Title IX Policy and Resolution

LTU is committed to providing an educational and employment environment that is free from discrimination based on protected characteristics, harassment, and retaliation for engaging in protected activity.

LTU values and upholds the equal dignity of all members of its community and strives to balance the rights of the Parties in the resolution process during what is often a difficult time for all involved.

To ensure compliance with federal, state, and local civil rights laws and regulations, and to affirm its commitment to promoting the goals of fairness and equity in all aspects of the education program or activity, LTU has developed policies and procedures that provide for prompt, fair, and impartial resolution of allegations of protected characteristic discrimination, harassment or allegations of retaliation.

LTU seeks to comply with all federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and ordinances prohibiting discrimination in private post-secondary education institutions.

LTU does not discriminate against any employee, applicant for employment, student, or applicant for admission on the basis of actual or perceived:

• Age (40 years and over in the employment context)
• Color
• Disability (physical or mental)
• Ethnicity
• Gender identity
• Genetic information (including family medical history)
• Marital status
• National origin (including ancestry)
• Pregnancy or related conditions
• Race
• Religion
• Sex
• Sexual orientation
• Veteran or military status (including disabled veteran; recently separated veteran; active-duty, wartime, or campaign badge veteran; and Armed Forces Service Medal veteran)
• Weight

This Policy covers nondiscrimination in both employment and access to educational opportunities. Therefore, any member of LTU community whose acts deny, deprive, unreasonably interfere with or limit the education or employment, residential and/or social access, benefits, and/or opportunities of any member of LTU’s community, guest, or visitor on the basis of that person’s actual or perceived protected characteristic(s), is in violation of this Policy.

LTU will promptly and effectively address any such discrimination of which it has Knowledge/Notice using the resolution process in the Equal Opportunity, Harassment, and Nondiscrimination Procedures.

LTU has appointed the Nondiscrimination Team, comprised of the following individual(s), to coordinate LTU’s compliance with federal, state, and local civil rights laws and ordinances:

For sex discrimination and sex-based harassment allegations:
Title IX Coordinators

Collectively, these individuals are responsible for providing comprehensive nondiscrimination education and training; coordinating LTU’s timely, thorough, and fair response, investigation, and resolution of all alleged prohibited conduct under this Policy; and monitoring the effectiveness of this Policy and related procedures to ensure an education and employment environment free from discrimination, harassment, and retaliation.

LTU recognizes that allegations under this Policy may include multiple forms of discrimination and harassment as well as violations of other LTU policies; may involve various combinations of students, employees, and other members of LTU community; and may require the simultaneous attention of multiple LTU departments (e.g., Campus Safety, Human Resources, Dean of Students, etc.). Accordingly, all LTU departments will share information, combine efforts, and otherwise collaborate, to the maximum extent permitted by law and consistent with other applicable LTU policies, to provide uniform, consistent, efficient, and effective responses to alleged discrimination, harassment, or retaliation.

Concerns about LTU’s application of this Policy and compliance with certain federal civil rights laws may also be addressed to:

Office for Civil Rights (OCR)
U.S. Department of Education
400 Maryland Avenue, SW
Washington, D.C. 20202-1100
Customer Service Hotline #: (800) 421-3481
Facsimile: (202) 453-6012
TDD#: (877) 521-2172
Email: OCR@ed.gov
Web: http://www.ed.gov/ocr

Office for Civil Rights (OCR)
Cleveland Office
1350 Euclid Avenue, Suite 325
Cleveland, OH, 44115
Email: OCR.Cleveland@ed.gov

For Complaints involving employee-on-employee conduct: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)

EEOC Regional Office
Patrick V. McNamara Building, 477 Michigan Avenue, Room 865
Detroit, MI, 48226

All LTU faculty and employees (including student-employees), other than those deemed Confidential Employees, are Mandated Reporters and are expected to promptly report all known details of actual or suspected discrimination, harassment, retaliation and/or Other Prohibited Conduct to appropriate officials immediately, although there are some limited exceptions. Supportive measures may be offered as the result of such disclosures without formal LTU action.

Complainants may want to carefully consider whether they share personally identifiable details with Mandated Reporters, as those details must be shared with the Coordinator.

If a Complainant expects formal action in response to their allegations, reporting to any Mandated Reporter can connect them with resources to report alleged crimes and/or Policy violations, and these employees will immediately pass Notice to the Coordinator (and/or police, if desired by the Complainant or required by law), who will act when an incident is reported to them.

The following sections describe LTU’s reporting options for a Complainant or third party (including parents/guardians when appropriate):

Confidential Employees

There are three categories of Confidential Employees: 1) Those with confidentiality bestowed by law or professional ethics, such as lawyers, medical professionals, clergy, and mental health counselors; 2) Those whom LTU has specifically designated as Confidential Resources for purposes of providing support and resources to the Complainant; and 3) Those conducting human subjects research as part of a study approved by LTU’s Institutional Review Board (IRB). For those in category 1) to be able to respect confidentiality, they must be in a confidential relationship with the person reporting, such that they are within the scope of their licensure, professional ethics, or confidential role at the time of receiving the Notice. These individuals will maintain confidentiality except in extreme cases of immediacy of threat or danger or abuse of a minor, elder, or individual with a disability, or when required to disclose by law or court order.

To enable Complainants to access support and resources without filing a Complaint, LTU has designated specific employees as Confidential Resources.Those designated by LTU as Confidential Resources are not required to report actual or suspected discrimination, harassment, or retaliation in a way that identifies the Parties. They will, however, provide the Complainant with the Coordinator’s contact information and offer options and resources without any obligation to inform an outside agency or LTU official unless a Complainant has requested the information be shared.

If a Complainant would like the details of an incident to be kept confidential, the Complainant may speak with the following Confidential Employees:

• For Students: On-campus licensed professional counselors and staff. https://www.ltu.edu/counseling
• For Employees: The Employee Assistance Program is available to help free of charge and may be consulted on an emergency basis during normal business hours. https://rsli.mylifeexpert.com/

Employees who have confidentiality as described above, and who receive Notice within the scope of their confidential roles will timely submit anonymous statistical information for Clery Act statistical reporting purposes unless they believe it would be harmful to their client, patient, or parishioner.

Failure of a Mandated Reporter, as described above in this section, to report an incident of discrimination, harassment, or retaliation of which they become aware is a violation of LTU Policy and can be subject to disciplinary action for failure to comply/failure to report. This also includes situations when a harasser is a Mandated Reporter. Such individuals are obligated to report their own misconduct, and failure to do so is a chargeable offense under this Policy.

In addition, Complainants may speak with individuals unaffiliated with LTU without concern that Policy will require them to disclose information to the institution without permission:

• Licensed professional counselors and other medical providers
• Local rape crisis counselors
• Domestic violence resources
• Local or state assistance agencies
• Clergy/Chaplains
• Attorneys

This Policy is only applicable to alleged incidents that occur on or after August 1, 2024. For alleged incidents of sex discrimination or sexual harassment occurring prior to August 1, 2024, the policy and procedures in place at the time of the alleged incident apply. Applicable versions of those policies and procedures are available from the Coordinator and at https://www.ltu.edu/title-ix/index.

This Policy applies to all faculty, employees, students, and other individuals participating in or attempting to participate in LTU’s program or activities, including education and employment.

This Policy prohibits all forms of discrimination on the basis of the protected characteristic(s), and may be applied to incidents, to patterns, and/or to the institutional culture/climate, all of which may be addressed in accordance with this Policy.

This Policy applies to LTU’s education programs and activities (defined as including locations, events, or circumstances in which LTU exercises substantial control over both the Respondent and the context in which the conduct occurred), circumstances where LTU has disciplinary authority, and to misconduct occurring within any building owned or controlled by a LTU-recognized student organization.

This Policy may also apply to the effects of off-campus misconduct that limit or deny a person’s access to LTU’s education program or activities.

For disciplinary action to be issued under this Policy, the Respondent must be a LTU faculty member, student, or employee at the time of the alleged incident. If the Respondent is unknown or is not a member of LTU community, the Coordinator will offer to assist the Complainant in identifying appropriate institutional and local resources and support options, and will implement appropriate supportive measures and/or remedial actions (e.g., trespassing a person from campus). LTU can also assist in contacting local police if the individual would like to file a police report about criminal conduct.

All vendors serving LTU through third-party contracts are subject to the policies and procedures of their employers and to these policies and procedures to which their employer has agreed to be bound by their contracts.

When a party is participating in a dual enrollment/early college program, LTU will coordinate with the party’s home institution to determine jurisdiction and coordinate providing supportive measures and responding to the complaint under the appropriate policy and procedures based on the allegations and identities of the Parties.

When the Respondent is enrolled in or employed by another institution, the Coordinator can assist the Complainant in contacting the appropriate individual at that institution, as it may be possible to pursue action under that institution’s policies.

Similarly, the Coordinator may be able to assist and support a student or employee Complainant who experiences discrimination in an externship, study abroad program, or other environment external to LTU where sexual harassment or nondiscrimination policies and procedures of the facilitating or host organization may give the Complainant recourse. If there are effects of that external conduct that impact a student or employee’s work or educational environment, those effects can often be addressed remedially by the Coordinator if brought to their attention.

LTU will offer and implement appropriate and reasonable supportive measures to the Parties upon Notice of alleged discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation. Supportive measures are non-disciplinary, non-punitive individualized services offered as appropriate and reasonably available. They are offered, without fee or charge to the Parties, to restore or preserve access to LTU’s education program or activity, including measures designed to protect the safety of all Parties and/or LTU’s educational environment and/or to deter discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation.

The Coordinator promptly makes supportive measures available to the Parties upon receiving Notice/Knowledge or a Complaint. At the time that supportive measures are offered, if a Complaint has not been filed, LTU will inform the Complainant, in writing, that they may file a Complaint with LTU either at that time or in the future. The Coordinator will work with a party to ensure that their wishes are considered with respect to any planned and implemented supportive measures.

LTU will maintain the confidentiality of the supportive measures, provided that confidentiality does not impair LTU’s ability to provide those supportive measures. LTU will act to ensure as minimal an academic/occupational impact on the Parties as possible. LTU will implement measures in a way that does not unreasonably burden any party.

These actions may include, but are not limited to:

• Referral to counseling, medical, and/or other healthcare services
• Referral to the Employee Assistance Program
• Referral to community-based service providers
• Visa and immigration assistance
• Student financial aid counseling
• Education to the institutional community or community subgroup(s)
• Altering campus housing assignment(s)
• Altering work arrangements for employees or student-employees
• Safety planning
• Providing campus safety escorts
• Implementing contact restrictions (no contact orders) between the parties
• Academic support, extensions of deadlines, or other course/program-related adjustments
• Trespass, Persona Non Grata (PNG), or Be-On-the-Lookout (BOLO) orders
• Timely warnings
• Class schedule modifications, withdrawals, or leaves of absence
• Increased security and monitoring of certain areas of the campus
• Any other actions deemed appropriate by the Administrator

Violations of no contact orders or other restrictions may be referred to appropriate student or employee conduct processes for enforcement or added as collateral misconduct allegations to an ongoing Complaint under this Policy.

The Parties are provided with a timely opportunity to seek modification or reversal of LTU’s decision to provide, deny, modify, or terminate supportive measures applicable to them. A request to do so should be made in writing to the Coordinator. An impartial employee other than the employee who implemented the supportive measures, who has authority to modify or reverse the decision, will determine whether to provide, deny, modify, or terminate the supportive measures if they are inconsistent with the Title IX regulatory definition of supportive measures. LTU will also provide the Parties with the opportunity to seek additional modification or termination of supportive measures applicable to them if circumstances materially change. LTU typically renders decisions on supportive measures within seven (7) business days of receiving a request and provides a written determination to the impacted party(ies) and the Coordinator.

LTU policies are written and interpreted broadly to include online manifestations of any of the behaviors prohibited below, when those behaviors occur in or have an effect on LTU’s education program and activities, or when they involve the use of LTU networks, technology, or equipment.

Although LTU may not control websites, social media, and other venues through which harassing communications are made, when such communications are reported to LTU, it will engage in a variety of means to address and mitigate the effects.

Nothing in this Policy is intended to infringe upon or limit a person’s rights to free speech. Any online posting or other electronic communication by employees and students, including technology-facilitated bullying, stalking, harassment, etc., occurring completely outside of LTU’s control (e.g., not on LTU networks, websites, or between LTU email accounts) will only be subject to this Policy when such online conduct can be shown to cause (or will likely cause) a substantial in-program disruption or infringement on/harm to the rights of others. Otherwise, such communications are considered speech protected by the First Amendment. Supportive measures for Complainants will be provided.

Off-campus harassing speech by employees, whether online or in person, may be regulated by LTU only when such speech is made in an employee’s official or work-related capacity.

LTU strives to ensure that all individuals are safe, included, and respected in their education and employment environments, regardless of their gender identity or expression, including intersex, nonbinary, transgender, agender, two-spirit, and gender-diverse students and employees.

Discrimination and harassment on the basis of gender identity or expression are not tolerated by LTU. If a member of the LTU community believes they have been subjected to discrimination under this Policy, they should follow the appropriate reporting process described herein.

In upholding the principles of equity and inclusion, LTU supports the full integration and healthy development of those who are gender diverse and seeks to eliminate any stigma related to gender identity and expression.

LTU is committed to fostering a climate where all identities are valued, contributing to a more vibrant and diverse community. LTU will administratively address issues that some students and employees, including those identifying as intersex, transgender, agender, nonbinary, and gender diverse, may confront as they navigate systems originally designed around the assumption that gender is binary. As our society’s understanding of gender evolves, so do LTU’s processes and policies.

Concepts like misgendering and deadnaming may not be familiar to all but understanding them is essential to LTU’s goal of being as welcoming and inclusive a community as possible.

Misgendering or mispronouning is the intentional or unintentional use of pronouns or identifiers that are different from those used by an individual. Unintentional misgendering is usually resolved with a simple apology if someone clarifies their pronouns for you. Intentional misgendering is inconsistent with the type of community we hold ourselves out to be and may constitute a Policy violation if the effect is greater than de mini-mis harm. We each have a right to determine our own gender identity and expression, but we don’t get to choose or negate someone else’s.

Deadnaming, along with misgendering, can be very traumatic to a person who is transgender, transitioning, nonbinary, or gender diverse. Deadnaming means using someone’s birth-assigned (cisgender) name, rather than the name they have chosen.

