allegations
• Provide each interviewed party and witness an opportunity to review and verify the Investigator’s summary notes (or transcript) of the relevant evidence/testimony from their respective interviews and meetings
• Make good faith efforts to notify each party of any meeting or interview involving another party, in advance when possible 
• When participation of a party is expected, provide that party with written notice of the date, time, and location of the meeting, as well as the expected participants and purpose 
• Interview all available, relevant witnesses and conduct follow-up interviews as necessary
• Allow each party the opportunity to suggest witnesses and questions they wish the Investigator(s) to ask of another party and/or witnesses, and document in the report which questions were asked, with a rationale for any changes or omissions
• Complete the investigation promptly and without unreasonable deviation from the intended timeline
• Provide regular status updates to the parties throughout the investigation
• Write a comprehensive investigation report fully summarizing the investigation, all witness interviews, and addressing all relevant evidence. Appendices including relevant physical or documentary evidence will be included
• Prior to the conclusion of the investigation, provide the parties and their respective Advisors (if so desired by the parties) a secured electronic or hard copy of the draft investigation report as well as an opportunity to inspect and review all of the evidence obtained as part of the investigation that is directly related to the reported misconduct, including evidence upon which the University does not intend to rely in reaching a determination, for a ten (10) day review and comment period so that each party may meaningfully respond to the evidence. The parties may elect to waive the full ten (10) days. 
• Elect to respond in writing in the investigation report to the parties’ submitted responses and/or to share the responses between the parties for additional responses
• Incorporate relevant elements of the parties’ written responses into the final investigation report, include any additional relevant evidence, make any necessary revisions, and finalize the report. The Investigator(s) should document all rationales for any changes made after the review and comment period.
• Share the report with the Title IX Officer and/or legal counsel for their review and feedback
• Incorporate any relevant feedback and share the final report with all parties and their Advisors through secure electronic transmission or hard copy at least ten (10) days prior to a hearing, if applicable. The parties and Advisors are also provided with a file of any directly related evidence that was not included in the report.

3. Witness Role and Participation in the Investigation

Witnesses (as distinguished from the parties) who are employees of the Recipient are strongly encouraged to cooperate with and participate in the Recipient’s investigation and Resolution Process. Student witnesses and witnesses from outside the University community are encouraged to cooperate with University investigations and to share what they know about a complaint.

Although in-person interviews for parties and all potential witnesses are ideal, circumstances (e.g., study abroad, summer break) may require individuals to be interviewed remotely. Skype, Zoom, Microsoft Teams, FaceTime, WebEx, or similar technologies may be used for interviews if the Investigator(s) determine that timeliness, efficiency, or other reasons dictate a need for remote interviewing. The University will take appropriate steps to reasonably ensure the security/privacy of remote interviews.

Witnesses may also provide written statements in lieu of interviews or choose to respond to written questions, if deemed appropriate by the Investigator(s), though not preferred.

4. Interview Recording

No unauthorized audio or video recording of any kind is permitted during

Neither the investigation nor the hearing will consider: (1) incidents not relevant or not directly related to the possible violation(s), unless they evidence a pattern; or (2) questions and evidence about the Complainant’s sexual predisposition; or (3) questions and evidence about the Complainant’s prior or subsequent sexual behavior, unless such questions and evidence about the Complainant’s prior sexual behavior are offered to prove that someone other than the Respondent committed the conduct alleged by the Complainant, or if the questions and evidence concern specific incidents of the Complainant’s prior or subsequent sexual behavior with respect to the Respondent and are offered to prove consent.

Within the boundaries stated above, the investigation and the hearing can consider character evidence generally, if offered, but that evidence is unlikely to be relevant unless it is fact evidence or relates to a pattern of conduct.

Provided that the complaint is not resolved through Informal Resolution and that the allegations alleged are within the Title IX definition of Sexual Harassment, once the final investigation report is shared with the parties, the Title IX Coordinator will refer the matter for a hearing.

However, if (1) the Title IX aspects of the complaint have been dismissed, (2) the complaint does not meet the Title IX definition of Sexual Harassment or (3) the Complainant is not facing serious discipline for alleged sexual misconduct and the credibility of witnesses is not central to the adjudication of the charge, a hearing will not be required for resolution of the allegations.

