I. General Provisions

The procedures, effective January 21, 2025, generally apply to all allegations of potential violations of the University of Connecticut’s Policy Against Discrimination, Harassment, and Related Interpersonal Violence (“Policy”), where the responding party is a UConn employee or third party. For certain allegations of sexual misconduct occurring on or after August 13, 2020, OIE will follow the 2020 Sexual Misconduct Grievance Procedures. 

The University of Connecticut will treat complainants and respondents equitably throughout the process. 

The University of Connecticut requires that any Title IX Coordinator, investigator, or decisionmaker not have a conflict of interest or bias for or against complainants or respondents generally or an individual complainant or respondent. 

Parties involved in the following grievance process may be accompanied by one advisor of their choice (which may be a union representative or attorney) to any meeting or proceeding. OIE will not assign an advisor for the purposes of these proceedings. If a party chooses to have an advisor, the party should provide OIE with the advisor’s contact information for the purpose of scheduling. The advisor may act as a support person for their party, assist the party in navigating the process, and help formulate questions for the hearing. The advisor may not participate in lieu of the party in any capacity. 

An allegation that an individual or individuals violated the Policy does not constitute an assumption that the behaviors occurred as alleged or that a policy violation occurred. Determinations of responsibility are only made at the conclusion of the process described in these procedures. 

OIE may implement supportive measures, including no contact directives, consistent with the Policy. Supportive measures are available to both parties, non-punitive, and put in place to restore or preserve a person’s access to UConn’s employment or education program or activity or provide support during these grievance procedures. Any party impacted by the supportive measure implementation or denial may appeal the decision by emailing OIE’s Associate Vice President (“AVP”). The appeal should clearly state why the party believes the measure is deficient and may include a recommended alternative measure. The appeal will be reviewed by OIE’s AVP, the Title IX Coordinator, or designee. Any impacted parties will be notified of the outcome in writing within ten (10) business days of receipt of the appeal. 

OIE will make appropriate arrangements to ensure that individuals with disabilities and individuals with limited English proficiency are provided auxiliary aids and services or language assistance services, respectively, if needed to participate in this complaint process. Such arrangements may include, but are not limited to, providing qualified interpreters, or assuring a barrier-free location for the proceedings. 

The University of Connecticut will take reasonable steps to protect the privacy of the parties and witnesses during its grievance procedures. These steps will not restrict the ability of the parties to obtain and present evidence, including by speaking to witnesses; consult with their family members, confidential resources, or advisors; or otherwise prepare for or participate in the grievance procedures. The parties cannot engage in retaliation, including against witnesses. 

While this process is private, it is not confidential. OIE may provide the notice of outcome or other information pertaining to matters addressed under these procedures to individuals or offices with a need to know the information. 

If there is a determination that a violation of the Policy occurred, UConn may impose appropriate disciplinary sanctions, up to, and including, separation from the institution. UConn may also provide remedies to restore access to the University’s employment or education program or activity. 

II. Timeline

OIE is committed to the prompt and thorough resolution of complaints under the Policy. As such, OIE will issue a discretionary dismissal under Section VI or determination under Section X within ninety (90) days of receipt of a complaint. 

These procedures allow for reasonable extensions of timeframes on a case-by-case basis for good cause, which includes but is not limited to: investigations where additional time is necessary to ensure the integrity and completeness of the investigation; to comply with a request by law enforcement for temporary delay to gather evidence for a criminal investigation; to accommodate the availability of parties and/or witnesses; to account for University breaks or vacations; to account for complexities of a case, including the number of witnesses and volume of information provided by the parties; or for other legitimate reasons. 

III. Standard of Evidence

All determinations will be based on the preponderance of evidence standard, meaning the evidence must demonstrate that it is more likely than not that the incident occurred as alleged. Decisionmaker(s) must evaluate relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence for its persuasiveness. If the decisionmaker(s) is not persuaded by the evidence that a violation of the Policy occurred, whatever the quantity of the evidence is, the decisionmaker(s) will not determine that a violation occurred.

IV. Review of Evidence

Relevant evidence is evidence that has some value or tendency to prove a matter of fact significant to the case. Relevant evidence may pertain to a party or witness’s credibility. 

Parties will be provided with equal opportunity to present evidence during the grievance process. Additionally, OIE will take reasonable steps to obtain relevant evidence which may not be in the parties’ control. The decision-maker will objectively evaluate all evidence that is relevant and not otherwise impermissible, including both inculpatory and exculpatory evidence.[1] Credibility determinations will not be based on a person’s status as a complainant, respondent, or witness. 

