Title IX investigations aim to ensure a thorough, fair, and impartial process, balancing the rights of both the complainant and the respondent while maintaining the integrity of the educational environment.
The investigation and resolution of Complaints under these Procedures is not intended to be an adversarial process between the Complainant, the Respondent, and witnesses. Rather, it is a process and opportunity for the University to educate students, provide an environment free from prohibited conduct under the Nondiscrimination Policy, and comply with its obligations under law. The University will provide for adequate, reliable, and impartial investigation of Complaints. The University will treat Complainants and Respondents equitably.
Below is an overview of the Track 1, 2, and 3 Investigations 鈥 The Formal Complaint Resolution Process
Click the following link to download a copy: Track 1, 2, and 3 Investigation Process Chart
-
Right/Option Formal Investigation + (if required) Hearing Alternative (Informal) Resolution Who decides to enter the process? Once a Formal Complaint is accepted, the University controls the timeline; parties may not opt out (they can request dismissal, but the campus decides).
Entirely voluntary - both parties and the University must give written consent. Ability to withdraw Parties may not unilaterally stop the case once it starts (they may choose not to participate, but the case proceeds).
Either party can walk away at any time before an agreement is signed; the complaint then re-enters the formal track. Neutral decision-maker / facilitator Investigator gathers facts. In Hearing tracks, a separate, impartial Hearing Officer decides whether a policy violation occurred. The investigator makes this determination in non-hearing cases.
A facilitator (not the investigator) helps the parties craft their own solution; there is no hearing officer. Advisor of choice Allowed at every meeting; at hearings, the advisor may cross-examine.
Allowed in all facilitation meetings, but there is no cross-examination. Evidence review / information sharing Each party gets the evidence packet and 10 working days to respond before the report is finalized.
Parties share information with the facilitator; discussions stay confidential and are not used later unless re-shared. Cross-examination Conducted only by advisors or Hearing Officers during a virtual hearing.
Not part of the process (there is no hearing). Timeline goal Investigation report within 100 working days of the Notice of Investigation; hearing decision 15 working days after hearing ends.
Resolution should be reached within 60 working days of both parties鈥 written consent. Outcome & sanctions/remedies Hearing Officer (or decision-maker in non-hearing cases) imposes sanctions and remedies; may include suspension, expulsion, or termination.
Parties design a binding written agreement (e.g., no-contact terms, class changes, training). No formal 鈥渟anction鈥 unless agreed upon. Appeal rights Either party may appeal on stated grounds (procedural error, new evidence, etc.).
None. Signing the agreement waives any appeal on the original allegations. Enforcement / non-compliance University enforces any sanctions; failure to comply can bring additional discipline.
Title IX Coordinator monitors the agreement; breaking it can trigger a new or re-opened formal case. Supportive Measures Available before, during, and after the case; do not depend on outcome.
Same supportive measures remain in place and can be adjusted to fit the agreement. Record keeping / future complaints Final decision becomes part of the respondent鈥檚 disciplinary record; either party may still file new complaints about future conduct or retaliation.
Agreement resolves this complaint; parties keep the right to report future misconduct or retaliation, but cannot re-file the same allegations. -
Stage Timeframe Complaint accepted or not accepted for investigation Within鈥10 Working Days鈥痮f the date of the intake or receipt of a written request for investigation (whichever is later)
Investigation 鈥 Review of Evidence Response Submission 10 Working Days鈥痜rom date Preliminary Investigation Report sent to Parties
Investigation 鈥 Final Investigation Report 100 Working Days鈥痜rom the date the Notice of Investigation is sent to Parties
Notice of Hearing At least鈥20 Working Days鈥痯rior to date of hearing
Hearing Officer鈥檚 Decision Report 15 Working Days鈥痜rom end of hearing
Final Decision from President or Designee 10 Working Days鈥痜rom receipt of Hearing Officer鈥檚 sanction recommendation
Appeal Submission 10 Working Days鈥痜rom date Notice of Investigation Outcome (Track 3 non-hearing) or Final Decision (Track 2 hearing) is sent to the Parties
Appeal Determination 30 Working Days鈥痑fter receipt of the written appeal
-
1. The University has also established the following process that allows for the reasonable extension of timeframes in these Procedures on a case-by-case basis for good cause. A Party, Investigator, and/or Hearing Officer may request a reasonable extension of the timeframes in these Procedures at any time from the Title IX Coordinator/DHR Administrator. The Title IX Coordinator/DHR Administrator may also initiate a reasonable extension of the timeframes in these Procedures at any time. For an extension to be granted, the following process must be followed:
- Good cause for the extension must exist. Good cause may include:
-
- To ensure the integrity and thoroughness of the investigation;
- The reasonable absence of a Party, Party's advisor, or witness;
- To comply with a request by law enforcement, including a concurrent law enforcement investigation;
- Based on the need to provide language assistance, disability accommodations, or other modifications to allow the full participation of a Party or witness;
- Academic breaks or exam periods;
- A particularly complex investigation or hearing process, such as one involving multiple Complainants, multiple Respondents, a large number of witnesses, voluminous evidence, or length of the written record;
- The severity and extent of the alleged misconduct; or
- Other extenuating or unforeseen circumstances that are not within the control of the University, Party, witnesses, Investigator, or Hearing Officer
- The Title IX Coordinator/DHR Administrator is the final decision-maker with respect to all extensions.