To a person who is transgender, transitioning, nonbinary, or gender diverse, their cisgender identity may be something that is in their past — dead, buried, and behind them. To then revive their deadname could trigger issues, traumas, and experiences of the past that the individual has moved past, or is moving past, and can interfere with their health and well-being.

Again, unintentional deadnaming can often be addressed by a simple apology and an effort to use the person’s chosen name. Intentional deadnaming could be a form of bullying, outing, or otherwise harassing an individual, and thus should be avoided.

This Policy should be interpreted consistent with the goals of maximizing the inclusion of intersex, transgender, transitioning, agender, nonbinary, and gender-diverse students and employees, including:

• Maintaining the privacy of all individuals consistent with law
• Ensuring all students have equal access to educational programming, activities, and facilities, including restrooms and locker rooms
• Ensuring all employees have equal access to employment opportunities and work, service, or health-related facilities
• Providing professional development for employees and education for students on topics related to gender inclusion
• Encouraging all students and employees to respect the pronoun usage and identities of all members of the LTU community

LTU uses a number of interventions to address concerns that are raised related to gender-based harassment or discrimination, including problem-solving, intervention, confrontation, investigation, and Policy enforcement. When conflicts arise between the right of members of the community to be free from gender-identity discrimination and those exercising their right to religious freedom, the LTU will try to balance rights and interests to find mutually agreeable outcomes or compromises. When that is not possible, LTU will offer remedial solutions or enforce its Policies while also respecting the rights of all members of its community.

Students and employees are entitled to an educational and employment environment that is free of discrimination, harassment, and retaliation. This Policy is not meant to inhibit or prohibit educational content or discussions inside or outside of the classroom that include germane, but controversial or sensitive, subject matters protected by academic freedom.

The sections below describe the specific forms of legally prohibited discrimination, harassment, and retaliation that are also prohibited under LTU Policy. When speech or conduct is protected by academic freedom and/or the First Amendment, it will not be considered a violation of LTU Policy, though supportive measures will be offered to those impacted.

All offense definitions below encompass actual and/or attempted offenses.

Any of the following offenses can be charged as or combined as pattern offenses, in which case the Notice of Investigation and Allegation (NOIA) will clearly indicate that both individual incidents and a pattern of conduct are being investigated. A pattern may exist and be charged when there is a potential substantial similarity to incidents where the proof of one could make it more likely that the other(s) occurred, and vice-versa. Patterns may exist based on target selection, similarity of offense, or other factors. Where a pattern is found, it can be the basis to enhance sanctions, accordingly.

Violation of any other LTU policies may constitute discrimination or harassment when motivated by actual or perceived protected characteristic(s), and the result is a limitation or denial of employment or educational access, benefits, or opportunities.

Discrimination

Discrimination is different treatment with respect to a person’s employment or participation in an education program or activity based, in whole or in part, upon the person’s actual or perceived protected characteristic. Discrimination also includes allegations of a failure to provide reasonable accommodations as required by law or policy, such as for disability, religion, or creed.

Discrimination can take two primary forms:

1. Disparate Treatment Discrimination:
   • Any intentional differential treatment of a person or persons that is based on a person’s actual or perceived protected characteristic and that:
   • Excludes a person from participation in;
   • Denies the person benefits of; or
   • Otherwise adversely affects a term or condition of a person’s participation in a LTU program or activity.

2. Disparate Impact Discrimination:
• Disparate impact occurs when policies or practices that appear to be neutral unintentionally result in a disproportionate impact on a protected group or person that:
• Excludes an individual from participation in;
• Denies the individual benefits of; or
• Otherwise adversely affects a term or condition of an individual’s participation in a LTU program or activity.

Discriminatory Harassment

• unwelcome conduct on the basis of actual or perceived protected characteristics, that
• based on the totality of the circumstances,
• is subjectively and objectively offensive, and
• is so severe or pervasive,
• that it limits or denies a person’s ability to participate in or benefit from LTU’s education program or activity

Sex-based Harassment (Applicable under Title IX, Title VII, and the Fair Housing Act)

Sex-based Harassment is a form of sex discrimination and means sexual harassment and other harassment on the basis of sex, including sex stereotypes, sex characteristics, pregnancy or related conditions, sexual orientation, and gender identity; sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, and stalking.

1. Quid Pro Quo:
• an employee agent, or other person authorized by LTU,
• to provide an aid, benefit, or service under LTU’s education program or activity,
• explicitly or impliedly conditioning the provision of such aid, benefit, or service,
• on a person’s participation in unwelcome sexual conduct.
2. Hostile Environment Harassment:
• unwelcome sex-based conduct, that
• based on the totality of the circumstances,
• is subjectively and objectively offensive, and
• is so severe or pervasive,
• that it limits or denies a person’s ability to participate in or benefit from LTU’s education program or activity

LTU reserves the right to address offensive conduct and/or harassment that (1) does not rise to the level of creating a hostile environment, or (2) that is of a generic nature and not based on a protected characteristic. Addressing such conduct will not result in the imposition of discipline under LTU Policy, but may be addressed through respectful conversation, remedial actions, education, effective Alternative Resolution, and/or other Informal Resolution mechanisms.

For assistance with Alternative Resolution and other Informal Resolution techniques and approaches, contact the Coordinator.

Other Prohibited Conduct

3. Sexual Assault:
1. Rape:
• Penetration, no matter how slight,
• of the vagina or anus of the Complainant,
• with any body part of the Respondent or by Respondent’s use of an object, or
• oral penetration of the Complainant by a sex organ of Respondent,
• without the consent of the Complainant.
2. Fondling:
• The touching of the private body parts of the Complainant (buttocks, groin, breasts),
• by the Respondent for the purpose of sexual gratification,
• without the consent of the Complainant,
• including instances where the Complainant is incapable of giving consent because of their age or because of a temporary or permanent mental incapacity.
3. Incest:
• Sexual intercourse,
• between persons who are related to each other,
• within the degrees wherein marriage is prohibited by MI law.
4. Statutory Rape:
• Sexual intercourse,
• with a person who is under the statutory age of consent of 18.

4. Dating Violence, defined as:
1. violence,
2. on the basis of sex,
3. committed by a person,
4. who is in or has been in a social relationship of a romantic or intimate nature with the Complainant.
1. The existence of such a relationship shall be determined based on the Complainant’s statement and with consideration of the length of the relationship, the type of relationship, and the frequency of interaction between the persons involved in the relationship. For the purposes of this definition—
1. Dating violence includes, but is not limited to, sexual or physical abuse or the threat of such abuse.
2. Dating violence does not include acts covered under the definition of domestic violence.

5. Domestic Violence, defined as:
1. violence,
2. on the basis of sex,
3. committed by a current or former spouse or intimate partner of the Complainant,
4. by a person with whom the Complainant shares a child in common, or
5. by a person who is cohabitating with, or has cohabitated with, the Complainant as a spouse or intimate partner, or
6. by a person similarly situated to a spouse of the Complainant under the domestic or family violence laws of MI, or
7. by any other person against an adult or youth Complainant who is protected from that person’s acts under the domestic or family violence laws of MI.

6. Stalking, defined as:
1. engaging in a course of conduct,
2. on the basis of sex,
3. directed at the Complainant, that
1. would cause a reasonable person to fear for the person’s safety, or
2. the safety of others; or
3. Suffer substantial emotional distress.

For the purposes of this definition—

• Course of conduct means two or more acts, including, but not limited to, acts in which the Respondent directly, indirectly, or through third parties, by any action, method, device, or means, follows, monitors, observes, surveils, threatens, or communicates to or about a person, or interferes with a person’s property.
• Reasonable person means a reasonable person under similar circumstances and with similar identities to the Complainant.
• Substantial emotional distress means significant mental suffering or anguish that may but does not necessarily require medical or other professional treatment or counseling.

Sexual Misconduct

7. Sexual Exploitation:
• A person taking non-consensual or abusive sexual advantage of another, that does not constitute Sex-based Harassment as defined above,
• for their own benefit or for the benefit of anyone other than the person being exploited.

Examples of Sexual Exploitation include, but are not limited to:

• Sexual voyeurism (such as observing or allowing others to observe a person undressing or using the bathroom or engaging in sexual acts, without the consent of the person being observed)
• Invasion of sexual privacy (e.g., doxxing)
• Knowingly making an unwelcome disclosure of (or threatening to disclose) a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression
• Taking pictures, video, or audio recording of another person in a sexual act, or in any other sexually related activity when there is a reasonable expectation of privacy during the activity, without the consent of all involved in the activity; or exceeding the boundaries of consent (such as allowing another person to hide in a closet and observe sexual activity, or disseminating sexual pictures without the photographed person’s consent), including the making or posting of non-consensual pornography
• Prostituting another person
• Engaging in sexual activity with another person while knowingly infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or a sexually transmitted disease (STD) or infection (STI), without informing the other person of the virus, disease, or infection
• Causing or attempting to cause the incapacitation of another person (through alcohol, drugs, or any other means) for the purpose of compromising that person’s ability to give consent to sexual activity, or for the purpose of making that person vulnerable to non-consensual sexual activity
• Misappropriation of another person’s identity on apps, websites, or other venues designed for dating or sexual connections (e.g., spoofing)
• Forcing a person to take an action against that person’s will by threatening to show, post, or share information, video, audio, or an image that depicts the person’s nudity or sexual activity
• Knowingly soliciting a minor for sexual activity
• Engaging in sex trafficking
• Knowingly creating, possessing, or disseminating child sexual abuse images or recordings
• Creating or disseminating synthetic media, including images, videos, or audio representations of individuals doing or saying sexually-related things that never happened, or placing identifiable real people in fictitious pornographic or nude situations without their consent (i.e., Deepfakes)

Other Prohibited Conduct

1. Bullying:
• repeated and/or severe aggressive behavior
• that is likely to intimidate or intentionally hurt, control, or physically or mentally diminish the Complainant
• that is not speech or conduct that is otherwise protected by the First Amendment
2. Endangerment:
• threatening or causing physical harm
• extreme verbal, emotional, or psychological abuse
• other conduct which threatens or endangers the health or safety of any person or damages their property}
3. Hazing:
• any act or action
• which does or is likely to endanger the mental or physical health or safety of any person
• as it relates to a person’s initiation, admission into, or affiliation with any Recipient group or organization

For the purposes of this definition:

• It is not necessary that a person’s initiation or continued membership is contingent upon participation in the activity, or that the activity was sanctioned or approved by the student group or student organization, for an allegation of hazing to be upheld.
• It shall not constitute an excuse or defense to a hazing allegation that the participants took part voluntarily, gave consent to the conduct, voluntarily assumed the risks or hardship of the activity, or that no injury was suffered or sustained.
• The actions of alumni, active, new, and/or prospective members of a student group or student organization may be considered hazing.
• Hazing is not confined to the student group or student organization with which the person subjected to the hazing is associated.

4. Retaliation:
• Adverse action, including intimidation, threats, coercion, or discrimination,
• against any person,
• by LTU, a student, employee, or a person authorized by LTU to provide aid, benefit, or service under LTU’s education program or activity,
• for the purpose of interfering with any right or privilege secured by law or Policy, or
• because the person has engaged in protected activity, including reporting information, making a Complaint, testifying, assisting, or participating or refusing to participate in any manner in an investigation or Resolution Process under the Equal Opportunity, Harassment, And Nondiscrimination Procedures, including an Informal Resolution process, or in any other appropriate steps taken by LTU to promptly and effectively end any sex discrimination in its education program or activity, prevent its recurrence, and remedy its effects.

The exercise of rights protected under the First Amendment does not constitute retaliation. It is also not retaliation for LTU to pursue Policy violations against those who make materially false statements in bad faith in the course of a resolution under the Equal Opportunity, Harassment, and Nondiscrimination Policy. However, the determination of responsibility, by itself, is not sufficient to conclude that any party has made a materially false statement in bad faith.

5. Unauthorized Disclosure:
• Distributing or otherwise publicizing materials created or produced during an investigation or Resolution Process except as required by law or as expressly permitted by LTU; or
• publicly disclosing institutional work product that contains personally identifiable information without authorization or consent.
6. Failure to Comply/Process Interference
• Intentional failure to comply with the reasonable directives of Coordinator in the performance of their official duties, including with the terms of a no contact order
• Intentional failure to comply with emergency removal or interim suspension terms
• Intentional failure to comply with sanctions
• Intentional failure to adhere to the terms of an Informal Resolution agreement
• Intentional failure to comply with mandated reporting duties as defined in this Policy
• Intentional interference with the Resolution Process, including but not limited to:
• Destruction of or concealing of evidence
• Actual or attempted solicitation of knowingly false testimony or providing false testimony or evidence
• Intimidating or bribing a witness or party

Sanction Ranges

The following sanction ranges apply for Prohibited Conduct under this Policy. Sanctions can be assigned outside of the specified ranges based on aggravating or mitigating circumstances, or the Respondent’s cumulative conduct record.

• Discrimination: warning through expulsion or termination.
• Discriminatory Harassment: warning through expulsion or termination.
• Quid Pro Quo Harassment: warning through expulsion or termination.
• Hostile Environment Harassment: warning through expulsion or termination.
• Rape: suspension through expulsion or termination.
• Fondling: warning through suspension (termination for employees).
• Incest: warning through probation.
• Statutory Rape: warning through suspension (termination for employees).
• Stalking: probation through expulsion or termination.
• Dating/Domestic Violence: probation through expulsion or termination.
• Sexual Exploitation: warning through expulsion or termination.
• Bullying: warning through expulsion or termination.
• Endangerment: warning through expulsion or termination.
• Hazing: warning through expulsion or termination.
• Retaliation: warning through expulsion or termination.
• Unauthorized Disclosure: warning through expulsion or termination.
• Failure to Comply/Process Interference: warning through expulsion or termination.

Consent, Force, and Incapacitation

As used in this Policy, the following definitions and understandings apply:

1. Consent: Consent is defined as:
• knowing, and
• voluntary, and
• clear permission
• by word or action
• to engage in sexual activity.

Individuals may perceive and experience the same interaction in different ways. Therefore, it is the responsibility of each party to determine that the other has consented before engaging in the activity.

If consent is not clearly provided prior to engaging in the activity, consent may be ratified by word or action at some point during the interaction or thereafter, but clear communication from the outset is strongly encouraged.

For consent to be valid, there must be a clear expression in words or actions that the other individual consented to that specific sexual conduct. Consent is evaluated from the perspective of what a reasonable person would conclude are mutually understandable words or actions. Reasonable reciprocation can establish consent. For example, if someone kisses you, you can kiss them back (if you want to) without the need to explicitly obtain their consent to be kissed back.

