Student Misconduct Procedure (2018-2019 academic year)

Copied below is the 2018-2019 academic year version of the Student Misconduct Procedure, which is applicable to complaints filed on or after August 15, 2018.

University of Iowa Student Misconduct Procedure Flowchart

1. Introduction. The University of Iowa’s Student Misconduct Procedure is designed to provide a process to investigate and resolve alleged violations of University policies by students.

The student misconduct system is not a substitute for the civil or criminal court system. Rather, the Student Misconduct Procedure provides a mechanism for the University to determine if University rules have been violated and act in accordance with the findings.

2. Jurisdiction. This Student Misconduct Procedure generally governs reports that students have allegedly violated University policies, except for reports of academic misconduct; misconduct in University Housing; or abuse of a service privilege, such as overdue library books, parking violations, intramural sports infractions, and misuse of placement offices and computer services.

Allegations of academic misconduct are handled under the procedures in Part C of Student Responsibilities found in the Polices & Regulations affecting Students. Reports of abuse of service privileges are resolved within the particular department that provides the service in question.

Reports against student University employees, who generally serve in an at-will capacity, may be resolved under this process or under policies or procedures applicable to that employment, if any, or both.

For reports of misconduct occurring in University Housing & Dining facilities, the Director of Student Accountability may resolve the report under the Student Misconduct Procedure.

3. Report. A report that a University policy has been violated may be brought by any person, or by the University itself. The complaint will ordinarily be in writing.

Reports that involve any allegations of sexual misconduct, domestic or dating violence, or stalking will be forwarded to the Office of the Sexual Misconduct Response Coordinator. Reports of most other misconduct will ordinarily be forwarded to the Office of the Student Accountability. Reports involving alleged violations of other University policies (for example, the Human Rights Policy and the Anti-Harassment Policy) may be referred to the appropriate University office(s) for investigation and/or adjudication.

If a sexual misconduct, domestic or dating violence, or stalking report was filed by a person other than the directly impacted party, the Office of the Sexual Misconduct Response Coordinator will notify the directly impacted party of the report and will determine whether the directly impacted party wants the University to investigate the report. When determining whether to honor a directly impacted party’s request to refrain from investigating and taking further action on a report, the Director of Student Accountability will consult with the Office of the Sexual Misconduct Response Coordinator and will consider the nature of the report, any other reports that may have been filed against the responding student, and the likelihood of further policy violations or danger to any person. In some cases, the University may need to move forward with an investigation contrary to a directly impacted party’s wishes. In those cases, a directly impacted party is not obligated to participate in the process and will be notified that an investigation is moving forward.

 

4. Investigation. When a student is accused of violating a Code of Student Life rule other than Rule 1, an investigator is assigned to conduct the University’s investigation into the allegations. In the event that the information collected during the investigation indicates that it is more likely than not that the responding student violated student conduct rules, the investigator has the authority to impose disciplinary sanctions with the exception of suspension or expulsion sanctions (refer to Section 10 below). The burden of evidence is explained in Section 9, and sanctions are listed in Section 14.

The Director of Student Accountability is authorized to suspend or expel students found responsible for violating Code of Student Life rules. In sexual misconduct, domestic or dating violence, or stalking cases, the Director will request sanctioning input from the Office of the Sexual Misconduct Response Coordinator. As explained below in Section 12, suspension and expulsion cases are resolved through a different process after the completion of the investigation phase. If the Director elects to delegate their sanction authority to another administrator, the administrator designated by the Director of Student Accountability must be someone other than the investigator assigned to the case.

In cases where the report of misconduct may relate to violations of University policies that contain separate procedures, the Director of Student Accountability will consult with any department responsible for investigating under the separate University policies. The Director of Student Accountability and the responsible department shall agree upon the investigator and the applicable procedures. In some cases, there may be more than one administrative investigation and more than one administrative procedure to resolve a report.

In cases where a specific directly impacted party has been identified, both the directly impacted party and the responding student are allowed to do all of the following during the investigation: bring an advocate (who may be a certified victim advocate) and advisor (who may be an attorney at the party’s expense) to any meeting with the investigator; meet with the investigator; submit documents and other relevant evidence to the investigator; identify witnesses who may have information relevant to the report; and receive periodic updates on the status of the investigation upon request to the investigator. Investigations should be completed as promptly as possible.

