Investigation Process
An investigation is the process OPHD uses to carefully examine an allegation or report of discrimination or harassment, including sexual harassment and sexual violence, or based on other Protected Categories (such as race, national origin, religion, etc.). The goal is to determine whether University policy was violated, and if so, what steps the University should take to correct and address it.
This is an administrative process, not a criminal one. This means that the investigation determines whether University policy was broken, not whether the law war broken. To learn more about the difference between the two, please see the section on University Investigation vs. Criminal Investigation.
Roles/Definitions
Complainant: the person(s) making the report or allegation
Respondent: the person(s) who the report or allegation is made about; the person(s) who is "responding" to the report or allegation
Witness: someone who has direct knowledge or information about the allegation being made
Investigator: the assigned person responsible for gathering information (such statements, documents, texts, photos, or recordings), analyzing the information gathered, and determining by a preponderance of the evidence what happened.
Preponderance of the Evidence: the standard used to evaluate the information and evidence gathered in an investigation. The preponderance of evidence standard means “more likely than not”
Investigation Steps
-
Notification of Investigation: Both the Complainant and the Respondent receive separate written notices that an investigation is starting.
-
Interviews: An investigator interviews the Complainant and Respondent separately. Each person has the opportunity to share their story, provide evidence and identify witnesses.
-
Evidence and Witness interviews: The investigator gathers evidence and interviews witnesses who may have information about the reported incident.
-
Evidence Review: Both parties have the opportunity to review the evidence collected, and make any corrections or amend statements.
- Notice of Outcome: At the end of the investigation, OPHD sends the Complainant and Respondent a written outcome letter with the investigation report. The report is also shared with the appropriate campus office if disciplinary action may be considered (for example: OSRR for students, HR for staff, or APO for faculty).
Hearing Process for Sexual Violence Sexual Harassment (for cases that require a hearing)
-
Hearing: a Hearing Officer conducts a live, virtual hearing with the Complainant, the Respondent, their advisors/support persons, and any relevant witnesses.
-
Decision: After the hearing, the Hearing Officer decides whether the Respondent is responsible for violating policy.
- Appeal Phase: Either or both parties may appeal the Hearing Officer’s decision and/or the proposed sanctions to an Appeal Officer.
- End of Process: The process ends when the appeal is resolved, or if no appeal is filed. Any sanctions or remedies, if applicable, take effect immediately once the process is complete.
University Investigation vs. Criminal Investigation
| University Investigation | Criminal Investigation | |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose | Determines whether University policy was violated. | Determines whether a criminal law was violated. |
| Authority | Conducted under the University’s policies and applicable state/federal education laws. | Conducted under the authority of the state or federal government through police, prosecutors, and the courts. |
| Initiation | Triggered by a report or complaint to the university (may be made by anyone, including anonymously). | Triggered by a police report, arrest, or charges filed by a prosecutor. |
| Investigators | Trained University staff or external investigators hired by the University. | Police officers and detectives; prosecutors handle the case in court. |
| Standard of Proof | Preponderance of the Evidence (more likely than not) | Beyond a Reasonable Doubt (the highest standard of proof) |
| Procedures | Follows UC policies and procedures designed to be prompt, fair, and equitable. | Follows criminal procedure laws, constitutional rights, and court rules. |
| Rights of the Parties | Both parties may have an advisor or support person (including an attorney), but their role is limited under UC rules. | Defendants have the right to a lawyer who can fully represent them in court, plus the right to remain silent and other constitutional protections. |
| Timeline | Generally faster; usually about 90–120 business days. | Can take months or years depending on investigation, trial, and appeals. |
| Possible Outcomes | Educational or administrative sanctions (e.g., no-contact directives, warning, suspension, expulsion, loss of privileges, employment discipline, termination). | Criminal penalties such as fines, probation, or jail/prison time. |
| Goals | Educational, remedial, and preventive; focused on maintaining a safe, fair and equitable learning/work environment. | Punitive and deterrent; focused on enforcing the law and protecting public safety. |
You may choose to report to the University, to law enforcement, or to both. These processes are separate, but they can happen at the same time. For more details on how a University title IX investigation works alongside a criminal investigation, please see FAQ#7 and FAQ#8 in the SVSH Policy.
Resources
- What to expect complainant respondent
- What to expect witnesses
- Role of advisor
- Role of support person
- Flow charts