Consent can also be withdrawn once given, as long as the withdrawal is reasonably and clearly communicated. If consent is withdrawn, sexual activity should cease within a reasonably immediate time.

Silence or the absence of resistance alone should not be interpreted as consent. Consent is not demonstrated by the absence of resistance. While resistance is not required or necessary, it is a clear demonstration of non-consent.

Consent to some sexual contact (such as kissing or fondling) cannot be assumed to be consent for other sexual activity (such as intercourse). A current or previous intimate relationship is not sufficient to constitute consent. If an individual expresses conditions on their willingness to consent (e.g., use of a condom) or limitations on the scope of their consent, those conditions and limitations must be respected. If a sexual partner shares the clear expectation for the use of a condom, or to avoid internal ejaculation, and those expectations are not honored, the failure to use a condom, removing a condom, or internal ejaculation can be considered acts of sexual assault.

Proof of consent or non-consent is not a burden placed on either party involved in a Complaint. Instead, the burden remains on LTU to determine whether its Policy has been violated. The existence of consent is based on the totality of the circumstances evaluated from the perspective of a reasonable person in the same or similar circumstances, including the context in which the alleged misconduct occurred and any similar and previous patterns that may be evidenced.

Going beyond the boundaries of consent is prohibited. Thus, unless a sexual partner has consented to slapping, hitting, hair pulling, strangulation, or other physical roughness during otherwise consensual sex, those acts may constitute dating violence or sexual assault.

2. Force

Force is the use of physical violence and/or physical imposition to gain sexual access. Sexual activity that is forced is, by definition, non-consensual, but non-consensual sexual activity is not necessarily forced. Force is conduct that, if sufficiently severe, can negate consent.

Force also includes threats, intimidation (implied threats), and coercion that is intended to overcome resistance or produce consent (e.g., “Have sex with me or I’ll hit you,” which elicits the response, “Okay, don’t hit me. I’ll do what you want.”).

Coercion is unreasonable pressure for sexual activity. Coercive conduct, if sufficiently severe, can render a person’s consent ineffective, because it is not voluntary. When someone makes clear that they do not want to engage in sexual activity, that they want to stop, or that they do not want to go past a certain point of sexual interaction, continued pressure beyond that point can be coercive. Coercion is evaluated based on the frequency, intensity, isolation, and duration of the pressure involved.

3. Incapacitation

Incapacitation is a state where a person is incapable of giving consent. An incapacitated person cannot make rational, reasonable decisions because they lack the capacity to give knowing/informed consent (e.g., to understand the “who, what, when, where, why, and how” of their sexual interaction). A person cannot consent if they are unable to understand what is happening or are disoriented, helpless, asleep, or unconscious for any reason, including because of alcohol or other drug consumption.

This Policy also covers a person whose incapacity results from a temporary or permanent physical or mental health condition, involuntary physical restraint, and/or the consumption of incapacitating substances.

Incapacitation is determined through consideration of all relevant indicators of a person’s state and is not synonymous with intoxication, impairment, blackout, and/or being drunk.

If the Respondent neither knew nor should have known the Complainant to be physically or mentally incapacitated, the Respondent is not in violation of this Policy. “Should have known” is an objective, reasonable person standard that assumes that a reasonable person is both sober and exercising sound judgment.

Unethical Relationships (See Appendix F)

LTU uses the preponderance of the evidence standard of proof when determining whether a Policy violation occurred. This means that LTU will decide whether it is more likely than not, based upon the available information at the time of the decision, that the Respondent is in violation of the alleged Policy violation(s).

A Report provides notice to LTU of an allegation or concern about discrimination, harassment, or retaliation and provides an opportunity for the Coordinator to provide information, resources, and supportive measures. A Complaint provides notice to LTU that the Complainant would like to initiate an investigation or other appropriate resolution procedures. A Complainant or individual may initially make a report and may decide at a later time to make a Complaint. Reports or Complaints of discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation may be made using any of the following options:

1. File a Complaint with, or give verbal Notice directly to, the Coordinator or to any member of the Nondiscrimination Team. Such a Complaint may be made at any time (including during non-business hours) by using the telephone number, email address, or by mail to the office of the Coordinator or any other Nondiscrimination Team member listed in this Policy:

Reporting carries no obligation to initiate a Complaint, and in most situations, LTU is able to respect a Complainant’s request to not initiate a resolution process. However, there may be circumstances, such as pattern behavior, allegations of severe misconduct, or a compelling threat to health and/or safety, where LTU may need to initiate a resolution process. If a Complainant does not wish to file a Complaint, LTU will maintain the privacy of information to the extent possible. The Complainant should not fear a loss of confidentiality by giving Notice that allows LTU to discuss and/or provide supportive measures, in most circumstances.

There is no time limitation on providing Notice/Complaints to the Coordinator. However, if the Respondent is no longer subject to LTU’s jurisdiction and/or significant time has passed, the ability to investigate, respond, and/or provide remedies may be more limited or impossible.

Acting on Notice/Complaints significantly impacted by the passage of time (including, but not limited to, the rescission or revision of Policy) is at the Coordinator’s discretion; they may document allegations for future reference, offer supportive measures and/or remedies, and/or engage in informal or formal action, as appropriate.

Deliberately false and/or malicious accusations under this Policy are a serious offense and will be subject to appropriate disciplinary action. This does not include allegations that are made in good faith but are ultimately shown to be erroneous or do not result in a determination of a Policy violation.

Additionally, witnesses and Parties who knowingly provide false evidence, tamper with or destroy evidence, or deliberately mislead an official conducting an investigation or resolution process can be subject to discipline under appropriate LTU policies.

LTU makes every effort to preserve the Parties’ privacy. LTU will not share the identity of any individual who has made a Complaint of discrimination, harassment, or retaliation; any Complainant; any individual who has been reported to be the perpetrator of discrimination, harassment, or retaliation; any Respondent; or any witness, except as permitted by, or to fulfill the purposes, of applicable laws and regulations (e.g., Title IX, HIPAA, Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)) and its implementing regulations, or as required by law; including any investigation, or resolution proceeding arising under these policies and procedures., Additional information regarding confidentiality and privacy can be found in Appendix E.

Unauthorized Disclosure of Information

Parties and Advisors are prohibited from disclosing information obtained by LTU through the Resolution Process, to the extent that information is the work product of LTU (meaning it has been produced, compiled, or written by LTU for purposes of its investigation and resolution of a Complaint), without authorization. It is also a violation of LTU Policy to publicly disclose institutional work product that contains a party or witness’s personally identifiable information without authorization or consent. Violation of this Policy is subject to significant sanctions.

LTU can act to remove an employee or student Respondent accused of Sex Discrimination or Sex-based Harassment from its education program or activities, partially or entirely, on an emergency basis when an individualized safety and risk analysis has determined that an imminent and serious threat to the health or safety of any student or other individual justifies removal. This risk analysis is performed by the Coordinator and may be done in conjunction with the CARE Team or Campus Safety using its standard objective violence risk assessment procedures.

LTU must issue timely warnings for reported incidents that pose a serious or continuing threat of bodily harm or danger to members of LTU community.

LTU will ensure that a Complainant’s name and other identifying information is not disclosed, while still providing enough information for community members to make safety decisions in light of the potential danger.

LTU community encourages the reporting of misconduct and crimes by Complainants and witnesses. Sometimes, Complainants or witnesses are hesitant to give Notice to LTU officials or participate in resolution processes because they fear that they themselves may be in violation of certain policies, such as underage drinking or use of illicit drugs at the time of the incident. Respondents may hesitate to be forthcoming during the process for the same reasons.

It is in the best interests of LTU community that Complainants choose to give Notice of misconduct to LTU officials, that witnesses come forward to share what they know, and that all Parties be forthcoming during the process.

To encourage reporting and participation in the process, LTU offers Parties and witnesses amnesty from minor policy violations, such as underage alcohol consumption or the use of illicit drugs, related to the incident. Granting amnesty is a discretionary decision made by LTU, and amnesty does not apply to more serious allegations, such as physical abuse of another or illicit drug distribution.

Students

LTU also maintains an amnesty policy for students in addition to witnesses who offer help to others in need.

Employees

Sometimes, employees are hesitant to report discrimination, harassment, or retaliation they have experienced for fear of getting in trouble themselves. LTU may, at its discretion, offer employee Complainants amnesty from such policy violations (typically more minor policy violations) related to the incident.

The preservation of evidence is critical to potential criminal prosecution and to obtaining restraining/protective orders, and it is particularly time sensitive. LTU will inform the Complainant of the importance of preserving evidence by taking actions such as the following:

Sexual Assault

• Seek forensic medical assistance at the nearest hospital, ideally within 120 hours of the incident (sooner is better).
• Avoid urinating, showering, bathing, washing hands or face, or douching, if possible, but evidence may still be collected even if you do.
• If oral sexual contact took place, refrain from smoking, eating, drinking, or brushing teeth.
• If clothes are changed, place soiled clothes in a paper bag (plastic destroys evidence) or a secure evidence container (if provided one by law enforcement)
• Seeking medical treatment can be essential, even if it is not for the purposes of collecting forensic evidence.

Stalking/Dating Violence/Domestic Violence/Sex-Based Harassment

• Evidence in the form of text and voice messages will be lost in most cases if the Complainant changes their phone number.
• Make a secondary recording of any voice messages and/or save the audio files to a cloud server.
• Take screenshots and/or a video recording of any text messages or other electronic messages (e.g., Instagram, Snapchat, Facebook).
• Save copies of email and social media correspondence, including notifications related to account access alerts.
• Take timestamped photographs of any physical evidence, including notes, gifts, etc., in place when possible.
• Save copies of any messages, including those showing any request for no further contact.
• Obtain copies of call logs showing the specific phone number being used rather than a saved contact name if possible.

During the initial meeting between the Complainant and Coordinator, the importance of taking these actions will be discussed, if timely.

Certain institutional officials (those deemed Campus Security Authorities) have a duty to report the following for federal statistical reporting purposes (Clery Act):

1. All “primary crimes,” which include criminal homicide, sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, motor vehicle theft, and arson
2. Hate crimes, which include any bias-motivated primary crime as well as any bias-motivated larceny or theft, simple assault, intimidation, or destruction/damage/vandalism of property
3. Violence Against Women Act (VAWA-based crimes), which include sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking
4. Arrests and referrals for disciplinary action for weapons law violations, liquor law violations, and drug law violations

All personally identifiable information is kept private, but statistical information regarding the type of incident and its general location (on- or off-campus or in the surrounding area, but no addresses are given) must be shared with Clery Act Coordinator for publication in the Annual Security Report and daily campus crime log. Campus Security Authorities include student affairs/student conduct staff, campus law enforcement/public safety/security, local police, coaches, athletic directors, residence life staff, student activities staff, human resources staff, advisors to student organizations, and any other official with significant responsibility for student and campus activities.

The Coordinator manages the Nondiscrimination Team and acts with independence and authority, free from bias and conflicts of interest. The Coordinator oversees all resolutions under this Policy and these procedures. The members of the Resolution Pool are vetted and trained to ensure they are not biased for or against any party in a specific Complaint, or for or against Complainants and/or Respondents, generally.

To raise any concern involving bias, conflict of interest, misconduct, or discrimination by the Coordinator, contact the LTU President. Concerns of bias, misconduct, discrimination, or a potential conflict of interest by any other Resolution Pool member should be raised with the Coordinator.

This Policy succeeds previous policies addressing discrimination, harassment, sexual misconduct, and/or retaliation, though previous policies and procedures remain in force for incidents occurring before August 1, 2024. The Coordinator reviews and updates these policies and procedures regularly. LTU reserves the right to make changes to this document as necessary, and once those changes are posted online, they are in effect.

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, regulations, or court holdings.

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

This Policy is effective 08-01-2024.

LTU will act on any Notice, Complaint, or Knowledge of a potential violation of the Equal Opportunity, Harassment, and Nondiscrimination Policy (“the Policy”) that the Coordinator or any other Mandated Reporter receives by applying the Resolution Process below.

The procedures below apply to all allegations of discrimination on the basis of an actual or perceived protected characteristics, harassment, retaliation, or Other Prohibited Conduct involving students, employees, or third parties.

Upon receipt of Notice, a Complaint, or Knowledge of an alleged Policy violation, the Coordinator will initiate a prompt initial evaluation to determine LTU’s next steps. The Coordinator will contact the Complainant/source of the Notice to offer supportive measures, provide information regarding resolution options, and determine how they wish to proceed.

Collateral misconduct is defined to include potential violations of other LTU policies not incorporated into the Policy that occur in conjunction with alleged violations of the Policy, or that arise through the course of the investigation, for which it makes sense to provide one resolution for all allegations. Thus, the collateral allegations may be charged along with potential violations of the Policy, to be resolved jointly under these Procedures. In such circumstances, the Coordinator may consult with LTU officials who typically oversee such conduct (e.g., human resources, student conduct, academic affairs) to solicit their input as needed on what charges should be filed, but the exercise of collateral charges under these procedures is within the discretion of Coordinator. All other allegations of misconduct unrelated to incidents covered by the Policy will typically be addressed separately through procedures described in the student, faculty, and staff handbooks.

The Coordinator conducts an initial evaluation typically within seven (7) business days of receiving Notice/Complaint/Knowledge of alleged misconduct. The initial evaluation typically includes:

• Assessing whether the reported conduct may reasonably constitute a violation of the Policy.
• If the conduct may not reasonably constitute a violation of the Policy, the matter is typically dismissed from this process, consistent with the dismissal provision in these procedures. It may then be referred to another process, if applicable.
• Determining whether LTU has jurisdiction over the reported conduct, as defined in the Policy.
• If the conduct is not within LTU jurisdiction, the matter is typically dismissed from this process, consistent with the dismissal provision in these procedures. If applicable, the conduct will be referred to the appropriate LTU office for resolution.
• Offering and coordinating supportive measures for the Complainant.
• Offering and coordinating supportive measures for the Respondent, as applicable.
• Notifying the Complainant, or the person who reported the allegation(s), of the available resolution options, including a supportive and remedial response, an Informal Resolution option, or the Resolution Process described below.
• Determining whether the Complainant wishes to initiate a Complaint.
• Notifying the Respondent of the available resolution options, including a supportive and remedial response, an Informal Resolution option, or the Resolution Process described below, if a Complaint is made.

Helping a Complainant to Understand Resolution Options

If the Complainant indicates they wish to initiate a Complaint (in a manner that can reasonably be construed as reflecting intent to make a Complaint), the Coordinator will help to facilitate the Complaint, which will include:

• Working with the Complainant to determine whether the Complainant wishes to pursue one of three resolution options:
• a supportive and remedial response, and/or
• Informal Resolution, or
• the Resolution Process described below.