- The Parties receive written notice from the Title IX Coordinator/DHR Administrator or designee that an extension is necessary and an explanation for the delay. The notice will indicate if the extension alters the timeframes for the major stages of the Complaint process and provide a new estimated timeline.
2. Requests for Extensions: While requests for delays by the Parties and witnesses may be considered, the University cannot unduly or unreasonably delay the prompt resolution of a Complaint under the Nondiscrimination Policy.
- Students 鈥撯疉s required by California law, the Title IX Coordinator/DHR Administrator will not unreasonably deny a Student Party's request for an extension during periods of examinations or academic breaks.
- Employees 鈥撯疶he fact that an Employee is off contract or between semesters, without more, does not excuse an Employee from their expected participation in the Complaint resolution process.
3. Status Updates: In addition to the communications at each major stage of the process, the University will provide a status update to the Complainant and Respondent every 30-days, beginning from the date that the Notice of Investigation is issued until the Notice of Investigation Outcome or Final Decision is issued to the Parties, unless a Party requests in writing not to receive these updates.
- For cases involving a hearing under Addendum A 鈥 Track 2 Hearing Process, the Title IX Coordinator/DHR Administrator shall notify the Complainant of any Disciplinary Sanctions imposed against a Respondent.
- The Civil Rights Appeals Unit will provide status updates to the Parties and Title IX Coordinator/DHR Administrator as required by the timelines in these Procedures.
- In addition, either Party may, at any time, request from the Title IX Coordinator/DHR Administrator a status update regarding investigation, hearing, and appeal timeframes.
-
During the investigation, the Investigator will take reasonable steps to gather all Relevant evidence from the Parties, witnesses, or other sources, including interviews with the Complainant, the Respondent, and Relevant witnesses. The University will provide an equal opportunity for the Parties to present fact witnesses and other inculpatory (meaning that it shows or tends to show a person's involvement in the alleged conduct) and exculpatory (meaning that it shows or tends to show that a person was not involved in the alleged conduct) evidence that is Relevant.
Investigations involve the following steps:
- Interviews with the Complainant, Respondent, and relevant witnesses
- Collection and review of documents, messages, photos, videos, or other evidence
Both Parties & Witnesses have the opportunity to review their interview notes for confirmation
- Both Parties will receive Preliminary Investigation Report along with all Relevant evidence gathered. The preliminary investigation report will list any evidence offered by the Parties or any other witnesses that the Investigator concluded are not Relevant. This evidence will be available for review upon request. The preliminary investigation report will:
- Describe the allegations.
- Describe the investigative process to date.
- Set forth the relevant policy language and the Preponderance of Evidence Standard.
- Describe the evidence presented and considered.
- Identify the material facts - disputed and undisputed - with explanations as to why any material fact is disputed.
The Parties will have 10 Working Days to review the evidence. Each Party may:
- Respond to the evidence in writing.
- Request that the Investigator gather additional evidence or ask specific questions to the other Party and other witnesses.
- Identify additional witnesses.
Conclusion of Review of Evidence: The Investigator will share with the Parties the answers to questions posed during the review of evidence and additional Relevant evidence gathered. This will be shared with all Parties, who may then respond to any new evidence and ask questions. The Investigator determines when it is appropriate to conclude the review of evidence process.
- Tracks 1 and 2: include a live virtual hearing following the investigation phase.
- Track 3: a Hearing is not required; and the investigator will make the final determination in the case.鈥 A final investigation report will be provided to the Parties along with a Notice of Investigation Outcome.鈥
-
The University will not impose discipline on a Respondent for violations of the Nondiscrimination Policy unless: 1) there is a determination at the conclusion of the formal complaint resolution process (including appeals) that the Respondent violated the Nondiscrimination Policy; or 2) where discipline is agreed to as part of an informal resolution process.
Conduct that does not violate the Nondiscrimination Policy may be referred to an appropriate office on Campus for review and determination as to whether corrective and/or disciplinary action is warranted.