5. Interim Measures. Pending the investigation and outcome of a report, a responding student may be subjected to any measure set forth in this Student Misconduct Procedure, other than expulsion or restitution/fines, on an interim basis. The investigator or Director of Student Accountability will base an interim measure decision on evidence available at that time. In cases where suspension is being considered as an interim measure, the investigator or Director of Student Accountability will consider whether the student’s continued presence at the University pending the outcome of the investigation and hearing creates a continuing danger to persons or property or constitutes an ongoing threat of disruption to the academic process.

Within five (5) University business days after receipt of the notice of the interim measure, a request may be made to the Director of Student Accountability to review and reconsider the interim measures. In sexual misconduct, domestic or dating violence, or stalking cases, the Director will consult with the Office of the Sexual Misconduct Response Coordinator.

6. Criminal Charges. University disciplinary proceedings may be instituted against a student charged with conduct that potentially violates both criminal laws and University policy, notwithstanding the fact that an investigation or court proceeding might be pending. University proceedings may occur before, during, or after the criminal court process. Hereinafter, “criminal” may include contempt hearings for violating a court order as well as violations of any federal, state, or local law or ordinance. The investigator or Director of Student Accountability may elect to delay the resolution of a report if criminal charges are pending. In sexual misconduct reports, the administrative report investigation will not be delayed except in extraordinary circumstances.

A student charged with violating Section D.20 Criminal Conduct of the Code of Student Life will be considered responsible for violating the Code of Student Life and therefore subject to disciplinary sanctions if convicted in criminal court of behavior prohibited under the sexual misconduct rules and/or the Code of Student Life. For purposes of these procedures, a conviction includes a guilty plea, jury verdict, misconduct decision, or deferred judgment. Due to the differences between the standard of proof used by a criminal court and the preponderance of the evidence standard used in university misconduct investigations, a student charged but not convicted of a crime is still subject to University disciplinary action if found responsible by an adjudicator or investigator. Findings or sanctions imposed under this Student Misconduct Procedure shall not be subject to change even though criminal charges arising out of the same facts were dismissed, reduced, or resolved in favor of the responding student.

7. Resolution by the Director. In cases where the allegations are disputed by a student who is facing a university suspension or expulsion, the Director of Student Accountability shall schedule a formal administrative hearing (see Section 12). In cases where the responding student acknowledges they engaged in the alleged behavior, which violated the rules outlined in the Code of Student Life, a formal administrative hearing is not required. In a non-disputed case, the sanction shall be determined by the Director of Student Accountability, or designee, who shall be someone other than the investigator assigned to investigate the case. The process for appealing sanctions issued by the Director of Student Accountability, or designee, in non-disputed cases follows the post-hearing appeal process described below in Section 15. If the responding student agrees to accept the sanction(s) imposed by the Director of Student Accountability, or designee, at any point in the process set forth in the Student Misconduct Procedures, the report will be considered resolved. In these cases, the student waives any subsequent right to a hearing and any subsequent right to an appeal. 

In a sexual misconduct case, the Director of Student Accountability, or designee, will consult with the Office of the Sexual Misconduct Response Coordinator, as well as the reporting party or the directly impacted party, or both if different people, before implementing a resolution under this provision. 

8. Withdrawal of Accused Student. A responding student whose case could result in suspension or expulsion cannot withdraw from University enrollment during an enrolled academic session without the permission of the Office of the Dean of Students. If the student is permitted to withdraw, a restriction may be placed on the student’s registration. In addition, the withdrawn student’s academic transcript may include a notation that the student withdrew after a non-academic disciplinary report was filed.

When a responding student, who fails to participate in early registration for an upcoming semester, decides during the investigation to not continue at the University, a restriction may be placed on the student’s registration and the academic transcript may include a notation that the student withdrew after a disciplinary report was filed.

When a responding student attempts to withdraw, the Director of Student Accountability will ordinarily grant permission to withdraw unless the allegations indicate that a suspension or expulsion may be warranted if the report is founded. If the Office of Student Accountability has issued the investigation report and recommended a suspension/expulsion hearing, the hearing will proceed and the responding student will not be allowed to withdraw unless the student agrees to accept the sanction(s) imposed by the Director of Student Accountability and waive any subsequent right to a hearing and waive any subsequent right to an appeal. When a responding student chooses to not register for the subsequent semester and shares this information with the investigator after the investigative report has been shared, the case will proceed to hearing.