The Coordinator will seek to abide by the wishes of the Complainant but may have to take an alternative approach depending on their analysis of the situation.

If the Complainant elects for the Resolution Process below, and the Coordinator has determined the Policy applies and that LTU has jurisdiction, they will route the matter to the appropriate Resolution Pool member, will provide the Parties with a Notice of Investigation and Allegation(s), and will initiate an investigation consistent with these Procedures.

If any Party indicates (either verbally or in writing) that they want to pursue an Informal Resolution option, the Coordinator will assess whether the matter is suitable for Informal Resolution and refer the matter accordingly.

If the Complainant indicates (either verbally or in writing) that they do not want any action taken, no Resolution Process will be initiated (unless deemed necessary by the Coordinator), though the Complainant can elect to initiate one later, if desired.

Coordinator Authority to Initiate a Complaint

If the Complainant does not wish to file a Complaint, the Coordinator, who has ultimate discretion as to whether a Complaint is initiated, will offer supportive measures and determine whether to initiate a Complaint themselves. To make this determination, the Coordinator will evaluate that request to determine if there is a serious and imminent threat to someone's safety or if LTU cannot ensure equal access without initiating a Complaint. The Coordinator will consider the following non-exhaustive factors to determine whether to file a Complaint:

• The Complainant’s request not to initiate a Complaint.
• The Complainant’s reasonable safety concerns regarding initiating a Complaint.
• The risk that additional acts of discrimination would occur if a Complaint is not initiated.
• The severity of the alleged discrimination, including whether the discrimination, if established, would require the removal of a Respondent from campus or imposition of another disciplinary sanction to end the discrimination and prevent its recurrence.
• The age and relationship of the Parties, including whether the Respondent is a LTU employee.
• The scope of the alleged discrimination, including information suggesting a pattern, ongoing discrimination, or discrimination alleged to have impacted multiple individuals.
• The availability of evidence to assist a Decision-maker in determining whether discrimination occurred.
• Whether LTU could end the alleged discrimination and prevent its recurrence without initiating its resolution process.

If deemed necessary, the Coordinator may consult with appropriate LTU employees (e.g. CARE Team or Campus Safety), and/or conduct a violence risk assessment to aid their determination whether to initiate a Complaint.

When the Coordinator initiates a Complaint, they do not become the Complainant. The Complainant is the person who experienced the alleged conduct that could constitute a violation of this Policy.

LTU may dismiss a Complaint if, at any time during the investigation or Resolution Process, one or more of the following grounds are met:

1. LTU is unable to identify the Respondent after taking reasonable steps to do so
2. LTU no longer enrolls or employs the Respondent
3. A Complainant voluntarily withdraws any or all of the allegations in the Complaint, and the Coordinator declines to initiate a Complaint
4. LTU determines the conduct alleged in the Complaint would not constitute a Policy violation, if proven

In addition to the other members of the Nondiscrimination Team, as authorized by the Coordinator, a Decision-maker can recommend dismissal to the Coordinator if they believe the grounds are met. A Complainant who decides to withdraw a Complaint may later request to reinstate or refile it.

Upon any dismissal, LTU will promptly send the Complainant written notification of the dismissal and the rationale for doing so. If the dismissal occurs after the Respondent has been made aware of the allegations, LTU will also notify the Respondent of the dismissal.

This dismissal decision is appealable by any party.

The Complainant may appeal a dismissal of their Complaint. The Respondent may also appeal the dismissal of the Complaint if dismissal occurs after the Respondent has been made aware of the allegations. All dismissal appeal requests must be filed within three (3) business days of the notification of the dismissal.

The Coordinator will notify the Parties of any appeal of the dismissal. If, however, the Complainant appeals, but the Respondent was not notified of the Complaint, the Coordinator must then provide the Respondent with a NOIA and will notify the Respondent of the Complainant’s appeal with an opportunity to respond.

Throughout the dismissal appeal process, LTU will:

• Implement dismissal appeal procedures equally for the Parties.
• Assign a trained Dismissal Appeal Officer who did not take part in an investigation of the allegations or dismissal of the Complaint.
• Provide the Parties a reasonable and equal opportunity to make a statement in support of, or challenging, the dismissal.
• Notify the Parties of the result of the appeal and the rationale for the result.

The grounds for dismissal appeals 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 dismissal was decided.
3. The Coordinator, Investigator, or Decision-maker had a conflict of interest or bias for or against complainants or respondents generally or the individual
4. Complainant or Respondent that would change the outcome

The appeal should specify at least one of the grounds above and provide any reasons or supporting evidence for why the ground is met. Upon receipt of a written dismissal appeal request from one or more Parties, the Coordinator will share the petition with all other Parties and provide three (3) business days for other Parties and the Coordinator to respond to the request. At the conclusion of the response period, the Coordinator will forward the appeal, as well as any response provided by the other Parties and/or the Coordinator to the Dismissal Appeal Officer for consideration.

If the Request for Appeal does not provide information that meets the grounds in this Policy, the Dismissal Appeal Officer will deny the request, and the Parties, their Advisors, and the Coordinator will be notified in writing of the denial and the rationale.

If any of the asserted grounds in the appeal satisfy the grounds described in this Policy, then the Dismissal Appeal Officer will notify all Parties and their Advisors, and the Coordinator, of their decision and rationale in writing. The effect will be to reinstate the Complaint.

In most circumstances, appeals are confined to a review of the written documentation or record of the original determination and pertinent documentation regarding the specific appeal grounds. The Dismissal Appeal Officer has seven (7) business days to review and decide on the appeal, though extensions can be granted at the discretion of the Coordinator, and the Parties will be notified of any extension.

Appeal decisions are deferential to the original determination, making changes only if there is a compelling justification to do so.

The Dismissal Appeal Officer may consult with the Coordinator and/or legal counsel on questions of procedure or rationale for clarification, if needed. The Coordinator will maintain documentation of all such consultation.

LTU may emergency remove an employee or student accused of Sex Discrimination or Sex-based Harassment upon receipt of Notice/Knowledge, a Complaint, or at any time during the Resolution Process. Prior to an emergency removal, LTU will conduct an individualized risk assessment and may remove the student if that assessment determines that an imminent and serious threat to the health or safety of a Complainant or any students, employees, or other persons arising from the allegations of sex discrimination justifies such action. Students accused of other forms of discrimination (not sex) are subject to interim suspension, which can be imposed for safety reasons.

When an emergency removal or interim suspension is imposed, wholly or partially, the affected employee or student will be notified of the action, which will include a written rationale, and the option to challenge the emergency removal or interim suspension within two (2) business days of the notification. Upon receipt of a challenge, the Coordinator will meet with the student (and their Advisor, if desired) as soon as reasonably possible thereafter to allow them to show cause why the removal/action should not be implemented or should be modified.

This meeting is not a hearing on the merits of the allegation(s), but rather is an administrative process intended to determine solely whether the emergency removal or interim suspension is appropriate, should be modified, or lifted. When this meeting is not requested within five (5) business days, objections to the emergency removal or interim suspension will be deemed waived. An employee or student can later request a meeting to show why they are no longer an imminent and serious threat because conditions related to imminence or seriousness have changed. A Complainant and their Advisor may be permitted to participate in this meeting if the Coordinator determines it is equitable for them to do so.

The Respondent may provide information, including expert reports, witness statements, communications, or other documentation for consideration prior to or during the meeting. When applicable, a Complainant may provide information to the Coordinator for review.

An emergency removal or interim suspension may be affirmed, modified, or lifted as a result of a requested review or as new information becomes available. The Coordinator will communicate the final decision in writing, typically within three (3) business days of the review meeting.

When the Respondent is an employee, or a student employee accused of misconduct in the course of their employment, existing provisions for interim action are typically applicable instead of the above emergency removal process.

LTU is obligated to ensure that the Resolution Process is not abused for retaliatory purposes. Although LTU permits the filing of counter-complaints, the Coordinator will use an initial evaluation, described above, to assess whether the allegations in the counter-complaint are made in good faith. When counter-complaints are not made in good faith, they will not be permitted. They will be considered potentially retaliatory and may constitute a violation of the Policy.

Counter-complaints determined to have been reported in good faith will be processed using the Resolution Process below. At the Coordinator’s discretion, investigation of such claims may take place concurrently or after resolution of the underlying initial Complaint.

Who Can Serve as an Advisor?

The Parties may each have an Advisor (friend, mentor, family member, attorney, or any other individual a party chooses) present with them for all meetings, interviews within the Resolution Process, including intake. The Parties may select whomever they wish to serve as their Advisor as long as the Advisor is eligible and available.

The Coordinator will offer to assign a trained Advisor to any party if the party chooses. If the Parties choose an Advisor from the pool available from LTU, LTU will have trained the Advisor and familiarized them with LTU’s Resolution Process.

LTU 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, LTU is not obligated to provide an attorney to advise that party.

A party may elect to change Advisors during the process and is not obligated to use the same Advisor throughout. Parties are expected to provide the Coordinator with timely notification if they change Advisors. If a party changes Advisors, consent to share information with the previous Advisor is assumed to be terminated, and a release for the new Advisor must be submitted.

LTU may permit Parties to have more than one Advisor, or an Advisor and a support person, upon special request to the Coordinator. The decision to grant this request is at the Coordinator’s sole discretion and will be granted equitably to all Parties.

If a party requests that all communication be made through their attorney Advisor instead of to the party, LTU will agree to copy both the party and their Advisor on all communications.

Advisors appointed by the institution cannot be Confidential Employees, and although they will not be asked to disclose details of their interactions with their advisees to institutional officials or Decision-makers absent an emergency, they are still reminded of their Mandated Reporter responsibilities.

Advisor’s Role in the Resolution Process

Advisors should help the Parties to prepare for each meeting and are expected to advise ethically, with integrity, and in good faith. Advisors may not provide testimony or speak on behalf of their advisee unless given specific permission to do so.

The Parties are expected to ask and respond to questions on their own behalf throughout 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.

Records Shared with Advisors

Advisors are entitled to the same opportunity as their advisee to access relevant evidence, and/or the same written investigation report that accurately summarizes this evidence.

Advisors are expected to maintain the confidentiality of the records LTU shares with them, per Section 17 of the Policy addressing Confidentiality. Advisors may not disclose any LTU work product or evidence LTU obtained solely through the Resolution Process for any purpose not explicitly authorized by LTU.

Accordingly, Advisors will be asked to sign Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs). LTU may decline to share materials with any Advisor who has not executed the NDA. LTU may restrict the role of any Advisor who does not respect the sensitive nature of the process or who fails to abide by LTU’s confidentiality expectations.

Advisor Expectations

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

LTU may also make reasonable provisions to allow an Advisor who cannot be present in person to attend a meeting/interview by telephone, video conferencing, or other similar technologies.

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

Advisor Policy Violations

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

This Resolution Process, consisting of Informal Resolution or Administrative Resolution, is LTU’s chosen approach to addressing all forms of discrimination on the basis of protected characteristics, harassment, retaliation, and Other Prohibited Conduct under the Policy. The process considers the Parties’ preferences but is ultimately determined at the Coordinator’s discretion.

Resolution proceedings are confidential. All individuals present at any time during the Resolution Process are expected to maintain the confidentiality of the proceedings in accordance with LTU Policy.

Informal Resolution

To initiate Informal Resolution, a Complainant or Respondent may make such a request to the Coordinator at any time prior to a final determination, or the Coordinator may offer the option to the Parties, in writing. LTU 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.

Before initiation of an Informal Resolution process, LTU will provide the Parties with a NOIA that explains:

• The allegations.
• The requirements of the Informal Resolution process.
• That, prior to agreeing to a resolution, any party has the right to withdraw from the Informal Resolution process and to initiate or resume LTU’s Resolution Process.
• That the Parties’ agreement to a resolution at the conclusion of the Informal Resolution Process will preclude the Parties from initiating or resuming the Resolution Process arising from the same allegations.
• The potential terms that may be requested or offered in an Informal Resolution agreement, including notification that an Informal Resolution agreement is binding only on the Parties.
• What information LTU will maintain, and whether and how it could disclose such information for use in its Resolution Process.

LTU offers four categories of Informal Resolution:

1. Supportive Resolution. When the Coordinator can resolve the matter informally by providing supportive measures (only) designed to remedy the situation.
2. Educational Conversation. When the Coordinator can resolve the matter informally by having a conversation with the Respondent to discuss the Complainant’s concerns and institutional expectations or can accompany the Complainant in their desire to confront the conduct.
3. Accepted Responsibility. When the Respondent is willing to accept responsibility for violating Policy and is willing to agree to actions that will be enforced similarly to sanctions, and the Complainant(s) and LTU are agreeable to the resolution terms.
4. Alternative Resolution. When the Parties agree to resolve the matter through an alternative resolution mechanism (which could include, but is not limited to, mediation, shuttle negotiation, restorative practices, facilitated dialogue, etc.), as described below.

The individual facilitating an Informal Resolution must be trained and cannot be the Investigator, Decision-maker, or Appeal Decision-maker (this person will be a member of the Resolution Pool).

It is not necessary to pursue Informal Resolution first in order to pursue an Administrative Resolution. Any party participating in Informal Resolution can withdraw from the Informal Resolution Process at any time and initiate or resume the Administrative Process.

The Parties may agree, as a condition of engaging in Informal Resolution, on what statements made or evidence shared during the Informal Resolution process will not be considered in the Administrative Resolution, should Informal Resolution not be successful, unless agreed to by all Parties.

If an investigation is already underway, the Coordinator has discretion to determine if an investigation will be paused, if it will be limited, or if it will continue during the Informal Resolution process.

Categories of Informal Resolution

1. Supportive Resolution

The Coordinator will meet with the Complainant to determine reasonable supportive measures that are designed to restore or preserve the Complainant’s access to LTU’s education program and activity. Such measures can be modified as the Complainant’s needs evolve over time or circumstances change. If the Respondent has received the NOIA, the Coordinator may also provide reasonable supportive measures for the Respondent as deemed appropriate. This option is available when the Complainant does not want to engage the other resolution options, and the Coordinator does not initiate a Complaint.

2. Educational Conversation

The Complainant(s) may request that the Coordinator address their allegations by meeting (with or without the Complainant) with the Respondent(s) to discuss concerning behavior and institutional policies and expectations. Such a conversation is non-disciplinary and non-punitive. Respondent(s) are not required to attend such meetings, nor are they compelled to provide any information if they attend. The conversation will be documented as the Informal Resolution for the matter, if it takes place. In light of this conversation, or the Respondent’s decision not to attend, the Coordinator may also implement remedial actions to ensure that policies and expectations are clear and to minimize the risk of the recurrence of any behaviors that may not align with Policy.