The following types of evidence, and questions seeking that evidence, are impermissible (i.e., will not be accessed or considered by OIE in connection with its investigation, except as may be necessary to determine whether one of the exceptions listed below applies; will not be disclosed; and will not otherwise be used), regardless of whether they are relevant: 

• Evidence that is protected under a privilege recognized by Federal or State law or evidence provided to a confidential employee, unless the person to whom the privilege or confidentiality is owed has voluntarily waived the privilege or confidentiality; 

• A party’s or witness’s records that are made or maintained by a physician, psychologist, or other recognized professional or paraprofessional in connection with the provision of treatment to the party or witness, unless OIE obtains that party’s or witness’s voluntary, written consent for use in its grievance procedures; and 

• Evidence that relates to the complainant’s sexual interests or prior sexual conduct, unless evidence about the complainant’s prior sexual conduct is offered to prove that someone other than the respondent committed the alleged conduct or is evidence about specific incidents of the complainant’s prior sexual conduct with the respondent that is offered to prove consent to the alleged sex-based harassment. The fact of prior consensual sexual conduct between the complainant and respondent does not by itself demonstrate or imply the complainant’s consent to the alleged sex-based harassment or preclude determination that sex-based harassment occurred. 

V. Initial Review

Upon receipt of a report (oral or written), OIE will evaluate the report to determine whether the alleged conduct is within OIE’s investigative authority as prescribed in the Policy. Where the alleged conduct does not fall under the Policy but may constitute behaviors prohibited by other University policies, OIE will promptly refer the matter to the appropriate authority and notify the impacted party of the referral in writing. 

VI. Discretionary Dismissal

The University of Connecticut may dismiss a complaint if: 

• OIE is unable to identify the respondent after taking reasonable steps to do so; 

• The respondent is not participating in the University of Connecticut’s education program or activity and is not employed by the University of Connecticut; 

• OIE obtains the complainant’s voluntary withdrawal in writing of any or all of the allegations, OIE’s AVP and/or the Title IX Coordinator decline to initiate a complaint, and OIE determines that, without the complainant’s withdrawn allegations, the conduct that remains alleged in the complaint, if any, would not constitute a potential violation of the Policy; or 

• OIE determines the conduct alleged in the complaint, even if proven, would not constitute a violation of the Policy. Before dismissing the complaint, OIE will make reasonable efforts to clarify the allegations with the complainant. 

A discretionary dismissal may occur at any point in the grievance proceeding prior to the final determination, including before initiating the formal fact gathering. Any impacted parties will receive notification of dismissal in writing and may request review of a discretionary dismissal, consistent with section XI of these procedures. 

VII. Informal Resolution

Where appropriate and available, OIE may offer the parties the option to engage in an informal resolution. There is no expectation that parties elect to participate in the informal resolution process. Further, both parties must agree to engage in the process prior to initiation. Parties may decide to withdraw from the informal resolution process at any time prior to a final resolution, and based on the facts and circumstances, the matter may return to the grievance process described by these procedures. An informal resolution is binding on the parties and is considered a final resolution to the matter.

VIII. Investigation (Fact Gathering)

Where the alleged conduct is within OIE’s investigative authority, the impacted party is seeking an investigation, and the report is not otherwise dismissible, OIE will initiate an investigation.[2] Upon initiating an investigation, OIE will provide written notice to the parties with sufficient time for the parties to prepare a response before any initial interview. 

After providing notice, OIE will conduct an adequate, reliable, and impartial investigation into the complaints. The burden is on the investigator – not the parties- to conduct an investigation that gathers sufficient evidence to determine whether a policy violation occurred. As such, OIE maintains full authority to determine whether certain evidence or witnesses are necessary to conduct a thorough investigation. 

OIE will provide to a party whose participation is invited or expected, written notice of the date, time, location, participants, and purpose of all meetings or proceedings with sufficient time for the party to prepare to participate. OIE will provide equal opportunity for parties to present information, both inculpatory and exculpatory, and recommend fact witnesses. On a case-by-case basis, OIE may allow for parties to present expert witnesses equally. 

At the conclusion of the fact gathering, OIE will provide at least ten (10) days for the parties to review [3] all relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence, to which the parties may submit a written response for consideration by the decision-maker(s). During the same period, parties will be given the opportunity to submit questions, in writing, to the decision-maker(s), which the decision-maker(s) will review for relevancy prior to the hearing. The decision-maker will explain to the submitting party any decisions to exclude questions based on relevance, impermissibility, lack of clarity, or harassment of another party. Parties will be given a reasonable opportunity to clarify or revise the excluded question(s) prior to the hearing. 

The unauthorized disclosure of information and evidence obtained solely through these grievance procedures is prohibited, and OIE will take reasonable steps to prevent and address any disclosures. 

IX. Hearing

At the conclusion of the fact gathering, OIE will schedule an administrative hearing where the decision-maker(s) (OIE’s AVP, the Title IX Coordinator, investigator, or trained designee) will ask all relevant questions, including their own questions and questions submitted by the parties. The parties, the decision-maker(s), and where applicable the parties’ advisors will be invited. Further, witnesses may be invited to participate in the hearing if the decision-maker(s) and/or the parties have relevant questions for the witness(es). The hearing will be recorded for review purposes and will be available to parties, if necessary, to facilitate a request for review. 