In the case of a responding student who allegedly commits misconduct prior to or after the student’s enrollment at the University and the allegations indicate that a suspension or expulsion may be warranted if the report is founded, a transcript notation may be issued if the student is permitted to withdraw after being notified of the University’s investigation. The transcript notation shall read, “Withdrew After Disciplinary Complaint was Filed”. The same notation shall be issued when a student accused during one enrolled semester chooses to not register for the subsequent academic session; this includes during summer and/or winter break. When a student is not permitted to withdraw and is expelled or suspended, the transcript notation shall read, “Non-Academic Misconduct – Suspension from [semester] to [semester].” Or when a student has been expelled, the transcript notation shall read “Non-Academic Misconduct - Expulsion” as applicable.

In considering whether to place a notation on a former student’s academic transcript, the Director of Student Accountability shall consider the timing of the allegations, the nature of the alleged misconduct, and the progress of the Code of Student Life investigation. A transcript notation may be issued when a former student is accused of committing non-academic misconduct for which a suspension or expulsion may be warranted and the incident(s) in question occurred while the student was enrolled at the University. The Dean of Students may collect information about the case and block the former student’s registration in anticipation of the student petitioning to re-enroll; however, no notation will appear on the student’s transcript unless the responding student was enrolled or had future enrollment at the time the alleged incident took place.

  9. Standard of Proof. The standard of proof under this Student Misconduct Procedure is a preponderance of the evidence. If the investigator determines that it is more likely than not that no policy violation occurred, the report will be dismissed. If the investigator or adjudicator determines that it is more likely than not that one or more University policies were violated, a sanction or sanctions will be imposed.

  10. Investigator Decision. The investigator’s decision letter shall summarize the findings of the investigation and identify any rules violated. The letter shall also note any sanctions imposed or, in the case of potential suspension or expulsion, the letter shall recommend a formal hearing if the responding student is disputing the material allegations of wrongdoing. In sexual misconduct cases, the investigator will, at approximately the same time, inform the reporting party, the directly impacted party, and the responding student in writing of the outcome of the investigation, to the extent permitted by federal and state laws governing student privacy and confidential student records. The investigator will provide a copy of the decision letter to the Director of Student Accountability and to other appropriate University offices, including the Office of the Sexual Misconduct Response Coordinator in cases involving sexual misconduct, domestic or dating violence, or stalking.

In some instances, the investigator may choose to issue a deferred judgment.  A deferred judgment means that the final decision on the merits of the report is postponed for a specific period of time.  During the period of postponement, the investigator may elect to reopen the investigation and issue findings of fact and sanctions, if appropriate.  If no further reports are made during the period of postponement, the original report will be considered dismissed following the conclusion of the time period.

11. Cases that do not Involve Suspension or Expulsion. Upon a finding that it is more likely than not that a policy violation occurred, the investigator has the authority to impose any disciplinary sanction other than suspension or expulsion. An explanation of some such sanctions can be found in Section 14. Decisions of the investigator can be appealed through the process set forth in Section 15.

 12. Formal Hearing Procedure for Suspension and Expulsion Cases.

(A) Formal Hearings. In cases where the investigator finds it more likely than not that a policy violation occurred, determines the recommended sanction to be suspension or expulsion, and the material facts of the case are in dispute, the Director of Student Accountability will order a formal hearing and assign a charging officer and an adjudicator.

In cases where the responding student does not dispute the material facts of a case recommended for a formal hearing but disputes the application of the rules to the facts, the Director of Student Accountability, or designee, will order a formal hearing and assign a charging officer and an adjudicator. In cases where the responding student does not dispute the material facts and does not dispute the application of the rules to the facts but disagrees with the sanctions, the student may appeal the imposed sanction.