3. Accepted Responsibility

The Respondent may accept responsibility for any or all of the alleged Policy violations at any point during the Resolution Process. If the Respondent indicates an intent to accept responsibility for all alleged Policy violations, the ongoing process will be paused, and the Coordinator will determine whether Informal Resolution is an option.

If Informal Resolution is available, the Coordinator will determine whether all Parties and LTU are able to agree on responsibility, restrictions, sanctions, restorative measures, and/or remedies. If so, the Coordinator implements the accepted finding that the Respondent is in violation of LTU Policy, implements agreed-upon restrictions and remedies, and determines the appropriate responses in coordination with other appropriate administrator(s), as necessary.

This resolution is not subject to appeal once all Parties indicate their written agreement to all resolution terms. When the Parties cannot agree on all terms of resolution, the Resolution Process will either continue or resume.

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

4. Alternative Resolution

The institution offers a variety of alternative resolution mechanisms to best meet the specific needs of the Parties and the nature of the allegations. Alternative resolution may involve agreement to pursue individual or community remedies, including targeted or broad-based educational programming or training; supported direct conversation or interaction with the Respondent(s); indirect action by the Coordinator or other appropriate LTU officials; and other forms of resolution that can be tailored to the needs of the Parties. Some alternative resolution mechanisms will result in an agreed-upon outcome, while others are resolved through dialogue. All Parties must consent to the use of an alternative resolution approach, and the Parties may, but are not required to, have direct or indirect contact during an alternative resolution process.

The 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
• Respondent’s disciplinary history
• Whether an emergency removal or other interim action 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 (e.g., time, staff)

The Coordinator has the authority to determine whether alternative resolution is available or successful, to facilitate a resolution that is acceptable to all Parties, and/or to accept the Parties’ proposed resolution, usually through their Advisors, often including terms of confidentiality, release, and non-disparagement.

Parties do not have the authority to stipulate restrictions or obligations for individuals or groups that are not involved in the alternative resolution process. The Coordinator will determine whether additional individual or community remedies are necessary to meet the institution’s compliance obligations in addition to the alternative resolution.

The Coordinator maintains records of any resolution that is reached and will provide notification to the Parties of what information is maintained. Failure to abide by the resolution agreement may result in appropriate responsive/disciplinary actions (e.g., dissolution of the agreement and resumption of the Resolution Process, referral to the conduct process for failure to comply, application of the enforcement terms of the agreement). The results of Complaints resolved by alternative resolution are not appealable.

If an Informal Resolution option is not available or selected, LTU will initiate or continue an investigation and subsequent Resolution Process to determine whether the Policy has been violated.

Administrative Resolution Process (see Section 22 below)

The Resolution Process relies on a pool of administrators (“the Pool”) to carry out the process.

Pool Member Roles

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

• Appropriate intake of and initial guidance pertaining to Complaints
• Advisor to Parties
• Informal Resolution Facilitator
• Perform or assist with initial evaluation
• Investigator
• Decision-maker for challenges to emergency removal and supportive measures
• Decision-maker
• Appeal of Dismissal Decision-maker
• Appeal Decision-maker

Pool Member Appointment

The Coordinator, in consultation with senior administrators as necessary, appoints the Pool, which acts with independence and impartiality. Although members of the Pool are typically trained in a variety of skill sets and can rotate amongst the different roles listed above in different Complaints, LTU can also designate permanent roles for individuals in the Pool.

Training (see Appendix J for details of training for Pool Members)

Prior to an investigation, the Coordinator will provide the Parties with a detailed written NOIA. 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. For climate/culture investigations that do not have an identifiable Respondent, the NOIA will be sent to the department/office/program head for the area/program being investigated.

The NOIA typically includes:

• 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/offenses implicated
• A description of, link to, or copy of the applicable procedures
• A statement that the Parties are entitled to an equal opportunity to access the relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence
• The name(s) of the Investigator(s), along with a process to notify the Coordinator of any conflict of interest that the Investigator(s) may have in advance of the interview process
• A statement that LTU presumes the Respondent is not responsible for the reported misconduct unless and until the evidence supports a different determination
• 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 relevant evidence
• A statement that retaliation is prohibited
• Information about the confidentiality of the process, including that the Parties and their Advisors (if applicable) may not share LTU work product obtained through the Resolution Process
• A statement that the Parties may have an Advisor of their choice who may accompany them through all steps of the Resolution Process
• A statement informing the Parties that LTU’s Policy prohibits knowingly making false statements, including knowingly submitting false information during the Resolution Process
• Detail on how a party may request disability accommodations or other support assistance during the Resolution Process
• A link to LTU’s VAWA Brochure
• An instruction to preserve any evidence that is directly related to the allegations

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

The LTU will make a good faith effort to complete the Resolution Process within 60-90 business days, including any appeals, which the Coordinator can extend as necessary for appropriate cause. The Parties will receive regular updates on the progress of the Resolution Process, as well as notification and a rationale for any extensions or delays, and an estimate of how much additional time will be needed to complete the process.

Investigations are completed expeditiously, normally within sixty (60) business days, though some investigations may take longer, depending on issues such as the nature, extent, and complexity of the allegations, witness availability, law enforcement involvement, and other factors.

If a party or witness chooses not to participate in the Resolution Process or becomes unresponsive, LTU reserves the right to continue it without their participation to ensure a prompt resolution. Non-participatory or unresponsive Parties retain the rights outlined in this Policy and the opportunity to participate in the Resolution Process.

LTU may undertake a short delay in its investigation (several days to a few weeks) if circumstances require. Such circumstances include but are not limited to a request from law enforcement to temporarily delay the investigation, the need for language assistance, the absence of Parties and/or witnesses, and/or health conditions. LTU will promptly resume its Resolution Process as soon as feasible. During such a delay, LTU will implement and maintain supportive measures for the Parties as deemed appropriate.

LTU action(s) or processes are not typically altered or precluded on the grounds that civil or criminal charges involving the underlying incident(s) have been filed or that criminal charges have been dismissed or reduced.

LTU will make a good faith effort to complete the Resolution Process as promptly as circumstances permit and will regularly communicate with the Parties to update them on the progress and timing of the process.

Any individual materially involved in the administration of the Resolution Process, including the 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.

The Coordinator will vet the assigned Investigator(s), Decision-maker(s), and Appeal Decision-makers for impartiality by ensuring there are no actual or apparent conflicts of interest or disqualifying biases. At any time during the Resolution Process, the Parties may raise a concern regarding bias or conflict of interest, and the 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 Coordinator, concerns should be raised with the President.

The Resolution Process involves an objective evaluation of all available relevant and not otherwise impermissible evidence, 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. All Parties have a full and fair opportunity, through the investigation process, to suggest witnesses and questions, to provide evidence, and to receive a written investigation report that accurately summarizes this evidence.

Once an investigation is initiated, the Coordinator appoints an Investigator(s) to conduct it. These Investigators may be members of the Resolution Process Pool, or any other properly trained Investigator, whether internal or external to LTU’s community.

Employees (not including Complainant and Respondent) are required to cooperate with and participate in LTU’s investigation and Resolution Process. Student witnesses and witnesses from outside LTU community cannot be required to participate but are encouraged to cooperate with LTU investigations and to share what they know about a Complaint.

Interviews may be conducted in person, via online video platforms (e.g., Zoom, Microsoft Teams, FaceTime, WebEx), or, in limited circumstances, by telephone. LTU will take appropriate steps to ensure the security/privacy of remote interviews.

Parties and 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.

It is standard practice for Investigators to create record of all interviews pertaining to the Resolution Process. The Parties may review copies of their own interviews, upon request. No unauthorized audio or video recording of any kind is permitted during investigation meetings.

All interviews are recorded, and all involved persons should be made aware of the audio and/or video recording. The recording and/or transcript of those meetings will be provided to the Parties for their review, after which the Parties may pose additional questions to each other. Those subsequent meetings or interviews are also recorded and/or transcribed and shared with the Parties. The University will use a virtual platform for recording/transcript purposes.

The Investigator(s) and the Decision-maker(s) will only consider evidence that is deemed relevant and not otherwise impermissible.

Relevant Evidence is that which may aid in determining whether the allegation occurred, or whether the behavior constitutes a violation of Policy.

Impermissible evidence is defined as evidence that relates to the Complainant’s sexual interests or prior sexual conduct, unless 1) evidence about the Complainant’s prior sexual conduct is offered to prove that someone other than the Respondent committed the alleged conduct, or 2) is evidence about specific incidents of the Complainant’s prior sexual conduct with the Respondent that is offered to prove consent.

The fact of prior consensual sexual conduct occurred between the Complainant and Respondent does not by itself demonstrate or imply the Complainant’s consent or preclude a determination that sex-based harassment occurred.

Previous disciplinary action of any kind involving the Respondent may not be considered 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. Barring a pattern allegation, this information is only considered at the sanction stage of the process and is not shared until then.

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

At any point in the proceedings, if a Respondent elects to admit to the charged violations and waive further process, the Decision-maker is authorized to accept that admission, adopt it as their finding/final determination, and administer sanctions. This would waive the Respondent. If the Respondent’s right to appeal. If the Respondent rejects the finding/final determination/sanctions, or does not admit to all conduct charged, the Resolution Process continues to its conclusion. The Complainant retains their right to appeal a determination when a Respondent admits responsibility.

All investigations are adequate, thorough, reliable, impartial, prompt, and fair. They involve interviewing all relevant Parties and witnesses, obtaining relevant evidence, and identifying sources of expert information, as necessary.

After an interview, Parties and witnesses will be asked to verify the accuracy of the recording, transcript, or summary of their interview. They may submit changes, edits, or clarifications. If the Parties or witnesses do not respond within the time period designated for verification, objections to the accuracy of the recording, transcript, or summary will be deemed to have been waived, and no changes will be permitted.

LTU may consolidate Complaints against more than one Respondent, or by more than one Complainant against one or more Respondents, when the allegations arise from the same facts or circumstances or implicate a pattern, collusion, and/or other shared or similar actions.

The Investigator(s) typically take(s) the following steps, if not already completed and not necessarily in this order:

• Determine the identity and contact information of the Complainant.
• Identify all offenses implicated by the alleged misconduct and notify the Complainant and Respondent of all specific policies implicated.
• Assist the Coordinator, if needed, with conducting a prompt initial evaluation to determine if the allegations indicate a potential Policy violation.
• Work with the Coordinator, as necessary, to prepare the initial NOIA. The NOIA may be amended with any additional or dismissed allegations.
• Commence a thorough, reliable, and impartial investigation by identifying issues and developing a strategic investigation plan, including a witness list, evidence list, intended investigation time-frame, and order of interviews for the Parties and witnesses.
• When participation of a party is expected, provide that party with written notification of the date, time, and location of the meeting, as well as the expected participants and purpose.
• Make good faith efforts to notify each party of any meeting or interview involving another party, in advance when possible.
• Interview the Complainant and the Respondent and conduct any necessary follow-up interviews with each.
• Interview all available, relevant witnesses and conduct follow-up interviews as necessary.
• Provide each interviewed party and witness an opportunity to review and verify the Investigator’s summary notes (or transcript or recording) of the relevant evidence/testimony from their respective interviews and meetings.
• Allow each party the opportunity to suggest witnesses and questions they wish the Investigator(s) to ask of another party and/or witnesses.
• Document which questions were asked with a rationale for any changes or omissions in the investigation report.
• Where possible, complete the investigation promptly and without unreasonable deviation from the intended time-line.
• Provide the Parties with regular status updates throughout the investigation.
• Prior to the conclusion of the investigation, provide the Parties and their respective Advisors with a list of witnesses whose information will be used to render a finding.
• Ask the Parties to provide a list of questions they would like asked of the other party or any witnesses. The Investigator will ask those questions deemed relevant, and for any question deemed not relevant, will provide a rationale for not asking the question.
• Write a draft investigation report that gathers, assesses, and synthesizes the evidence, accurately summarizes the investigation, and party and witness interviews, and provides all relevant evidence.
• Provide the Parties and their respective Advisors an electronic copy of the draft investigation report as well as an opportunity to inspect and review all relevant evidence obtained as part of the investigation for a review and comment period of ten (10) business days so that each party may meaningfully respond to the evidence. The Parties may elect to waive all or part of the review period.
• The Investigator may share the investigation report with the Coordinator and/or legal counsel for their review and feedback.

The Administrative Resolution Process is used for all Complaints of discrimination on the basis of protected characteristics, harassment, retaliation, and Other Prohibited Behaviors (as defined in Policy) or when Informal Resolution is either not elected or is unsuccessful.

The Administrative Resolution Process consists of a hand-off of the investigation report and all relevant evidence to the Decision-maker to make a finding and determine sanctions (if applicable).

At the discretion of Coordinator, the assigned Decision-maker will be an individual or a panel drawn from the Resolution Process Pool, or other trained individuals either internal or external to the institution. Once the Decision-maker receives and reviews the file, they can recommend dismissal to the Coordinator, if they believe the grounds are met.

The Administrative Resolution Process typically takes approximately thirty (30) business days to complete, beginning with the Decision-maker’s receipt of the Draft Investigation Report. The Parties will be regularly updated on the timing and any significant deviation from this typical time line.