If there is a determination that a violation of the Nondiscrimination Policy occurred, the Title IX Coordinator/DHR Administrator will, as appropriate:
- Coordinate the provision and implementation of Remedies to a Complainant and any other individuals who the University identifies as also having been deprived of equal access to the University's education programs, activities, or employment due to a violation of the Nondiscrimination Policy;
- Coordinate the imposition of any Disciplinary Sanctions on a Respondent, including notification to the Complainant of any such Disciplinary Sanctions;
- Take other appropriate prompt and effective steps to ensure that prohibited conduct under the Nondiscrimination Policy does not continue or recur within the University's education programs, activities, or employment; and
- Comply with these Procedures before the imposition of any Disciplinary Sanctions against a Respondent.
Students who are found to have violated the Nondiscrimination Policy will be subject to discipline in accordance with state and federal requirements, student conduct rules, and other CSU policies. Sanctions for Students determined to have violated the Nondiscrimination Policy are identified in the Student Conduct Process: restitution, loss of financial aid, educational and remedial sanctions, denial of access to campus or persons, disciplinary probation, suspension, and expulsion. The University may also temporarily or permanently withhold a degree. Other sanctions and remedies may be agreed upon through the Informal Resolution process.
-
The University will not impose discipline on a Respondent for violations of the Nondiscrimination Policy unless: 1) there is a determination at the conclusion of the formal complaint resolution process (including appeals) that the Respondent violated the Nondiscrimination Policy;鈥痮r 2) where discipline is agreed to as part of an informal resolution process.
Conduct that does not violate the Nondiscrimination Policy may be referred to an appropriate office on Campus for review and determination as to whether corrective and/or disciplinary action is warranted.
If there is a determination that the Nondiscrimination Policy was violated,, the Title IX Coordinator/DHR Administrator will, as appropriate:
- Coordinate the provision and implementation of Remedies to a Complainant and any other individuals who the University identifies as also having been deprived of equal access to the University's education programs, activities, or employment due to violation of the Nondiscrimination Policy;
- Coordinate the imposition of any Disciplinary Sanctions on a Respondent, including notification to the Complainant of any such Disciplinary Sanctions;
- Take other appropriate prompt and effective steps to ensure that prohibited conduct under the Nondiscrimination Policy does not continue or recur within the University's education programs, activities, or employment; and
- Comply with these Procedures and any applicable Collective Bargaining Agreements before the imposition of any Disciplinary Sanctions against a Respondent.
Employees who are found to have violated the Nondiscrimination Policy will be subject to discipline that is appropriate for the violation and in accordance with state and federal requirements and other CSU policies and applicable collective bargaining agreements. The possible sanctions for Employees determined to have violated the Nondiscrimination Policy are education, training, counseling, reprimand, unpaid suspension of varying lengths, demotion, and/or termination.
-
The Complainant and Respondent may choose to be accompanied by one Advisor of their choice, who may be, but is not required to be, an attorney or a union representative during meetings or any stage of the Complaint process.
- The University will not limit the choice or presence of the Advisor for the Complainant or Respondent in any meeting or proceeding. However, the unavailability of a specific Advisor will not unreasonably delay scheduling.
- A Party's Advisor may not answer questions regarding the subject matter of the investigation for the Complainant or the Respondent. However, the Advisor may observe and consult with the Complainant or Respondent.
- The Parties also have the right to consult with an attorney, at their own expense, or a union representative at any stage of the process if they wish to do so.
-
Sexual Assault Victim's Advocate鈥痳efers to Employees or third-party professionals designated to support Complainants reporting Sexual Harassment, Sexual Misconduct, Sexual Exploitation, Dating Violence, Domestic Violence, or Stalking. They must be certified and have received specialized training to provide options and assistance, including but not limited to the provision of information about available options in the Complaint, law enforcement, legal, and medical processes, and with emotional and decision-making support.鈥
Sexual Assault Victim's Advocates鈥痬ay serve as the Complainant's Advisor or Support Person and assist in seeking services. They are committed to maintaining the highest possible level of confidentiality permissible under state and federal law in their communications with the individuals they assist.
-
Support Person means a person who provides emotional support to a Party and may accompany the Party to a hearing as described in the .
-
Link to:
Appeal Rights:
- For Complaints alleging Sexual Harassment, Sexual Misconduct, Sexual Exploitation, Dating Violence, Domestic Violence, and Stalking, either Party may file an appeal.
- For Complaints involving allegations of Discrimination, Harassment, Prohibited Consensual Relationships, or Retaliation only the non-prevailing Party may appeal.