(B) Roles. The charging officer’s role is to coordinate the presentation of witnesses and evidence against the responding student, and urge the adjudicator to find the responding student responsible for alleged rule violation(s). The investigator may be appointed as the charging officer. The charging officer may call witnesses; ask clarifying procedural questions of the adjudicator; may lodge objections to witnesses, evidence, and others issues; and may consult with witnesses, advocates, or attorneys, but the charging officer otherwise may not speak during the hearing unless requested by the adjudicator.

The adjudicator’s role is to address prehearing matters, to preside over the hearing, to ask questions of the witnesses, to resolve evidentiary issues and disputes, and to ultimately determine whether a University policy violation has occurred.

If the reporting party, the responding student, or the charging officer believes that the assigned adjudicator cannot fairly and competently preside over the hearing, that party should lodge an objection to the adjudicator in writing via the Director of Student Accountability at least two (2) University business days before the hearing is scheduled to begin. The submission shall set forth the ground(s) for the objection, which may include allegations that the adjudicator has a substantial conflict of interest or a demonstrated bias. The Director of Student Accountability will consider and make a determination regarding the objection prior to the hearing.

(C) Notice of Hearing. The charging officer will provide a notice of hearing to both the reporting party and the responding student. The notice may be served by U.S. Mail, campus mail, fax, electronic mail, or hand delivery. The hearing will not be set sooner than seven (7) University business days after the service of the notice.

The notice of hearing should include the following information:

1) The time, date, and location of the hearing.

2) The name(s) and contact information of the adjudicator and charging officer.

3) The facts and circumstances supporting the allegation.

4) The rule(s) allegedly violated.

5) A preliminary description of the witnesses and exhibits the charging officer intends to use in the hearing, which may be updated by the charging officer at least two (2) days prior to the hearing or as directed by the adjudicator.

6) A copy or a link to the Student Misconduct Procedure, which sets forth both the procedures for the hearing and the range of potential sanctions that the Director of Student Accountability may impose.

7) A description of any interim measures that are in effect before the hearing.

8) Information about the parties’ right to bring an advocate, attorney, and/or advisor to the hearing.

(D) Consolidation.

1) Multiple Reports. When two or more reports have been lodged against the same student, the charging officer has discretion to set separate hearings for each report or to combine the reports into a single hearing.

2) Multiple Students. When two or more students have been alleged to have violated University policies from the same facts and circumstances, the charging officer has discretion to set separate hearings for each student or to combine the reports into a single hearing.

(E) Pre-Hearing Preparation. Prior to the hearing, the reporting party, directly impacted party, the charging officer, and the responding student have a right to view the documents, records, or other evidence that each party plans to present at the hearing, if any. At least five (5) University business days before the hearing, the reporting party, the charging officer, and the responding party will also exchange information on potential witnesses each party plans to call, if any, in advance of the hearing. Arrangements relating to the exchange of such witness lists, documents, records, or other evidence will be made by the adjudicator. The adjudicator has the authority to take appropriate and reasonable action or to impose reasonable hearing-related sanctions for non-compliance with these provisions, which may include exclusion of the witnesses or exhibits that were not disclosed in accordance with these provisions. To arrange an appointment to examine the disciplinary file or learn what documents and other evidence will be presented at the hearing, the student(s) should contact the Office of Student Accountability at least two (2) University business days before the hearing is scheduled to take place and arrange a meeting with the keeper of the record.

(F) Postponing the Hearing. If the charging officer, reporting party, directly impacted party, or responding student cannot appear at the date and time specified for the hearing, that person must request a new hearing date or time from the adjudicator at least two (2) University business days before the hearing is scheduled to begin. A hearing is not postponed until the request for postponement is approved by the adjudicator.

(G) Failure to Attend Hearing. If the responding student has received notice and does not appear for the hearing, the charging officer may nevertheless present the information and evidence in support of the allegations and the adjudicator may make a ruling on the merits of the allegations.

(H) Hearing Procedure. Hearings shall be conducted in accordance with the following guidelines:

1) Closed hearing. The hearing will be closed to the public.

2) Record. The adjudicator will maintain the record and all exhibits of the hearing, which may be recorded, until the adjudicator has rendered a decision. The record, all exhibits, and any recordings of the hearing will be the property of the University and kept in the Office of the Dean of Students.

3) Attendance During Hearing. The charging officer, responding student, directly impacted party, and the reporting party have the right to be present for the entire hearing. Attendance may be by telephone or video conferencing. Attendance by the responding student or the reporting party is not required.