Investigator-led Questioning Meetings

• The Coordinator provides the Draft Investigation Report to the Decision-maker and the Parties simultaneously for review. The Decision-maker can then provide the Investigator with a list of relevant questions to ask the Parties or any witnesses.
• To the extent credibility is in dispute and relevant to one or more of the allegations, the questions provided by the Decision-maker may also explore credibility.
• The Investigator will also ask each of the Parties to provide a proposed list of questions to ask the other Parties and any witnesses.
• To the extent credibility is in dispute and relevant to one or more of the allegations, questions proposed by the Parties may also explore credibility.
• All party questions must be posed during this phase of the process and cannot be posed later unless authorized by the Decision-maker.
• The Investigator will share all party-proposed questions with the Decision-maker, who will finalize the list with the Investigator to ensure all questions are both relevant and permissible.
• The Investigator will then hold individual meetings with the Parties and witnesses to ask the questions posed by the Decision-maker, as well as the questions proposed by the Parties that have been deemed relevant and not duplicative, including questions intended to assess credibility. These meetings will be recorded and transcribed.
• For any question deemed not relevant or duplicative, the Investigator will provide a rationale for not asking the question, either during the recorded meeting, or in writing (typically as an appendix to the Final Investigation Report).
• Typically, within five (5) business days of the last of these meetings, the recordings or transcripts of them will be provided to the Parties for their review. The Parties will then have five (5) business days to review these recordings or transcripts and propose any follow-up questions for the Investigator to ask.
• The Investigator will review the proposed questions with the Decision-maker, to determine relevance and permissibility. If deemed necessary, the Investigator will then meet individually with the Parties or witnesses for whom there are relevant, and not duplicative, follow-up questions. These follow-up meetings will also be recorded, and the Parties will receive the recordings or transcripts of these meetings. This final round of questioning is the last round permitted, unless permission is granted to extend, by the Decision-maker.
• The Investigator will then incorporate any new, relevant evidence and information obtained through the Parties’ review of the Draft Investigation Report, the questioning, and follow-up meetings into a Final Investigation Report.
• The Investigator will also respond in writing (typically within the Final Investigation Report) to the relevant elements of the Parties’ responses to the Draft Investigation Report and incorporate relevant elements of the Parties’ written responses, additional relevant evidence, and any necessary revisions into the Final Investigation Report.
• The Investigator will then share the Final Investigation Report with the Coordinator and/or legal counsel for their review and feedback.
• The Investigator will then provide the Coordinator with the Final Investigation Report and investigation.

The Decision-maker’s Determination

• The Coordinator will provide the Decision-maker, the Parties, and their Advisors with the Final Investigation Report (FIR) and investigation file, including the evidence and information obtained through the Investigator-led questioning meetings.
• The Decision-maker will review the FIR, all appendices, and the investigation file.
• If the record is incomplete, the Decision-maker may direct a re-opening of the investigation, or may direct or conduct any additional inquiry necessary, including informal meetings with the Parties or any witnesses, if needed.
• Upon reviewing the relevant evidence, the Decision-maker may also choose to pose additional questions:
• To the extent credibility is in dispute and relevant to one or more of the allegations, the Decision-maker may meet individually with the Parties and witnesses to question them in order to assess their credibility. These meetings will be recorded, and the recording or transcript will be shared with the Parties.
• At their discretion, the Decision-maker may also meet with any party or witness to ask additional relevant questions that will aid the Decision-maker in making their findings. These meetings will be recorded, and the recording or transcript will be shared with the Parties.
• The Decision-maker will then apply the Preponderance of the evidence to make a determination on each of the allegations and, if applicable, any associated sanctions.
• Timeline. The Decision-maker’s determination process typically takes approximately ten (10) business days, but this time frame can vary based on a number of factors and variables. The Parties will be notified of any delays.
• Impact Statements. Prior to a determination, the Coordinator will also provide the Parties with an opportunity to submit a written impact and/or mitigation statement. The Coordinator will review these statements upon receipt to determine whether there are any immediate needs, issues, or concerns, but will otherwise hold them until after the Decision-maker has made determinations on the allegations. If there are any findings of a Policy violation, the Decision-maker will request the Impact Statements from the Coordinator and review them prior to determining sanctions. They will also be exchanged between the Parties at that time.
• 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 Resolution Process at any time, and/or referring that information to another process for resolution.

Factors the Decision-maker may consider when determining sanctions and responsive actions 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
• The Respondent’s acceptance of responsibility
• Any other information deemed relevant by the Decision-maker(s)

The sanctions will be implemented as soon as it is feasible once a determination is final, 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.

Student Sanctions

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

• Reprimand: A formal statement that the conduct was unacceptable and a warning that further violation of any LTU policy, procedure, or directive will result in more severe sanctions/responsive actions.
• Required Counseling: A mandate to meet with and engage in either LTU-sponsored or external counseling to better comprehend the misconduct and its effects.
• Restrictions: A student may be restricted in their activities, including, but not limited to, being restricted from locations, programs, participation in certain activities or extra-curriculars, study abroad, or holding leadership roles in student organizations.
• Probation: An official sanction for violation of institutional policy, providing for more severe disciplinary sanctions in the event that the student 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 extra-curricular activities, exclusion from designated areas of campus, no-contact orders, and/or other measures deemed appropriate.
• Suspension: Separation from the institution, or one or more of its facilities, for a defined period of time, typically not to exceed two (2) years, after which the student is eligible to return. Eligibility may be contingent upon satisfaction of specific conditions noted at the time of suspension, on successfully applying for readmission, or upon a general condition that the student is eligible to return if the institution determines it is appropriate to re-enroll/readmit the student. The student is typically required to vacate institutional property within 24 hours of notification of the action, though this deadline may be extended at the discretion of the Coordinator or other appropriate official. During an institution-wide suspension, the student is banned from institutional property, functions, events, and activities unless they receive prior written approval from an appropriate institutional official. This sanction may be enforced with a trespass action, as necessary.
• Expulsion: Permanent separation from the institution. The student is banned from institutional property, and the student’s presence at any institution-sponsored activity or event is prohibited. This action may be enforced with a trespass action, as necessary.
• Withholding Diploma: LTU may withhold a student’s diploma for a specified period of time and/or deny a student participation in commencement activities as a sanction if the student is found responsible for violating Policy.
• Revocation of Degree: While very rarely exercised, LTU reserves the right to revoke a degree previously awarded from LTU for fraud, misrepresentation, and/or other violation of LTU policies, procedures, or directives in obtaining the degree, or for other serious violations committed by a student prior to graduation.
• Other Actions: In addition to, or in place of, the above sanctions, LTU may assign any other sanctions as deemed appropriate.

Student Group and Organization Sanctions

The following are the common sanctions that may be imposed upon student groups or organizations singly or in combination:

• Warning: A formal statement that the conduct was unacceptable and a warning that further violation of any LTU policy, procedure, or directive will result in more severe sanctions/responsive actions.
• Probation: An official sanction for violation of institutional policy, providing for more severe disciplinary sanctions in the event that the group 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 and event privileges, denial of LTU funds, ineligibility for honors and awards, restrictions on new member recruitment, no-contact orders, and/or other measures deemed appropriate.
• Suspension: Termination of student group or organization recognition and/or institutional support for a defined period of time not to exceed two (2) years and/or until specific criteria are met. During the suspension period, a student group or organization may not conduct any formal or informal business or participate in LTU-related activities, whether they occur on- or off-campus. Re-recognition is possible but not guaranteed and will only be considered after the end of the suspension period and based on meeting all re-recognition criteria and obtaining clearance from LTU.
• Expulsion: Permanent termination of student group organization recognition and revocation of the privilege to congregate and conduct business on campus as an organization for any reason.
• Loss of Privileges: Restricted from accessing specific LTU privileges for a specified period of time.
• Other Actions: In addition to or in place of the above sanctions, LTU may assign any other sanctions as deemed appropriate.

Employee Sanctions/Responsive/Corrective Actions

Responsive actions for an employee who has engaged in discrimination, harassment, 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
• Shift or schedule adjustments
• Reassignment
• Delay of (or referral for delay of) Tenure Track Progress
• Assignment to a 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, LTU may assign any other responsive actions as deemed appropriate.

Within ten (10) business days of the conclusion of the Resolution Process, the Coordinator provides the Parties with a written outcome notification. The outcome notification will specify the finding for each alleged Policy violation, all applicable sanctions that LTU is permitted to share pursuant to state or federal law, and a detailed rationale, written by the Decision-maker, supporting the findings to the extent LTU is permitted to share under federal or state law.

The notification will also detail the Parties’ equal rights to appeal, the grounds for appeal, the steps to request an appeal, and when the determination is considered final if no party appeals.

The Coordinator will provide the Parties with the outcome notification simultaneously, or without significant time delay between notifications. The written outcome notification may be delivered by one or more of the following methods: in person, mailed to the Parties’ local or permanent address as indicated in official LTU records, or emailed to the Parties’ LTU-issued or designated email account. Once mailed, emailed, and/or received in person, the outcome notification is presumptively delivered.

Students

Should a student Respondent decide not to participate in the Resolution Process, the process proceeds absent their participation to a reasonable resolution. If a student Respondent withdraws from LTU, the Resolution Process may continue, or the Coordinator may exercise their discretion to dismiss the Complaint. If the Complaint is dismissed, LTU will still provide reasonable supportive or remedial measures as deemed 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 LTU 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 discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation.

When a student withdraws or leaves while the process is pending, the student may not return to LTU in any capacity until the Complaint is resolved and any sanctions imposed are satisfied. If the student indicates they will not return, the Coordinator has discretion to dismiss the Complaint. The Registrar, Office of Admissions, and HR may be notified, accordingly.

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

Employees

Should an employee Respondent decide not to participate in the Resolution Process, the process proceeds absent their participation to a reasonable resolution. If an employee Respondent leaves their employment with LTU with unresolved allegations pending, the Resolution Process may continue, or the Coordinator may exercise their discretion to dismiss the Complaint. If the Complaint is dismissed, LTU may still provide reasonable supportive or remedial measures as deemed necessary to address safety and/or remedy any ongoing effects of the alleged discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation.

When an employee resigns and the Complaint is dismissed, the employee may not return to LTU in any capacity. The Registrar, Office of Admissions, and HR will be notified, accordingly. A note will be placed in the employee’s file that they resigned with allegations pending and are not eligible for academic admission or rehire with LTU. The records retained by the Coordinator will reflect that status.

The Coordinator will designate an Appeal Decision-maker – either a three-member panel, or individual chosen from the Pool, or other trained internal or external individuals, to hear the appeal. No Appeal Decision-maker(s) will have been previously involved in the Resolution Process for the Complaint, including in any supportive measure challenge or dismissal appeal that may have been decided earlier in the process. If a panel is used, a voting chair will be designated by the Coordinator.

Appeal Grounds

Appeals are limited to the following grounds:

1. A procedural irregularity that would change the outcome.
2. New evidence that would change the outcome and that was not reasonably available at the time the determination regarding responsibility was made.
3. The Coordinator, Investigator(s), or Decision-maker(s) had a conflict of interest or bias for or against complainants or respondents generally or the specific Complainant or Respondent that would change the outcome.
4. The Final Determination by the Decision-maker is substantially contrary to the weight of the evidence in the record (applicable to sanctions of suspension, expulsion, or termination, only).
5. The sanctions fall outside the range of sanctions designated for this offense, considering the cumulative conduct/disciplinary record of the Respondent (applicable to sanctions of suspension, expulsion, or termination, only).

Request for Appeal

The Respondent or Complainant may submit a written request for appeal (“Request for Appeal”) to the Coordinator within five (5) business days of the delivery of the Notice of Outcome.

The Request for Appeal will be forwarded to the Appeal Decision-maker for consideration to determine if the request meets the grounds for appeal (a Review for Standing). This is not a review of the merits of the appeal, but solely a determination as to whether the request could reasonably be construed to meet the grounds and is timely filed.

If the Request for Appeal does not provide information that meets the grounds in this Policy, the request will be denied by the Appeal Decision-maker, and the Parties and their Advisors will be simultaneously notified in writing of the denial and the rationale.

If any of the information in the Request for Appeal meets the grounds in this Policy, then the Appeal Decision-maker will notify all Parties and their Advisors, the Coordinator, and, when appropriate, the Investigator(s) and/or the original Decision-maker.

All other Parties and their Advisors, the Coordinator, and, when appropriate, the Investigator(s) and/or the Decision-maker will be provided a copy of the Request for Appeal with the approved grounds and then be given five (5) business days to submit a response to the portion of the appeal that was approved and involves them. The Appeal Decision-maker will forward all responses, if any, to all Parties for review and comment.

The non-appealing party (if any) may also choose to appeal at this time. If so, that Request for Appeal will be reviewed by the Appeal Decision-maker to determine if it meets the grounds in this Policy and will either be approved or denied. If approved, it will be forwarded to the party who initially requested an appeal, the Coordinator, and the Investigator(s) and/or original Decision-maker, as necessary, who will submit their responses, if any, within five (5) business days. Any such responses will be circulated for review and comment by all Parties. If denied, the Parties and their Advisors will be notified accordingly, in writing.

No party may submit any new Requests for Appeal after this time period. The Appeal Decision-maker will collect any additional information needed and all documentation regarding the approved appeal grounds, and the subsequent responses will be shared with the Appeal Decision-maker, who will promptly render a decision.

Appeal Determination Process

In most cases, appeals are confined to a review of the written documentation or record of the original determination and pertinent documentation regarding the specific appeal grounds. The Appeal Decision-maker will deliberate as soon as is practicable and discuss the merits of the appeal.

Appeal decisions are to be deferential to the original determination, making changes to the finding only when there is clear error and to the sanction(s)/responsive action(s) only if there is a compelling justification to do so. All decisions are made by majority vote and apply the Preponderance of the evidence standard of proof.

An appeal is not an opportunity for the Appeal Decision-makers to substitute their judgment for that of the original Decision-maker merely because they disagree with the finding and/or sanction(s).

The Appeal Decision-maker may consult with the Coordinator and/or legal counsel on questions of procedure or rationale, for clarification, if needed. The Coordinator will maintain documentation of all such consultation.

Appeal Outcome

An appeal may be granted or denied. Appeals that are granted should normally be remanded (or partially remanded) to the original Investigator(s) and/or Decision-maker with corrective instructions for reconsideration. In rare circumstances where an error cannot be cured by the original Investigator(s) and/or Decision-maker or the Coordinator (as in cases of bias), the Appeal Decision-maker may order a new investigation and/or a new determination with new Pool members serving in the Investigator and Decision-maker roles.

A Notice of Appeal Outcome letter (“Appeal Outcome”) will be sent to all Parties simultaneously, or without significant time delay between notifications. The Appeal Outcome will specify the finding on each appeal ground, any specific instructions for remand or reconsideration, all sanction(s) that may result which LTU is permitted to share according to federal or state law, and the rationale supporting the essential findings to the extent LTU is permitted to share under federal or state law.

Written notification may be delivered by one or more of the following methods: in person, mailed to the Parties’ local or permanent address as indicated in official institutional records, or emailed to the Parties’ LTU-issued email or otherwise approved account. Once mailed, emailed, and/or received in person, the Appeal Outcome will be presumptively delivered.

Once an appeal is decided, the outcome is final and constitutes the Final Determination; further appeals are not permitted, even if a decision or sanction is changed on remand (except in the case of a new determination). When appeals result in no change to the finding or sanction, that decision is final. When an appeal results in a new finding or sanction, that finding or sanction can be appealed one final time on the grounds listed above and in accordance with these procedures.