The hearing cannot be held less than ten (10) days from the conclusion of the investigation–when the final investigation report is transmitted to the parties and the Decision-maker(s)–unless all parties and the Decision-maker(s) agree to an expedited timeline. 

The Title IX Coordinator will select appropriate Decision-makers and provide a copy of the investigation report and the file of directly related evidence.

The University will designate a single Decision-maker or a [three]-member panel, at the discretion of the Title IX Coordinator. 

The Decision-maker(s) will not have had any previous involvement with the complaint. The Title IX Coordinator may elect to have an alternate sit in throughout the hearing process in the event that a substitute is needed for any reason.

Those who have served as Investigators will be witnesses in the hearing and therefore may not serve as Decision-makers. Those who are serving as Advisors for any party may not serve as Decision-makers in that matter. 

The Title IX Coordinator may not serve as a Decision-maker or Chair in the matter but may serve as an administrative facilitator of the hearing if their previous role(s) in the matter do not create a conflict of interest. Otherwise, a designee may fulfill the facilitator role. The hearing will convene at a time and venue determined by the Title IX Coordinator or designee
 

Previous disciplinary action of any kind involving the Respondent may not be used unless there is an allegation of a pattern of misconduct. Such information may also be considered in determining an appropriate sanction upon a determination of responsibility, assuming the Recipient uses a progressive discipline system. This information is only considered at the sanction stage of the process and is not shared until then. 

The parties may each submit a written impact statement prior to the hearing for the consideration of the Decision-maker(s) at the sanction stage of the process when a determination of responsibility is reached. 

After post-hearing deliberation, the Decision-maker(s) render(s) a determination based on the preponderance of the evidence; whether it is more likely than not that the Respondent violated the Policy.

No less than ten (10) days prior to the hearing, the Title IX Coordinator or designee will send notice of the hearing to the parties. Once mailed, emailed, and/or received in-person, notice will be presumptively delivered. 
The notice will contain:

• A description of the alleged violation(s), a list of all policies allegedly violated, a description of the applicable hearing procedures, and a statement of the potential sanctions/responsive actions that could result.
• The time, date, and location of the hearing.
• Description of any technology that will be used to facilitate the hearing.
• Information about the option for the live hearing to occur with the parties located in separate rooms using technology that enables the Decision-maker(s) and parties to see and hear a party or witness answering questions. Such a request must be raised with the Title IX Coordinator as soon as possible, preferably at least five (5) business days prior to the hearing
• A list of all those who will attend the hearing, along with an invitation to object to any Decision-maker(s) based on demonstrated bias or conflict of interest. This must be raised with the Title IX Coordinator at least two (2) business days prior to the hearing.
• Information on how the hearing will be recorded and how the parties can access the recording after the hearing.
• A statement that if any party or witness does not appear at the scheduled hearing, the hearing may be held in their absence. For compelling reasons, the Title IX Coordinator or designee may reschedule the hearing. 
• Notification that the parties may have the assistance of an Advisor of their choosing at the hearing and that they may be required to have one present for any questions they may desire to ask. The party must notify the Title IX Coordinator if they do not have an Advisor, and the University may appoint one if required. 
• A statement that questions that are repetitive, irrelevant, or harassing are prohibited.
• A statement that parties may note an objection to questions posed.
• A copy of all the materials provided to the Decision-maker(s) about the complaint unless they have already been provided. 
• An invitation to each party to submit to the Decision Maker an impact statement pre-hearing that the Decision-maker(s) will review during any sanction determination.
• An invitation to contact the Title IX Coordinator to arrange any disability accommodations, language assistance, and/or interpretation services that may be needed at the hearing, at least seven (7) days prior to the hearing. 
• Whether parties can/cannot bring mobile phones/devices into the hearing.

Hearings for possible violations that occur near or after the end of an academic term (assuming the Respondent is still subject to this Policy) and are unable to be resolved prior to the end of term will typically be held immediately after the end of the term or during the summer, as needed, to meet the resolution timeline followed by the University and remain within the 60-90 business-day goal for resolution. Employees who do not have 12-month contracts are still expected to participate in Resolution Proceedings that occur during months between contracts.

If a party or parties prefer not to attend or cannot attend the hearing in person, the party should request alternative arrangements from the Title IX Coordinator as soon as possible, preferably at least five (5) days prior to the hearing.