4) Advocate. The responding student, the reporting party, and the directly impacted party have the ability to have an advocate (who may be a certified victim advocate) present throughout the hearing at the student’s or party’s expense. The advocate may ask clarifying procedural questions of the adjudicator and may consult with the party or student who brought the advocate, but the advocate may not otherwise speak during the hearing.

5) Attorney. The responding student, the reporting party, and the directly impacted party have the ability to have an attorney present throughout the hearing at the student’s or party’s expense. The attorney may call witnesses; ask clarifying procedural questions of the adjudicator; may lodge objections to witnesses, evidence, and other issues; and may consult with the party or student who brought the attorney, but the attorney otherwise may not speak during the hearing unless requested by the adjudicator.

6) Witnesses. The charging officer, the reporting party or directly impacted party, and the responding student may call witnesses. Prospective witnesses, except for the reporting party/directly impacted party or the responding student, may be excluded from the hearing room until called. At their discretion, the adjudicator may order that a witness not included on the pre-hearing witness list be called to testify. The adjudicator’s order may be issued prior to the start of the hearing or after the start of the hearing.

7) Questioning. Consistent with the educational nature of the Student Misconduct Procedure, the adjudicator will ordinarily question the responding student, the reporting party or directly impacted party, and any witnesses relating to the allegations in the case. The charging officer, responding student, directly impacted party, and reporting party may suggest questions to the adjudicator. The adjudicator has discretion to determine the questions posed to the responding student, the reporting party, directly impacted party, and any witnesses, including questions generated by the adjudicator. A short recess may be necessary to generate and submit questions.

8) Evidence/Evidentiary Standard. The charging officer, responding student, directly impacted party, and the reporting party may all submit evidence to the adjudicator. The charging officer, responding student, directly impacted party, and the reporting party may also review and comment on each other’s evidence submitted to the adjudicator. The adjudicator will note objections to evidence and has discretion to receive or exclude evidence.

The adjudicator has discretion to receive and consider offered evidence, and will base a finding upon the kind of evidence which reasonably prudent persons are accustomed to rely for the conduct of their serious affairs. Except where explicitly provided for in the Student Misconduct Procedure, formal or technical rules of evidence or procedure utilized in courtrooms do not apply to the hearing. The adjudicator’s decision may be based upon evidence that may be inadmissible in a criminal or civil court. Irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious evidence should be excluded.

In cases involving allegations of sexual misconduct, the adjudicator shall scrutinize carefully any information regarding the prior sexual activity of a party or witness. Evidence of past sexual behavior may be immaterial depending on the circumstances. If the information is relevant to the issues in dispute, the adjudicator may allow the information into the record. If a party’s past sexual behavior is not relevant to the case, the adjudicator shall not allow the information into the record.

9) Standard of Proof. The adjudicator shall apply the “preponderance of evidence” standard described in Section 9.

10) Hearing Room Space/Partitions. The adjudicator will accommodate concerns about safety, well-being, confrontation, or scheduling with the parties in any manner determined in the sole judgment of the adjudicator to be appropriate. Such concerns may be resolved by utilizing partitions or visual screens, permitting testimony via telephone, video conferencing, receiving testimony via recording or written statement, or in other manners.

11) Decorum. The parties and witnesses are expected to maintain a level of decorum appropriate for an educational proceeding. The adjudicator is responsible for maintaining decorum and may remove any person from the hearing due to disruptive behavior.

12) Adjudicator Decision. The adjudicator’s decision shall be issued in writing to the Director of Student Accountability within ten (10) University business days after the hearing, unless an alternative time frame is otherwise agreed upon by the charging officer, the responding student, directly impacted party, and the reporting party. The written decision shall summarize the findings of fact, identify rules violated, and determine whether the responding student is responsible for violating University policies. In cases where the responding student has been found responsible for one or more policy violations, the Director of Student Accountability will determine which sanction(s) to impose and implement any sanction(s) imposed in a separate letter provided to the parties. The Director’s sanction letter shall include a rationale explaining why the chosen status sanction was selected over an alternative.  A copy of the sanction determination will be placed in the responding student’s disciplinary file in the Office of Student Accountability alongside the adjudicator’s decision.