No party or advisor will be permitted to directly question any party or witness. After the initial round of questions, the decision-maker(s) will suspend the hearing for at least fifteen (15) minutes for the parties to consider and submit any follow-up questions in writing to the decision-maker(s). The decision-maker(s) will reconvene the hearing and ask all relevant follow-up questions to the appropriate parties. 

Any party present at the hearing may be removed from the proceedings for engaging in disruptive or harmful behavior.[4] 

The decision-maker(s) may consider a party’s level of participation in the hearing process in their determination, but a finding that a party engaged in prohibited conduct under the Policy may not be solely based on a party’s refusal to participate in the hearing or answer specific questions. 

Following the hearing, the decision-maker(s) will objectively consider all relevant evidence obtained during the fact finding and at the hearing, consistent with sections I, III, and IV of these procedures to determine what occurred and whether what occurred constitutes a violation of the Policy. 

X. Determination

Within ten (10) business days of the hearing, OIE’s AVP, the decision-maker(s), or trained designee will issue a written notice of outcome to the parties simultaneously. The notice of outcome will include a description of the allegations, information about the Policy and these procedures, the decision-maker’s evaluation of the relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence, the policy determination(s), information on sanctions, referrals, and remedies, and information regarding requests for review. OIE will also notify the Office of the President and/or the Executive Vice President of UConn Health, and any other individual or office that may need to know the information. 

The determination regarding responsibility becomes final either on the date that the written determination of the result of any request for review is issued, or, if no party requests review, the date on which the request for review would no longer be considered timely as defined in section XI of this policy. 

As applicable, OIE’s AVP, the Title IX Coordinator, or designee will coordinate with appropriate management concerning the implementation of remedies, the imposition of any disciplinary sanctions, and take further appropriate action to ensure that violations of the Policy do not continue or recur. 

XI. Written Response and Request for Review

At the conclusion of OIE’s grievance process, outlined above, any party may submit a written response to the outcome. The written response does not constitute a request for review but will be added to and maintained in OIE’s files. 

Parties may also request a review of OIE’s discretionary dismissal or findings. Requests for review must be received by OIE’s AVP no later than 5:00 PM (EST) on the tenth (10) business day from the issuance of the written notice of dismissal or outcome.  A request for an extension of time beyond ten (10) business days may be granted at the discretion of OIE’s AVP or designee. 

The grounds for review are limited to: (1) Procedural irregularity that would change the outcome;  (2) New evidence that would change the outcome and that was not reasonably available when the determination or dismissal was made; and (3) The investigator, decisionmaker, and/or in matters involving sex-based discrimination, the Title IX Coordinator, had a conflict of interest or bias for or against complainants or respondents generally or the individual complainant or respondent that would change the outcome. 

A party’s request for review must identify at least one of the three grounds for review and provide sufficient detail to understand the basis for the request.  Mere disagreement with the outcome is not sufficient grounds for review. 

Upon receipt of a request for review within the prescribed timelines, OIE’s AVP will refer the request and underlying documents to the Panel of Reviewers, which consists of trained faculty, staff, and members of the administration appointed by OIE to serve two-year terms. The Panel of Reviewers will designate one or more members to review the request. 

The reviewer(s) will first review the request to determine if at least one of the review grounds is identified.  The reviewer(s) has the discretion to deny a request if none of the permissible grounds for review are identified.  The reviewer(s) decision to deny a request for failure to identify any of these grounds is deemed final. 

If any of the three permissible grounds for review is identified, the role of the reviewer(s) is to evaluate all available evidence and make a recommendation to the President and/or the Executive Vice President of UConn Health, which may include accepting or rejecting one or all of the items contained in the notice of outcome, or any other actions deemed necessary or appropriate in the discretion of the reviewer(s), within twenty (20) business days of the reviewer(s) receipt of the request for review. Extensions of time may be granted by the President and/or the Executive Vice President of UConn Health or their respective designee for good cause. 

XII. Related Policies

Policy Against Discrimination, Harassment, and Related Interpersonal Violence | University Policies (uconn.edu) (effective August 1, 2024)

Affirmative Action & Equal Employment Opportunity, Policy Statement: | University Policies (uconn.edu) (effective October 3, 2022)

People with Disabilities, Policy Statement: | University Policies (uconn.edu) (effective November 15, 2011)

Religious Accommodation Policy | University Policies (uconn.edu) (effective August 1, 2018)

Non-Retaliation Policy | University Policies (uconn.edu) (effective October 22, 2021)

[1] Inculpatory evidence is evidence that tends to prove that the respondent engaged in the alleged behavior, while exculpatory evidence is evidence that is favorable to the respondent.

[2] In the absence of a participating complainant, OIE may institutionally initiate an investigation after consideration of the specific facts and circumstances consistent with federal and state law.

[3] To protect the privacy of everyone involved, parties will not be allowed to retain evidence or investigative materials.

[4] Throughout the process, students are subject to the Student Code and employees are subject to the Code of Conduct.