After any necessary consultation with the parties, the Decision Maker will provide the names of persons who have been asked to participate in the hearing, all pertinent documentary evidence, and the final investigation report to the parties at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing. 

Any witness scheduled to participate in the hearing must have been first interviewed by the Investigator(s) or have proffered a written statement or answered written questions, unless all parties and the Decision Maker assent to the witness’s participation in the hearing. The same holds for any relevant evidence that is first offered at the hearing. If the parties and Decision Maker do not assent to the admission of evidence newly offered at the hearing, the Decision Maker may delay the hearing and/or instruct that the investigation needs to be re-opened to consider that evidence. 

The parties will be given a list of the names of the Decision-maker(s) at least ten (10) days in advance of the hearing. All objections to any Decision-maker must be raised in writing, detailing the rationale for the objection, and must be submitted to the Title IX Coordinator as soon as possible and no later than six (6) days prior to the hearing. Decision-makers will only be removed if the Title IX Coordinator concludes that their actual or perceived bias or conflict of interest precludes an impartial hearing of the complaint. 

The Title IX Coordinator will give the Decision-maker(s) a list of the names of all parties, witnesses, and Advisors at least ten (10) days in advance of the hearing. Any Decision-maker who cannot make an objective determination must recuse themselves from the proceedings when notified of the identity of the parties, witnesses, and Advisors in advance of the hearing. If a Decision-maker is unsure of whether a bias or conflict of interest exists, they must raise the concern to the Title IX Coordinator as soon as possible.

During the ten (10)-day period prior to the hearing, the parties have the opportunity for continued review and comment on the final investigation report and available evidence. That review and comment should be shared with the Decision Maker or Title IX Coordinator.

1. Pre-Hearing Meetings

The Decision Maker may convene a pre-hearing meeting(s) with the parties and their Advisors and invite them to submit the questions or topics they (the parties and their Advisors) wish to ask or discuss at the hearing, so that the Decision Maker can rule on their relevance ahead of time to avoid any improper evidentiary introduction in the hearing or to provide recommendations for more appropriate phrasing. 

However, this advance review opportunity does not preclude the Advisors from asking a question for the first time at the hearing or from asking for a reconsideration on a pre-hearing ruling by the Decision Maker based on any new information or testimony offered at the hearing. The Decision Maker must document and share with each party their rationale for any exclusion or inclusion at a pre-hearing meeting.

The Decision Maker, only with full agreement of the parties, may decide in advance of the hearing that certain witnesses do not need to be present if their testimony can be adequately summarized by the Investigator(s) in the investigation report or during the hearing. 

The pre-hearing meeting(s) will not be recorded. The pre-hearing meetings may be conducted as separate meetings with each party/Advisor, with all parties/Advisors present at the same time, remotely, or as a written-only exchange. The Decision Maker will work with the parties to establish the format.

At the hearing, the Decision-maker(s) have the authority to hear and make determinations on all allegations of discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation and may also hear and make determinations on any additional alleged policy violations that occurred in concert with the discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation, even though those collateral allegations may not specifically fall within the Policy Prohibiting Sexual Misconduct and Discrimination on the Basis of Sex.. 

Participants at the hearing will include the Decision Maker, any additional panelists, the hearing facilitator, the Investigator(s) who conducted the investigation, the parties, Advisors to the parties, any called witnesses, the Title IX Coordinator, and anyone providing authorized accommodations, interpretation, and/or assistive services.

The Decision Maker will answer all questions of procedure.

Anyone appearing at the hearing to provide information will respond to questions on their own behalf. 

The Decision Maker will allow witnesses who have relevant information to appear at a portion of the hearing to respond to specific questions from the Decision-maker(s) and the parties, and the witnesses will then be excused.

The Decision Maker explains the procedures and introduces the participants. This may include a final opportunity for challenge or recusal of the Decision-maker(s) based on bias or conflict of interest. The Decision Maker will rule on any such challenge unless the Decision Maker is the individual who is the subject of the challenge, in which case the Title IX Coordinator will review the challenge and decide.

The Decision Maker then conducts the hearing according to the hearing script. At the hearing, recording, witness logistics, party logistics, curation of documents, separation of the parties, and other administrative elements of the hearing process are managed by a non-voting hearing facilitator appointed by the Title IX Coordinator.  