Consistent with state and federal law, the Director of Student Accountability will circulate to the reporting party, the directly impacted party, the responding student, the charging officer, and any other appropriate University official a copy of the adjudicator’s decision and the sanction(s) imposed, if any, within two (2) University business days after receipt of the adjudicator’s decision. The letter from the Director of Student Accountability shall establish the deadline for filing an appeal and shall include a statement describing the procedure for appeal set forth below. The notice can be sent by U.S. Mail, campus mail, fax, electronic mail, or may be personally served.

13. Impact Statement. In a sexual misconduct case, a directly impacted party has the right to submit an impact statement to the investigator (in cases not involving suspension or expulsion) or the Director of Student Accountability (in cases involving suspension or expulsion) prior to a determination of sanction(s). In other types of cases, the investigator may request an impact statement from a directly impacted party. Impact statements shall not be considered as evidence that the incident in question was in fact committed, and shall not be the basis for examination in any hearing. However, the investigator or the Director of Student Accountability may consider the impact statement in making a determination as to the appropriate level of sanction to be imposed upon a finding that a University policy has been violated.

 14. Sanctions. When it has been determined after an investigation or hearing that one or more University policies have been violated, one or more final sanctions may be imposed. The following is a non-exhaustive list of potential sanctions that may be utilized individually or in combination:

(A) Educational Sanction. A student may be required to provide an identified service or participate in a particular program, receive specific instruction, or complete a research assignment. The student is responsible for related expenses, including expenses for education, counseling, or treatment, if any expense is entailed.

(B) Disciplinary Reprimand: A written notice to the student explaining that the student's violation of institutional policy warrants an official record to be kept in the Office of Student Accountability. Disciplinary Reprimand is a Step 1 sanction. A subsequent University policy violation following a Disciplinary Reprimand could result in the imposition of more serious sanctions.

(C) Disciplinary Probation: A written admonishment for a violation of specified regulations. With respect to the non-academic disciplinary system, a student on disciplinary probation is not considered to be in good standing for a designated period of time. If the student is found to violate any institutional regulation(s) during the probationary period, more severe disciplinary sanctions may be imposed, including the possibility of suspension or expulsion from the University. Once the designated period of time has elapsed, the student will be considered in good standing; however, a record of the sanction will be kept in the Office of the Dean of Students. Disciplinary Probation is a Step 2 sanction. 

(D) Restitution and Fine. A student may be assessed reasonable expenses related to the misconduct. This may include, but is not limited to, the repair/replacement cost for any damage they cause to property or medical or counseling expenses incurred by the victim. An established fine may also be imposed upon the responsible student.

(E) Denial of Privileges. A student may be denied access to certain University privileges for a definite or indefinite period of time. Such sanctions may include, but are not limited to: prohibitions on University employment; bar from extracurricular activities; restrictions from all or part of campus; prohibition on the use of computers, internet, or other University services; and/or prevention from attending a class.

(F) No-Contact Directive: A student may be prohibited from intentionally contacting a student, employee, or visitor to campus in any manner at any time. Such prohibition may be in effect for a specific or an indefinite period of time.


(G) University Housing Transfer or Contract Cancellation: A student may be involuntarily transferred within, or removed from, University housing or residence halls. The student may also be prohibited from reentering University housing or residence halls. Conditions for readmission may be specified.

(H) Disciplinary Suspension: A student may be involuntarily separated from the University for a period of time after which readmission is possible. Conditions for return may be specified. The Director of Student Accountability may be required to approve any request for readmission.

(I) Expulsion: The student may be permanently separated from the University.

Sanctions will vary based upon the facts and circumstances of any specific offense. Sanctions are usually progressive in nature and include the probability of more severe disciplinary sanctions if the student is found to violate the same or any other University policies. In some circumstances, the investigator or Director of Student Accountability may elect to defer a sanction.  A deferred suspension, suspension in abeyance, or deferred Housing cancellation, for example, means that the sanction does not go into effect as long as the student complies with all requirements during the interim period.  In those cases where the student completes all expectations during the designated period, the student’s record will not show that the sanction was ever imposed. 