If a remand results in a new determination that is different from the appealed determination, that new determination can be appealed, once, on any of the five (5) available appeal grounds.

Sanction Status During the Appeal

Any sanctions imposed as a result of the determination are stayed (i.e., not implemented) during the appeal process, and supportive measures may be maintained or reinstated until the appeal determination is made.

If any of the sanctions are to be implemented immediately post-determination, but pre-appeal, then the emergency removal procedures (detailed above) for a “show cause” meeting on the justification for doing so must be permitted within five (5) business days of implementation.

Following the conclusion of the Resolution Process, and in addition to any sanctions implemented or Informal Resolution terms, the Coordinator may implement additional long-term remedies or actions with respect to the Parties and/or LTU community that are intended to stop the discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation, remedy the effects, and prevent recurrence.

These remedies/actions may include, but are not limited to:

• Referral to counseling and health services
• Referral to the Employee Assistance Program
• Course and registration adjustments, such as retroactive withdrawals
• Education to the individual and/or the community
• Permanent alteration of housing assignments
• Permanent alteration of work arrangements for employees
• Provision of campus safety escorts
• Climate surveys
• Policy modification and/or training
• Provision of transportation assistance
• Implementation of long-term contact limitations between the Parties
• Implementation of adjustments to academic deadlines, course schedules, etc.

At the discretion of the Coordinator, certain long-term supportive measures may also be provided to the Parties even if no Policy violation is found.

When no Policy violation is found, the Coordinator will address any remedies LTU owes the Respondent to ensure no effective denial of educational access.

LTU will maintain the confidentiality of any long-term remedies/actions/measures, provided confidentiality does not impair LTU’s ability to provide these services.

All Respondents are expected to comply with the assigned sanctions, responsive actions, corrective actions, and/or Informal Resolution terms within the time frame specified by the final Decision-maker(s), including the Appeal Panel or Decision-maker or the Informal Resolution agreement.

Failure to abide by the sanction(s)/action(s) imposed by the date specified, whether by refusal, neglect, or for any other reason, may result in additional sanction(s)/action(s), including suspension, expulsion, and/or termination from LTU.

Supervisors are expected to enforce the completion of sanctions/responsive actions for their employees.

A suspension imposed for non-compliance with sanctions will only be lifted when compliance is achieved to the Coordinator’s satisfaction.

For a period of at least seven (7) years following the conclusion of the Resolution Process, the LTU will maintain records of:

1. Each discrimination, harassment, and retaliation resolution process, including any Final Determination regarding responsibility or appeal, and any audio or audiovisual recording or transcript required under federal regulation.
2. Any disciplinary sanctions imposed on the Respondent.
3. Any supportive measures provided to the Parties and any remedies provided to the Complainant or the community designed to restore or preserve equal access to LTU’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 provide training to the Coordinator, Coordinator and designees, Investigators, Decision-makers, Appeal Decision-makers, Informal Resolution Facilitators, and any person who is responsible for implementing LTU’s Resolution Process, or who has the authority to modify or terminate supportive measures. LTU will make these training materials available for review upon request.
7. All materials used to train all employees consistent with the requirements in the Title IX Regulations.

The LTU will also maintain any and all records in accordance with federal and state laws.

Disability Accommodations

LTU is committed to providing reasonable accommodations and support to qualified students, employees, or others with disabilities to ensure equal access to LTU’s Resolution Process.

Anyone needing such accommodations or support should contact the Coordinator, who will work with disability support as appropriate to review the request and, in consultation with the person requesting the accommodation, determine which accommodations are appropriate and necessary for full process participation.

Other Support

LTU will also address reasonable requests for support for the Parties and witnesses, including:

• Language services/Interpreters
• Access and training regarding use of technology throughout the Resolution Process
• Other support as deemed reasonable and necessary to facilitate participation in the Resolution Process

These procedures succeed any previous procedures addressing discrimination, harassment, and retaliation for incidents occurring on or after August 1, 2024. The Coordinator will regularly review and update these procedures. LTU reserves the right to make changes to this document as necessary, and once those changes are posted online, they are in effect.

If governing 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 governing laws, regulations, or court holdings.

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

These procedures are effective 08-01-2024.

The following definitions apply to the nondiscrimination Policies and Procedures:

• Advisor. Any person chosen by a party, or appointed by the institution, who may accompany the party to all meetings related to the Resolution Process and advise the party on that process.
• Coordinator. The person with primary responsibility for overseeing and enforcing the nondiscrimination Policies and Procedures. As used in these policies and procedures, the “Coordinator” also includes their designee(s).
• Appeal Decision-maker. The person or panel who accepts or rejects a submitted appeal request, determines whether any of the appeal grounds are met, and directs responsive action(s), accordingly.
• Complainant. A student or employee who is alleged to have been subjected to conduct that could constitute discrimination, harassment, retaliation, or Other Prohibited Conduct under the Policy; or a person other than a student or employee who is alleged to have been subjected to conduct that could constitute discrimination or harassment or under the Policy and who was participating or attempting to participate in LTU’s education program or activity at the time of the alleged discrimination, harassment, retaliation, or Other Prohibited Conduct.
• Complaint. An oral or written request to LTU that can objectively be understood as a request for LTU to investigate and make a determination about the alleged Policy violation(s).
• Confidential Employee.
• An employee whose communications are privileged or confidential under federal or state law. The employee’s confidential status, for purposes of this definition, is only with respect to information received while the employee is functioning within the scope of their duties to which privilege or confidentiality applies; or
• An employee whom LTU has designated as confidential under this Policy for the purpose of providing services to persons related to discrimination, harassment, retaliation, or Other Prohibited Conduct. If the employee also has a duty not associated with providing those services, the employee’s confidential status only applies with respect to information received about discrimination, harassment, retaliation, or Other Prohibited Conduct in connection with providing those services; or
• An employee who is conducting an Institutional Review Board-approved human-subjects research study designed to gather information about discrimination, harassment, retaliation, or Other Prohibited Conduct. The employee’s confidential status only applies with respect to information received while conducting the study.
• Day. A Business day when LTU is in normal operation. All references in the Policy to days refer to Business days unless specifically noted as calendar days.
• Decision-maker. The person or panel who reviews evidence, determines relevance, and makes the Final Determination of whether Policy has been violated and/or assigns sanctions.
• Education Program or Activity. Locations, events, or circumstances where LTU exercises substantial control over the context in which the discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and/or or Other Prohibited Conduct occurs and also includes any building owned or controlled by a student organization that LTU officially recognizes.
• Employee. A person employed by LTU either full- or part-time, including student employees when acting within the scope of their employment.
• Final Determination. A conclusion by the standard of proof that the alleged conduct did or did not violate Policy.
• Finding. A conclusion by the standard of proof that the conduct did or did not occur as alleged (as in a “finding of fact”).
• Informal Resolution. A resolution agreed to by the Parties and approved by the Coordinator that occurs prior to a Final Determination in the Resolution Process.
• Investigation Report. The Investigator’s summary of all relevant evidence gathered during the investigation. Variations include the Draft Investigation Report and the Final Investigation Report.
• Investigator. The person(s) authorized by LTU to gather facts about an alleged violation of this Policy, assess relevance and credibility, synthesize the evidence, and compile this information into an Investigation Report.
• Knowledge. When LTU receives Notice of conduct that reasonably may constitute harassment, discrimination, retaliation, or Other Prohibited Conduct in its Education Program or Activity.
• Mandated Reporter. A LTU employee who is obligated by Policy to share Knowledge, Notice, and/or reports of discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and/or Other Prohibited Conduct with the Coordinator.
• Nondiscrimination Team. The Coordinator, any deputy coordinators, and any member of the Resolution Process Pool.
• Notice. When an employee, student, or third party informs the Coordinator of the alleged occurrence of discriminatory, harassing, retaliatory, or Other Prohibited Conduct.
• Parties. The Complainant(s) and Respondent(s), collectively.
• Pregnancy or Related Conditions. Pregnancy, childbirth, termination of pregnancy, or lactation, medical conditions related thereto, or recovery therefrom.
• Protected Characteristic. Any characteristic for which a person is afforded protection against discrimination and harassment by law or LTU Policy.
• Relevant Evidence. Evidence that may aid a Decision-maker in determining whether the alleged discrimination, harassment, retaliation, or Other Prohibited Conduct occurred, or in determining the credibility of the Parties or witnesses.
• Remedies. Typically, post-resolution actions directed to the Complainant and/or the community as mechanisms to address safety, prevent recurrence, and restore or preserve equal access to LTU’s Education Program and Activity.
• Resolution Process. The investigation and resolution of allegations of prohibited conduct under this Policy, including Informal Resolution, Administrative Resolution, and/or Hearing Resolution.
• Respondent. A person who is alleged to have engaged in conduct that could constitute discrimination based on a protected characteristic, harassment, retaliation, or Other Prohibited Conduct for engaging in a protected activity under this Policy.
• Sanction. A consequence imposed on a Respondent who is found to have violated this Policy.
• Sex. Sex assigned at birth, sex stereotypes, sex characteristics, pregnancy or related conditions, sexual orientation, and gender identity.
• Student. Any person who has gained admission.
• Coordinator. At least one official designated by LTU to ensure ultimate oversight of compliance with Title IX and LTU’s Title IX program. References to the Coordinator throughout the Policy may also encompass a designee of the Coordinator for specific tasks.

Under this Policy and procedures, the Parties have the right to:

• An equitable investigation and resolution of all credible allegations of prohibited discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and Other Prohibited Conduct, when reported in good faith to LTU officials.
• Timely written notice of all alleged violations, including the identity of the Parties involved (if known), the specific misconduct being alleged, the date and location of the alleged misconduct (if known), the implicated Policies and procedures, and possible sanctions.
• Timely written notice of any material adjustments to the allegations (e.g., additional incidents or allegations, additional Complainants) by updating the Notice of Investigation and Allegation(s) (NOIA) as needed to clarify potentially implicated Policy violations.
• Be informed in advance of any LTU public release of information regarding the allegation(s) or underlying incident(s), whenever possible.
• Have all personally identifiable information protected from LTU’s release to the public without consent, except to the extent permitted by law.
• Be treated with respect by LTU officials.
• Have LTU Policy and these procedures followed without material deviation.
• Voluntarily agree to resolve allegations under this Policy through Informal Resolution without LTU pressure, if Informal Resolution is approved by the Coordinator.
• Not be discouraged by LTU officials from reporting discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and Other Prohibited Conduct to both on-campus and off-campus authorities.
• Be informed of options to notify proper law enforcement authorities, including on-campus and local police, and the option(s) to be assisted by LTU in notifying such authorities, if the party chooses. This also includes the right to not be pressured to report.
• Have allegations of violations of this Policy responded to promptly and with sensitivity by LTU law enforcement, security, and/or other LTU officials.
• Be informed of available supportive measures, such as counseling, advocacy, health care, student financial aid, visa and immigration assistance, and/or other services, both on-campus and in the community.
• A LTU-implemented no-contact order or a no-trespass order against a non-affiliated third party when a person has engaged in or threatens to engage in stalking, threatening, harassing, or other improper conduct.

Be informed of available assistance in changing academic, living, and/or employment situations after an alleged incident of discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and/or Other Prohibited Conduct if such changes are reasonably available. No formal report, or investigation, either institutional or criminal, needs to occur for this option to be available. Such actions may include, but are not limited to:

• Referral to counseling, medical, and/or other health-care services
• Referral to the Employee Assistance Program
• Referral to community-based service providers
• Visa and immigration assistance
• Student financial aid counseling
• Education to the institutional community or community subgroup(s)
• Altering campus housing assignment(s)
• Altering work arrangements for employees or student-employees
• Safety planning
• Providing campus safety escorts
• Implementing contact restrictions (no contact orders) between the parties
• Academic support, extensions of deadlines, or other course/program-related adjustments
• Trespass, Persona Non Grata (PNG), or Be-On-the-Lookout (BOLO) orders
• Timely warnings
• Class schedule modifications, withdrawals, or leaves of absence
• Increased security and monitoring of certain areas of the campus
• Any other actions deemed appropriate by the Administrator

• Have LTU maintain supportive measures for as long as necessary, ensuring they remain confidential, provided confidentiality does not impair LTU’s ability to provide the supportive measures.
• Receive sufficiently advanced written notice of any LTU meetings or interviews involving another party, when possible.
• Identify and have the Investigator(s) and/or Decision-maker question relevant available witnesses, including expert witnesses.
• Provide the Investigator(s)/Decision-maker with a list of questions that, if deemed relevant and permissible by the Investigator(s)/Decision-maker, may be asked of any party or witness.
• Have Complainant’s inadmissible sexual interests/prior sexual history or any Party’s irrelevant character evidence excluded by the Decision-maker.
• Access the relevant evidence obtained and respond to that evidence.
• A fair opportunity to provide the Investigator(s) with their account of the alleged misconduct and have that account be on the record.
• Receive a copy of all relevant and permissible evidence obtained during the investigation, subject to privacy limitations imposed by federal and state law and be given ten (10) business days to review and comment on the evidence.
• The right to receive a copy of the Final Investigation Report, including all factual, Policy, and/or credibility analyses performed, [and to have at least ten (10) business days to review the report prior to the determination.
• Be informed of the names of all witnesses whose information will be used to make a finding, in advance of that finding, when relevant.
• Regular status updates on the investigation and/or Resolution Process.
• Have reports of alleged Policy violations addressed by Resolution Process Pool members who have received relevant annual training as required by law.
• A Decision-making panel that is not single-sex in its composition, if a panel is used.
• Preservation of confidentiality/privacy, to the extent possible and permitted by law.
• Meetings, interviews, and/or hearings that are closed to the public.
• Petition that any LTU representative in the process be recused on the basis of disqualifying bias and/or conflict of interest.
• Be able to select an Advisor of their choice to accompany and assist the party in all meetings and/or interviews associated with the Resolution Process.
• Apply the appropriate standard of proof, Preponderance of the evidence, to make a Finding and Final Determination after an objective evaluation of all relevant and permissible evidence.
• Be present, including presence via remote technology, during all testimony given and evidence presented during any live hearing.
• Have an impact and/or mitigation statement considered by the Decision-maker following a determination of responsibility for any allegation, but prior to sanctioning.
• Be promptly informed of the Resolution Process finding(s) and sanction(s) (if any) and be given a detailed rationale of the decision (including an explanation of how credibility was assessed) in a written outcome letter delivered to the Parties simultaneously (without undue delay).
• Be informed in writing of when a LTU decision is considered final and any changes to the Final Determination or sanction(s) that occur post outcome letter delivery.
• Be informed of the opportunity to appeal the Resolution Process finding(s) and sanction(s), and the procedures for doing so in accordance with LTU’s grounds for appeal.
• A fundamentally fair resolution as defined in these procedures.