1.    Investigator Presentation of Final Investigation Report

The Investigator(s) will present a summary of the final investigation report, including items that are contested and those that are not, and will be subject to questioning by the Decision-maker(s) and the parties (through their Advisors). 
Neither the parties nor the Decision-maker(s) should ask the Investigator(s) their opinions on credibility, recommended findings, or determinations, and Advisors and parties will refrain from discussion of or questions for Investigators about these assessments. If such information is introduced, the Decision Maker will direct that it be disregarded.

2.    Testimony and Questioning

Once the Investigator(s) present(s) the report and respond(s) to questions, the parties and witnesses may provide relevant information in turn, beginning with the Complainant, and then in the order determined by the Decision Maker. The hearing will facilitate questioning of parties and witnesses by the Decision-maker(s) and then by the parties through their Advisors.

All questions are subject to a relevance determination by the Decision Maker. The Advisor, will pose the proposed question orally, electronically, or in writing. Orally is the default if any of the allegations meet the Title IX definition of Sexual Harassment, if dismissed under Title IX all questions must be submitted in writing.  If submitted orally, the proceeding will pause to allow the Decision Maker to consider the question (and state it if it has not already been stated aloud), and the Decision Maker will determine whether the question will be permitted, disallowed, or rephrased. 

The Decision Maker may invite explanations or persuasive statements regarding relevance with the Advisors if the Decision Maker so chooses. The Decision Maker will then state their decision on the question for the record and advise the party/witness to whom the question was directed, accordingly. The Decision Maker will explain any decision to exclude a question as not relevant, or to reframe it for relevance.

The Decision Maker will limit or disallow questions on the basis that they are irrelevant, unduly repetitious (and thus irrelevant), or abusive. The Decision Maker has final say on all questions and determinations of relevance. The Decision Maker may consult with legal counsel on any questions of admissibility. The Decision Maker may ask Advisors to frame why a question is or is not relevant from their perspective but will not entertain argument from the Advisors on relevance once the Decision Maker has ruled on a question. 

If the parties raise an issue of bias or conflict of interest of an Investigator or Decision-maker at the hearing, the Decision Maker may elect to address those issues, consult with legal counsel, and/or refer them to the Title IX Coordinator, and/or preserve them for appeal. If bias is not in issue at the hearing, the Decision Maker should not permit irrelevant questions that probe for bias.

Any party or witness may choose not to offer evidence and/or answer questions at the hearing, either because they do not attend the hearing, or because they attend but refuse to participate in some or all questioning. The Decision-maker(s) can only rely on whatever relevant evidence is available through the investigation and hearing in making the ultimate determination of responsibility. The Decision-maker(s) may not draw any inference solely from a party’s or witness’s absence from the hearing or refusal to submit to cross-examination or answer other questions.

Hearings (but not deliberations) are recorded by the University for purposes of review in the event of an appeal. The parties may not record the proceedings and no other unauthorized recordings are permitted.

The Decision-maker(s), the parties, their Advisors (with approval from the party they represented), and appropriate administrators of the University will be permitted to review the recording or review a transcript of the recording, upon request to the Title IX Coordinator. No person will be given or be allowed to make a copy of the recording without permission of the Title IX Coordinator.

The Decision-maker(s) will deliberate in closed session to determine whether the Respondent is responsible for the policy violation(s) in question. If a panel is used, a simple majority vote is required to determine the finding. The preponderance of the evidence standard of proof is used. 

When there is a finding of responsibility on one or more of the allegations, the Decision-maker(s) may then consider the previously submitted party impact and/or mitigation statement(s) in determining appropriate sanction(s). 

The Decision-maker(s) will also review any pertinent conduct history provided by the appropriate administrator and will determine the appropriate sanction(s) in consultation with other appropriate administrators, as appropriate.

The Decision Maker will then prepare a written statement detailing all findings and final determinations, the rationale(s) explaining the decision(s), the evidence used in support of the determination(s), the evidence not relied upon in the determination(s), any credibility assessments, and any sanction(s) and rationales explaining the sanction(s) and will deliver the statement to the Title IX Coordinator. 

This statement must be submitted to the Title IX Coordinator within three (3) business days of the end of deliberations unless the Title IX Coordinator grants an extension. If an extension is granted, the Title IX Coordinator will notify the parties.