Most alcohol offenses and possession of marijuana under ten (10) grams may be sanctioned through a written reprimand, appropriate education, notification to a parent if the student is a minor, and participation in the Critical MASS program (see minimum sanctions for alcohol and drug violations in the Policy Regarding Use of Illegal Drugs and Alcohol). Sexual assaults, in contrast, will ordinarily result in the suspension or expulsion of the respondent, as well as an administrative no-contact directive involving the parties.

Students who fail to comply with a sanction in a timely manner are subject to additional disciplinary action, which may include suspension from the University until compliance is achieved. The authority of the Director of Student Accountability to take additional action in cases of non-compliance extends to reports resolved through agreement, reports resolved at a formal hearing, and reports resolved by an investigator or another University department such as University Housing.

In the event that a student fails to comply with a sanction and the Director of Student Accountability has decided to impose a suspension, the student will be notified of the apparent failure to comply and of the Director of Student Accountability’s intent to suspend, and provided an opportunity to meet personally with the Director of Student Accountability and explain the circumstances prior to a final decision by the Director. A student suspended for failing to comply with a sanction may appeal the Director of Student Accountability’s decision to the Provost but is not entitled to a formal hearing.

 15. Appeal. In cases involving sexual misconduct, the charging officer, the reporting party, the directly impacted party, or the responding student may appeal the decision of a investigator, the adjudicator, or the Director of Student Accountability by filing a written notice of appeal in writing within ten (10) University business days following the receipt of the decision. The notice of appeal shall be filed with the Office of Student Accountability.

The Director of Student Accountability will promptly transmit the notice of appeal to the non-appealing parties (generally within two (2) University business days). Each non-appealing party will have the right to respond to the appeal within five (5) University business days after the receipt of the appeal.

The Director of Student Accountability is responsible for promptly transmitting the notice of appeal, the hearing record, and any responses received to the appropriate University office for review of the appeal.

For cases that involve suspension or expulsion, the appropriate University office to hear the appeal is the Office of the Provost. The Provost also hears cases dismissed by the investigator which would have risen to the level of a suspension or expulsion had the allegations been founded. For all other cases (including deferred sanctions), the appropriate University office to hear the appeal is the Office of the Vice President for Student Life.

Sanctions imposed by the investigator or Director of Student Accountability will remain in effect while the appeal is being considered. The response to the appeal by the Office of the Provost or the Vice President for Student Life is the final university decision on the matter.

16. Grounds for Appeal. The appealing party must support the appeal by addressing one or more of the following grounds:

(A) The decision was unsupported by substantial evidence when viewed as a whole.

(B) The decision was arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable, or constituted an abuse of discretion.

(C) The sanction was unreasonably harsh or lenient in light of the circumstances.

(D) The procedures were not properly followed, resulting in prejudice to the appealing party.

(E) New evidence, not reasonably available at the time of hearing, warrants reconsideration.

17. Decision on Appeal. On appeal, the decision may be affirmed, reversed, remanded back with instructions for further investigation or hearing, or modified as deemed appropriate by the office reviewing the appeal. In the event that the appeal officer elects to modify the sanction(s), the appeal officer shall consult with the Director of Student Accountability prior to issuing the decision letter to ensure that any appropriate adjustments are included in the decision letter to explain the sanctions. 

The decision letter shall state that it is the final institutional action on the matter. The decision letter shall reference the appeal procedures before the Board of Regents, State of Iowa (BOR) and shall state that such appeals are subject to deadlines. Interim measures in effect while the appeal was pending ordinarily remain in effect until the BOR appeal process is exhausted. Any interim measures put into effect earlier shall expire following the completion of the BOR appeal process, at which point the Director of Student Accountability shall remind each party to observe the Anti-Retaliation Policy. 

The appeal officer shall transmit the written decision to the Director of Student Accountability within ten (10) University business days of the receipt of the notice of appeal. Subject to state and federal law, the Director of Student Accountability will circulate to the reporting party, directly impacted party, responding student, the charging officer, and any other appropriate University official a copy of the decision on appeal within two (2) University business days after receipt of the decision. In cases involving allegations of sexual misconduct, dating violence, or stalking, the Director of Student Accountability also will forward the appeal decision to the Office of the Sexual Misconduct Response Coordinator.