ÁùºÏ±¦µä

[Figure 1] Figure 1 breaks down all forms of alleged misconduct across all reports. The EOTIX Office investigates all forms of federally defined discrimination, which include sexual harassment and sexual violence. The cases include allegations of the following:

• Discrimination. Discrimination cases include age discrimination, disability, gender/sexual orientation, gender identity/gender expression, genetic information, military status/military obligations, national origins, religion or race/color.
• Title IX. Title IX cases include any discrimination that occurs on the basis of sex in any education program or activity operated by the University.
• Retaliation. Retaliation cases involve incidents in which an individual was allegedly treated negatively because that individual has, in good faith, exercised their rights under the policy to complain of alleged discrimination or sexual harassment or has provided information in an investigation about behavior that may violate University policies. This could include intimidation, verbal or physical threats, coercion or discrimination.
• Under Review. Under Review (Determining what constitutes discrimination as stated in the Board of Regents Handbook, Title 4, Chapter, 8, Section 14)

[Figure 2] Illustrates what happened to each report of prohibited conduct after the initial assessment.

As Figure 2 illustrates, many reports received by the EOTIX Office do not result in a Formal Investigation. This might be surprising, but it reflects that a Formal Investigation is often not the best course of action. In addition, some cases lacking sufficient evidence (for instance, when an anonymous caller provides limited information), many matters are closed because the Complainant chooses not to proceed with any investigation, the EOTIX Office has no additional facts to press forward, and after conducting an independent assessment of health and safety concerns, the Title IX coordinator decides the matter may be closed.

In other occasions, Alternative Resolution is the most appropriate approach because it is preferred by the parties and/or provides the most productive avenue to remedy the situation. Additional explanations for a case being dismissed could include that an alleged victim would not respond to outreach, the alleged victim declined to pursue a formal investigation/chose and informal resolution or the report did not meet the criteria for a discrimination case.

Summary Statistics

The following overview provides summary statistics on the reports of prohibited conduct the EOTIX office received.

• “Complainant.” Refers to the person who alleges that prohibited conduct has occurred or who has experienced prohibited conduct.
• "Respondent.” Refers to the person who is alleged to have engaged in prohibited conduct.

• “Complainant.” Refers to the person who alleges that prohibited conduct has occurred or who has experienced prohibited conduct.
• "Respondent.” Refers to the person who is alleged to have engaged in prohibited conduct.

[Figure 5] The following chart illustrates whether the EOTIX Office determined that University policy may have been violated in Formal Investigations. The EOTIX Office utilizes a preponderance of the evidence standard, which means that to determine that a violation occurred, it must be more likely than not that the University policy was violated.