For the purpose of this Policy, the terms privacy, confidentiality, and privilege have distinct meanings.

• Privacy. Means that information related to a complaint will be shared with a limited number of LTU employees who “need to know” in order to assist in providing supportive measures or evaluating, investigating, or resolving the Complaint. All employees who are involved in LTU’s response to Notice under this Policy receive specific training and guidance about sharing and safeguarding private information in accordance with federal and state law.
• Confidentiality. Exists in the context of laws or professional ethics (including Title IX) that protect certain relationships, including clinical care, mental health providers, and counselors. Confidentiality also applies to those designated by LTU as Confidential Employees for purposes of reports under this Policy, regardless of legal or ethical protections. When a Complainant shares information with a Confidential Employee, the Confidential Employee does not need to disclose that information to the Coordinator. The Confidential Resource will, however, provide the Complainant with the Coordinator’s contact information, assist the Complainant in reporting, if desired, and provide them with information on how the ${TIXOffice_Caps} can assist them. With respect to Confidential Employees, information may be disclosed when: (1) the reporting person gives written consent for its disclosure; (2) there is a concern that the person will likely cause serious physical harm to self or others; or (3) the information concerns conduct involving suspected abuse or neglect of a minor under the age of 18, elders, or persons with disabilities. Non-identifiable information may be shared by Confidential Employees for statistical tracking purposes as required by the Clery Act/Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). Other information may be shared as required by law.
• Privilege. Exists in the context of laws that protect certain relationships, including attorneys, spouses, and clergy. Privilege is maintained by a provider unless a court orders release or the holder of the privilege (e.g., a client, spouse, parishioner) waives the protections of the privilege. LTU treats employees who have the ability to have privileged communications as Confidential Employees.

LTU reserves the right to determine which LTU officials have a legitimate educational interest in being informed about student-related incidents that fall under this Policy, pursuant to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).

Only a small group of officials who need to know will typically be told about the Complaint. Information will be shared as necessary with Investigators, Decision-makers, Appeal Decision-makers, witnesses, the Parties, and the Parties’ Advisors. The circle of people with this knowledge will be kept as tight as possible to preserve the Parties’ rights and privacy, and release is governed by the institution’s unauthorized disclosure policy.

LTU may contact students’ parents/guardians to inform them of situations in which there is a significant and articulable health and/or safety risk but will usually consult with the student prior to doing so.

Expectations Regarding Unethical Relationships

There are inherent risks in any romantic or sexual relationship between persons in unequal positions, such as faculty member-student or supervisor-employee. In reality, these relationships may be less consensual than perceived by the person whose position confers power or authority. Similarly, each of the Parties may view the relationship differently, particularly in retrospect. Circumstances may change, and once welcome conduct may become unwelcome at some point in the relationship.

Even when the Parties have initially consented to romantic or sexual involvement, the possibility of a later allegation of a relevant Policy violation still exists. LTU does not wish to interfere with private choices regarding personal relationships when these relationships do not interfere with LTU’s goals and policies. However, for the personal protection of members of this community, relationships in which power differentials are inherent (e.g., faculty-student, staff-student) are generally discouraged. They may also violate standards of professionalism and/or professional ethics.

Consensual romantic or sexual relationships in which one party maintains a direct supervisory or otherwise evaluative role over the other party are inherently problematic. Therefore, persons with direct supervisory or otherwise evaluative responsibilities who are involved in such relationships must promptly inform their supervisor and/or the Coordinator. The existence of this type of relationship will likely result in removing the supervisory or evaluative responsibilities from the employee or shifting a party from being supervised or evaluated by someone with whom they have established a consensual relationship. When an applicable relationship existed prior to adoption of this Policy or prior to employment, the duty to notify the appropriate supervisor still pertains.

This type of relationship includes Resident Assistants (RAs) and students for whom the RA has direct responsibility. While no relationships are specifically prohibited by this Policy, failure to timely self-report such relationships to a supervisor as required can result in disciplinary action for an employee. The Coordinator will determine whether to refer violations of this provision to Human Resources for resolution, or to pursue resolution under this Policy, based on the circumstances of the allegation.

Threat assessment is the process of assessing the actionability of violence by a person against another person or group following the issuance of a direct or conditional threat. A Violence Risk Assessment (VRA) is a broader term used to describe assessment of any potential violence or danger, regardless of the presence of a vague, conditional, or direct threat.

Implementing a VRA requires specific training. It is typically conducted by psychologists, clinical counselors, social workers, case managers, law enforcement officers, student conduct professionals, and/or other CARE Team members.

A VRA occurs in collaboration with the CARE Team and Campus Safety and must be understood as an ongoing process, rather than as a single evaluation or meeting. A VRA is not an evaluation for an involuntary behavioral health hospitalization (e.g., 5150 in California, Section XII in Massachusetts, Baker Act in Florida), nor is it a psychological or mental health assessment.

A VRA assesses the risk of actionable violence, often with a focus on targeted/predatory escalations. It is supported by research from law enforcement, criminology, human resources, and psychology.

When conducting a VRA, the assessor(s) use(s) an evidence-based process consisting of:

1. An appraisal of risk factors that escalate the potential for violence.
2. A determination of stabilizing influences, or protective factors, that reduce the risk of violence.
3. A contextual analysis of violence risk by considering environmental circumstances, hopelessness, and suicidality; catalyst events; nature and actionability of the threat; fixation and focus on target; grievance collection; and action and time imperative for violence.
4. The application of intervention and management approaches to reduce the risk of violence.

To assess a person’s level of violence risk, the Coordinator will initiate the VRA process through the CARE Team or Campus Safety. The CARE Team or Campus Safety will assign a trained person(s) to perform the assessment, according to the specific nature of the complaint.

The assessor(s) will follow the process for conducting a VRA as outlined in the CARE Team or Campus Safety manual and will rely on a consistent, research-based, reliable system that allows for the evaluation of the risk levels.

Some examples of formalized approaches to the VRA process include The NABITA Risk Rubric, The Structured Interview for Violence Risk Assessment (SIVRA-35), Violence Risk Assessment of the Written Word (VRAWW), Workplace Assessment of Violence Risk (WAVR-21), Historical Clinical Risk Management (HCR-20), and MOSAIC.

The VRA is conducted independently from the Resolution Process, informed by it, but free from outcome pressure. The person(s) conducting the assessment will be trained to mitigate any bias and provide the analysis and findings in a fair and equitable manner.

The CARE Team or Campus Safety member(s) conducts a VRA process and makes a recommendation to the Coordinator as to whether the VRA indicates there is a substantial, compelling, and/or imminent and serious threat to the health and/or safety of a person or the community.

In some circumstances, the Coordinator may determine that a VRA should be conducted by the CARE Team or Campus Safety as part of the initial evaluation of a Complaint under this Policy. A VRA can aid in critical and/or required determinations, including:

1. Whether to remove the Respondent on an emergency basis because of an immediate threat to a person or the community’s health/safety (Emergency Removal)
2. Whether the Coordinator should pursue/initiate a Complaint absent a willing/able Complainant
3. Whether the scope of an investigation should include an incident, and/or pattern of misconduct, and/or climate of discrimination or harassment
4. To help identify potential predatory conduct
5. To help assess/identify grooming behaviors
6. Whether it is reasonable to try to resolve a Complaint through Informal Resolution, and if so, what approach may be most successful
7. Whether to impose transcript notation or communicate with a transfer institution about a Respondent
8. Assessment of appropriate sanctions/remedies (to be applied post-determination)
9. Whether a Clery Act Timely Warning/Trespass order/Persona Non Grata is needed

A compelling risk to health and/or safety may result from evidence of patterns of misconduct, predatory conduct, threats, abuse of minors, use of weapons, and/or violence. Institutions may be compelled to act on alleged employee misconduct irrespective of a Complainant’s wishes.

LTU does not discriminate in its education program or activity against any applicant for admission, student, applicant for employment, or employee on the basis of current, potential, or past pregnancy or related conditions as mandated by Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX). LTU prohibits members of LTU community from adopting or implementing any policy, practice, or procedure which treats an applicant for admission, student, applicant for employment, or employee differently on the basis of current, potential, or past parental, family, or marital status. This policy and its pregnancy-related protections apply to all pregnant persons, regardless of gender identity or expression.

• Familial Status. The configuration of one’s family or one’s role in a family.
• Marital Status. The state of being married or unmarried.
• Parental Status. The status of a person who, with respect to another person who is under the age of 18, is a biological, adoptive, foster, or stepparent; a legal custodian or guardian; in loco parentis with respect to such a person; or actively seeking legal custody, guardianship, visitation, or adoption of such a person.
• Pregnancy and Related Conditions. The full spectrum of processes and events connected with pregnancy, including pregnancy, childbirth, termination of pregnancy, or lactation; related medical conditions; and recovery therefrom.
• Reasonable Modifications. Individualized modifications to LTU’s policies, practices, or procedures that do not fundamentally alter LTU’s education program or activity.

Any LTU employee who becomes aware of a student’s pregnancy or related condition is required to provide the student with the Coordinator’s contact information and communicate that the Coordinator can help take specific actions to prevent discrimination and ensure equal access to LTU’s education program and activity. If the employee has a reasonable belief that the Coordinator is already aware of the pregnancy or related condition, the employee is not required to provide the student with the Coordinator’s contact information.

Upon notification of a student’s pregnancy or related condition, the Coordinator will contact the student and inform the student of LTU’s obligations to:

• Prohibit sex discrimination.
• Provide reasonable modifications.
• Allow access, on a voluntary basis, to any separate and comparable portion of the institution’s education program or activity.
• Allow a voluntary leave of absence.
• Ensure lactation space availability.
• Maintain a Resolution Process for alleged discrimination.
• Treat pregnancy as comparable to other temporary medical conditions for medical benefit, service, plan, or policy purposes.

The Coordinator will also notify the student of the process to file a complaint for alleged discrimination, harassment, or retaliation, as applicable.

Students who are pregnant or are experiencing related conditions are entitled to Reasonable Modifications to prevent sex discrimination and ensure equal access to LTU’s education program and activity. Any student seeking Reasonable Modifications must contact the Coordinator to discuss appropriate and available Reasonable Modifications based on their individual needs. Students are encouraged to request Reasonable Modifications as promptly as possible, although retroactive modifications may be available in some circumstances. Reasonable Modifications are voluntary, and a student can accept or decline the offered Reasonable Modifications. Not all Reasonable Modifications are appropriate for all contexts.

• Reasonable Modifications may include:
• Breaks during class to express breast milk, breastfeed, or attend to health needs associated with pregnancy or related conditions, including eating, drinking, or using the restroom
• Intermittent absences to attend medical appointments
• Access to online or homebound education
• Changes in schedule or course sequence
• Time extensions for coursework and rescheduling of tests and examinations
• Allowing a student to sit or stand, or carry or keep water nearby
• Counseling
• Changes in physical space or supplies (for example, access to a larger desk or a footrest)
• Elevator access
• A larger uniform or other required clothing or equipment
• Other changes to policies, practices, or procedures determined by the Coordinator

In situations such as clinical rotations, performances, labs, and group work, the institution will work with the student to devise an alternative path to completion, if possible. In progressive curricular and/or cohort-model programs, medically necessary leaves are sufficient cause to permit the student to shift course order, substitute similar courses, or join a subsequent cohort when returning from leave. Students are encouraged to work with their faculty members and LTU’s support systems to devise a plan for how to best address the conditions as pregnancy progresses, anticipate the need for leaves, minimize the academic impact of their absence, and get back on track as efficiently and comfortably as possible. The Coordinator will assist with plan development and implementation as needed.

Supporting documentation for Reasonable Modifications will only be required when it is necessary and reasonable under the circumstances to determine which Reasonable Modifications to offer to determine other specific actions to take to ensure equal access.

Information about pregnant students’ requests for modifications will be shared with faculty and staff only to the extent necessary to provide the Reasonable Modification.

Students experiencing pregnancy-related conditions that manifest as a temporary disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act are eligible for reasonable accommodations just like any other student with a temporary disability. The Coordinator will consult with disability staff to ensure the student receives reasonable accommodations for their disability as required by law.

All students should be informed of health and safety risks related to participation in academic and co-curricular activities, regardless of pregnancy status. A student may not be required to provide health care provider or other certification that the student is physically able to participate in the program or activity, unless:

1. The certified level of physical ability or health is necessary for participation;
2. The institution requires such certification of all students participating; and
3. The information obtained is not used as a basis for pregnancy-related discrimination.

The Recipient provides students and employees with access to lactation spaces that are functional, appropriate, and safe. Such spaces are regularly cleaned, shielded from view, and free from the intrusion of others.

Students

Students are permitted to take a voluntary leave of absence for a reasonable time as deemed medically necessary by their health care provider because of pregnancy and/or the birth, adoption, or placement of a child. The leave term may be extended in the case of extenuating circumstances or medical necessity. While registered under that status, students who choose to take a leave of absence under this policy can elect to keep their health insurance coverage and continue residing in Recipient housing, subject to the payment of applicable fees.

To the extent possible, LTU will take reasonable steps to ensure that students who take a leave of absence or medical leave return to the same position of academic progress that they were in when they took leave, including access to the same or an equivalent course catalog that was in place when the leave began.

Continuation of students’ scholarships, fellowships, or similar LTU-sponsored funding during the leave term will depend on student registration status and the policies of the funding program regarding registration status. Students will not be negatively impacted by or forfeit their future eligibility for their scholarship, fellowship, or similar Recipient-supported funding by exercising their rights under this policy.

The Title IX Office can and will advocate for students with respect to financial aid agencies and external scholarship providers in the event that a leave of absence places eligibility into question.

In order to initiate a leave of absence, the student must contact the Coordinator at least 30 calendar days prior to the initiation of leave, or as soon as practicable. The Coordinator will assist the student in completing any necessary paperwork.

Employees

Pregnancy and related conditions will be regarded as a justification for a leave of absence without pay for a reasonable period of time.

Employees who take leave under Title IX must be reinstated to the status held when leave began or a comparable position without a negative effect on any employment privilege or right.

A copy of this policy will be made available to faculty and employees in annually required training and posted on LTU website. LTU will alert all new students about this policy and the location of this policy as part of orientation. The will make educational materials available to all members of LTU community to promote compliance with this policy and familiarity with its procedures.