Filing an Appeal to the Chancellor鈥檚 Office: A written appeal may be submitted to the Chancellor's Office Civil Rights Programming & Services Appeals Unit (鈥淐ivil Rights Appeals Unit鈥) no later than 10 Working Days after the date of the Notice of Investigation Outcome (non-hearing cases) or Final Decision (hearing cases). All arguments and/or evidence supporting the appeal must be submitted by the deadline to file the appeal. Arguments or evidence submitted after the appeal submission deadline will not be considered by the Civil Rights Appeals Unit. A written appeal may not exceed 3,500 words, excluding exhibits. Appeals will be submitted to:
Civil Rights Appeals Unit
Systemwide Human Resources
Office of the Chancellor
401 Golden Shore Long Beach, California 90802
Electronic submission to the email address listed above is the preferred method of submitting appeals.
Bases for Appeal: An appeal will be based only on one or more of the appeal issues listed below:
- There was no reasonable basis for the findings or conclusions that resulted in the investigation or hearing outcome.
- Procedural errors occurred that would have likely changed the outcome of the investigation or hearing.
- New evidence is available that would change the outcome and that was not reasonably available when the Investigator鈥檚 or Hearing Officer鈥檚 determination was made.
- The Title IX Coordinator/DHR Administrator, Investigator, or Hearing Officer had a conflict of interest or bias for or against complainants or respondents generally or the individual Complainant or Respondent that would change the outcome.
- The sanctions imposed was objectively unreasonable, or arbitrary based on Student Respondent Procedures: Addendum B Revised 3/4/2025 substantiated conduct. (For Acceptance of Responsibility cases or Appeal reversals).
Acknowledgement of Appeal: The Civil Rights Appeals Unit will provide prompt written acknowledgement of the receipt of the appeal to the appealing Party, and will provide written notification of the appeal, including a copy of the appeal, to the non-appealing Party and the campus Title IX Coordinator/DHR Administrator. The notice will include the right of the non-appealing Party and the University to provide a response to the appeal within 10 Working Days of the date of the notice. The appeal response will be limited to 3,500 words, excluding exhibits. Any response to the appeal received by the Civil Rights Appeals Unit will be provided to the appealing Party for informational purposes only.
-
Link to:
Appeal Rights:
- For Complaints alleging Sexual Harassment, Sexual Misconduct, Sexual Exploitation, Dating Violence, Domestic Violence, or Stalking either Party may file an appeal.
- For Complaints involving allegations of Discrimination, Harassment, Prohibited Consensual Relationships, or Retaliation only the non-prevailing Party may appeal.
Filing an Appeal to the Chancellor鈥檚 Office: A written appeal may be submitted to the Chancellor's Office Civil Rights Programming & Services Appeals Unit (鈥淐ivil Rights Appeals Unit鈥) no later than 10 Working Days after the date of the Notice of Investigation Outcome (non-hearing cases) or Final Decision (hearing cases). All arguments and/or evidence supporting the appeal must be submitted by the deadline to file the appeal. Arguments or evidence submitted after the appeal submission deadline will not be considered by the Civil Rights Appeals Unit. A written appeal may not exceed 3,500 words, excluding exhibits. Appeals will be submitted to:
Civil Rights Appeals Unit
Systemwide Human Resources
Office of the Chancellor
401 Golden Shore Long Beach, California 90802
Electronic submission to the email address listed above is the preferred method of submitting appeals.
Bases for Appeal: An appeal will be based only on one or more of the appeal issues listed below:
- There was no reasonable basis for the findings or conclusions that resulted in the investigation or hearing outcome.
- Procedural errors occurred that would have likely changed the outcome of the investigation or hearing.
- New evidence is available that would change the outcome and that was not reasonably available when the Investigator鈥檚 or Hearing Officer鈥檚 determination was made.
- The Title IX Coordinator/DHR Administrator, Investigator, or Hearing Officer had a conflict of interest or bias for or against complainants or respondents generally or the individual Complainant or Respondent that would change the outcome.
- The sanctions imposed was objectively unreasonable, or arbitrary based on Student Respondent Procedures: Addendum B Revised 3/4/2025 substantiated conduct. (For Acceptance of Responsibility cases or Appeal reversals).
Acknowledgement of Appeal: The Civil Rights Appeals Unit will provide prompt written acknowledgement of the receipt of the appeal to the appealing Party, and will provide written notification of the appeal, including a copy of the appeal, to the non-appealing Party and the campus Title IX Coordinator/DHR Administrator. The notice will include the right of the non-appealing Party and the University to provide a response to the appeal within 10 Working Days of the date of the notice. The appeal response will be limited to 3,500 words, excluding exhibits. Any response to the appeal received by the Civil Rights Appeals Unit will be provided to the appealing Party for informational purposes only.