Using the deliberation statement, the Title IX Coordinator will work with the Decision Maker(s) to prepare a Notice of Outcome letter. The Title IX Coordinator will then share the letter, which includes the final determination, rationale, and any applicable sanction(s), with the parties and their Advisors within three (3) business-days of receiving the deliberation statement. 

The Notice of Outcome will be shared with the parties simultaneously. Notification will be made in writing and may be delivered by one or more of the following methods: in person, mailed to the local or permanent address of the parties as indicated in official University records, or emailed to the parties’ University-issued email or otherwise approved account. Once mailed, emailed, and/or received in-person, notice will be presumptively delivered. 

The Notice of Outcome will articulate the specific alleged policy violation(s), including the relevant policy section(s), and will contain a description of the procedural steps taken by the University from the receipt of the misconduct report to the determination, including any and all notifications to the parties, interviews with parties and witnesses, site visits, methods used to obtain evidence, and hearings held. 

The Notice of Outcome will specify the finding for each alleged policy violation; the findings of fact that support the determination; conclusions regarding the application of the relevant policy to the facts at issue; a statement of, and rationale for, the result of each allegation to the extent the University is permitted to share such information under state or federal law; any sanction(s) issued which the University is permitted to share according to state or federal law; and whether remedies will be provided to the Complainant to ensure access to the University’s educational or employment program or activity. 

The Notice of Outcome will also include information on when the results are considered final by the University, will note any changes to the outcome and/or sanction(s) that occur prior to finalization, and the relevant procedures and bases for appeal.

Factors considered when determining a sanction/responsive action may include, but are not limited to: 

• The nature, severity of, and circumstances surrounding the violation(s) 
• The Respondent’s disciplinary history 
• The need for sanctions/responsive actions to bring an end to the discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation
• The need for sanctions/responsive actions to prevent the future recurrence of discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation
• The need to remedy the effects of the discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation on the Complainant and the community
• The impact on the parties
• Any other information deemed relevant by the Decision-maker(s)

The sanctions will be implemented as soon as is feasible, either upon the outcome of any appeal or the expiration of the window to appeal without an appeal being requested. 

The sanctions described in this Policy are not exclusive of, and may be in addition to, other actions taken, or sanctions imposed, by external authorities. 

If it is later determined that a party or witness intentionally provided false or misleading information, that action could be grounds for re-opening a grievance process at any time, and/or referring that information to another process for resolution.

A.    Student Sanctions
The following are the common sanctions that may be imposed upon students singly or in combination: 

• Warning: A formal statement that the conduct was unacceptable and a warning that further violation of any University policy, procedure, or directive will result in more severe sanctions/responsive actions. 
• Required Counseling: A mandate to meet with and engage in either University-sponsored or external counseling to better comprehend the misconduct and its effects.   
• Probation: A written reprimand for violation of institutional policy, providing for more severe disciplinary sanctions in the event that the student or organization is found in violation of any institutional policy, procedure, or directive within a specified period of time. Terms of the probation will be articulated and may include denial of specified social privileges, exclusion from co-curricular activities, exclusion from designated areas of campus, no-contact orders, and/or other measures deemed appropriate. 
• Suspension: Termination of student status for a definite period of time not to exceed two years and/or until specific criteria are met. Students who return from suspension are automatically placed on probation through the remainder of their tenure as a student at Loma Linda University.
• Expulsion: Permanent termination of student status and revocation of rights to be on campus for any reason or to attend University-sponsored events. 
• Other Actions: In addition to or in place of the above sanctions, the University may assign any other sanctions as deemed appropriate.

B.    Employee Sanctions/Responsive/Corrective Actions
Responsive actions for an employee who has engaged in harassment, discrimination, and/or retaliation include: 

• Verbal or Written Warning
• Performance Improvement Plan/Management Process
• Enhanced Supervision, Observation, or Review
• Required Counseling 
• Required Training or Education
• Probation
• Denial of Pay Increase/Pay Grade
• Loss of Oversight or Supervisory Responsibility
• Demotion
• Transfer
• Reassignment
• Delay of (or referral for delay of) Tenure Track Progress
• Assignment to New Supervisor
• Restriction of Stipends, Research, and/or Professional Development Resources
• Suspension/Administrative Leave with Pay
• Suspension/Administrative Leave without Pay 
• Termination 
• Other Actions: In addition to or in place of the above sanctions/responsive actions, the University may assign any other responsive actions as deemed appropriate.

A.    Students

Should a Respondent decide not to participate in the Resolution Process, the process proceeds absent their participation to a reasonable resolution. Should a student Respondent permanently withdraw from the University, the Resolution Process typically ends with a dismissal, as the University has lost primary disciplinary jurisdiction over the withdrawn student. However, the University may continue the Resolution Process when, at the discretion of the Title IX Coordinator, doing so may be necessary to address safety and/or remedy any ongoing effects of the alleged harassment, discrimination, and/or retaliation. 

Regardless of whether the complaint is dismissed or pursued to completion of the Resolution Process, the University will continue to address and remedy any systemic issues or concerns that may have contributed to the alleged violation(s), and any ongoing effects of the alleged harassment, discrimination, and/or retaliation.

If the student Respondent only withdraws or takes a leave for a specified period of time (e.g., one semester or term), the Resolution Process may continue remotely and, if found in violation, that student is not permitted to return to University unless and until all sanctions, if any, have been satisfied.

B.    Employees

Should an employee Respondent resign with unresolved allegations pending, the Resolution Process typically ends with dismissal, as the University has lost primary disciplinary jurisdiction over the resigned employee. However, the University may continue the Resolution Process when, at the discretion of the Title IX Coordinator, doing may be necessary to address safety and/or remedy any ongoing effects of the alleged harassment, discrimination, and/or retaliation. 

Regardless of whether the matter is dismissed or pursued to completion of the Resolution Process, the University will continue to address and remedy any systemic issues or concerns that contributed to the alleged violation(s), and any ongoing effects of the alleged harassment, discrimination, and/or retaliation.

All Respondents are expected to comply with the assigned sanctions, responsive actions, and/or corrective actions within the timeframe specified by the final Decision-maker(s). 

Failure to abide by the sanction(s)/action(s) imposed by the date specified, whether by refusal, neglect, or any other reason, may result in additional sanction(s)/action(s), including suspension, expulsion, and/or termination from the University. Supervisors are expected to enforce completion of sanctions/responsive actions for their employees.

A suspension will only be lifted when compliance is achieved to the satisfaction of the Title IX Coordinator.

Loma Linda University will maintain for a period of at least seven years following the conclusion of the Resolution Process, records of:

1. Each sexual harassment investigation including any determination regarding responsibility and any audio or audiovisual recording or transcript required under federal regulation
2. Any disciplinary sanctions imposed on the Respondent
3.  Any remedies provided to the Complainant designed to restore or preserve equal access to the University’s education program or activity
4. Any appeal and the result therefrom
5. Any Informal Resolution and the result therefrom
6. All materials used to train Title IX Coordinators, Investigators, Decision-makers, and any person who facilitates an Informal Resolution process. Loma Linda University will make these training materials publicly available on the University’s website. 
7. Any actions, including any supportive measures, taken in response to a report or Formal Complaint of sexual harassment, including:
   • The basis for all conclusions that the response was not deliberately indifferent
   • Any measures designed to restore or preserve equal access to the University’s education program or activity
   • If no supportive measures were provided to the Complainant, document the reasons why such a response was not clearly unreasonable in light of the known circumstances

Loma Linda University will also maintain any and all records in accordance with state and federal laws.

This Policy and procedures supersede any previous policies addressing harassment, sexual misconduct, discrimination, and/or retaliation for incidents occurring on or after August 14, 2020, under Title IX and will be reviewed and updated annually by the Title IX Coordinator. The University reserves the right to make changes to this document as necessary, and once those changes are posted online, they are in effect. 

During the Resolution Process, the Title IX Coordinator may make minor modifications to procedures that do not materially jeopardize the fairness owed to any party, such as to accommodate summer schedules. The Title IX Coordinator may also vary procedures materially with notice (on the institutional website, with the appropriate effective date identified) upon determining that changes to law or regulation require Policy or procedural alterations not reflected in this Policy and procedures. 

If government laws or regulations change–or court decisions alter–the requirements in a way that impacts this document, this document will be construed to comply with the most recent government laws or regulations or court holdings. 

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

This Policy and procedures are effective January 1, 2022.