Ohio Administrative Code
Title 3341 - Bowling Green State University
Chapter 3341-2 - Policy Statements
Section 3341-2-41 - Title IX sexual harassment policy and procedures

Confidential resources are professionals who are required by law to protect confidentiality or assigned as a confidential resource by BGSU. A confidential resource must not reveal information disclosed in confidence unless they are given permission by the person who disclosed it, or there is an imminent threat of harm, or suspected abuse of a person under the age of eighteen, or as otherwise required or permitted by law or court order.

Confidential resources available to BGSU students include the BGSU counseling center, The cocoon, psychological services center, and the Falcon health center (for Firelands campus this includes Firelands counseling and recovery services). Clergy and mental and medical health care providers are also confidential resources.

BGSU employees who are not confidential resources will seek to respect the privacy of all individuals. Reported information about prohibited conduct will be shared only with BGSU employees who need to know the information to assess, investigate, and resolve the report.

BGSU encourages anyone who experiences prohibited conduct to make a report to BGSU police department. Prompt reporting enables law enforcement to collect and preserve evidence.

A person who wishes to pursue criminal action in addition to, or instead of, making a report to BGSU may contact law enforcement directly by calling:

An individual may make a report directly to the title IX coordinator in 207 hayes hall by email to titleix@bgsu.edu, by regular mail, by telephone at (419) 372-7751, or in person at the office of title IX. An online report form may be found on the BGSU website by visiting the title IX or the equity and compliance web pages.

Designated BGSU staff, including the office of the dean of students, the office of residence life, the office of accessibility services, the office of multicultural affairs, gender violence prevention and education services, for Firelands, the associate dean of students, and the BGSU police department, will help individuals with reporting.

A "mandatory reporter" must immediately report any information about suspected prohibited conduct regarding students, faculty, or staff to the title IX coordinator. A mandatory reporter's decision to report should not be based on the location of the suspected conduct, the intent, nature, or circumstances surrounding the alleged conduct, or when the conduct occurred. A mandatory reporter who fails to make a timely report may be subject to appropriate discipline. All who fall under the category of "mandatory reporter" must attend a yearly in person training or complete online trainings as defined by the university. Each of the following is considered a "mandatory reporter:"

All who fall under the category of "mandatory reporter" must attend and complete in-person or online trainings as defined by the university.

Employees who are not mandatory reporters are not required to report information about suspected prohibited conduct to the title IX coordinator. It is difficult, however, to address prohibited conduct that has not been reported. Accordingly, employees who are not mandatory reporters (or confidential resources) are encouraged to ask the person who gave them the information for permission to share it with the title IX coordinator.

Cyberstalking is a form of stalking that includes harassment via social media, email, text, or other forms of electronic communication.

Each person serving as an investigator must be impartial and have no conflict of interest or bias for or against complainants or respondents generally or an individual complainant or respondent. There will be a primary investigator who will serve as the lead investigator. This person may be assisted by one or more secondary investigators.

A complainant or respondent who is concerned that the designated investigator cannot conduct a fair and unbiased review may report those concerns to the title IX coordinator. The title IX coordinator will assess the circumstances and decide whether to designate a different investigator.

The investigator's role is to gather facts, not to function as an advocate for a complainant or respondent. But upon request, an investigator may identify campus support resources for the complainant and respondent and refer them to the office of the dean of students to coordinate services.

BGSU presumes that a report of prohibited conduct is made in good faith. A finding that the conduct does not violate this policy, or that there is not enough evidence to conclude that an incident occurred as reported, does not mean that a report was made in bad faith.

Each investigation and hearing is a neutral, fact-gathering process in which the respondent is presumed not to be responsible. This presumption is overcome only if, after a hearing as provided in this policy, the appropriate decision maker finds that the respondent violated this Policy by a preponderance of the evidence.

For purposes of this policy, a preponderance of the evidence means that, based on all the reliable, relevant evidence and reasonable inferences from that evidence, the respondent is more likely than not in violation of this policy. This standard is to be used for all formal complaints of sexual harassment (including where employees and faculty are respondents).

The complainant, respondent, and witnesses may choose whether or not to participate in the investigation. Even if a complainant or respondent declines to participate, however, the investigator may continue to investigate the reported conduct and, to the extent consistent with due process, issue findings based on the evidence that is available.

BGSU expects the complainant, respondent, witnesses, and all others to provide truthful information in any proceeding under this policy. Knowingly providing a materially false statement or other information may result in disciplinary action under the code of student conduct or other applicable policy.

The respondent may decide to accept responsibility for the prohibited conduct at any time. If so, then with the voluntary agreement of the complainant, the title IX coordinator will determine the next steps in order to reach a final determination.

The complainant and respondent may each have one advisor of their choice throughout the formal resolution process. The advisor may be, but is not required to be, an attorney. The university will not be responsible for professional fees of any advisor.

The role of the advisor is narrow in scope: the advisor may attend any interview or meeting connected with the formal resolution process to provide support and guidance, but the advisor may not actively participate in interview or meetings and many not serve as a proxy for the parties. The advisor may attend the hearing and may directly ask the other party and any witnesses all relevant questions and follow-up questions, including those challenging credibility. An advisor may not be a witness or have any other role in the process except as stated in this policy.

An investigative interview or meeting or hearing will not be postponed to accommodate the schedule of a party's chosen advisor and may proceed without the party's advisor. If a party's chosen advisor is not present at the hearing, BGSU will choose an advisor for that party (without fee or charge) to conduct cross-examination on behalf of that party.

The investigator is responsible for gathering relevant information to the extent reasonably possible. That information may include documents, images, written or electronic communications or data, and medical records (with the person's consent).

The complainant and respondent, however, will be asked to identify witnesses and provide other relevant information as soon as possible to aid prompt investigation and resolution.

The investigator will review all information identified or provided by the parties. For purposes of the preliminary and final reports, the investigator will determine the relevance and probative value of all information developed or received during the investigation. The investigator will provide all relevant information to the parties for their review and comment (as described in this policy).

The university cannot access, consider, disclose, or otherwise use a party's records that are made or maintained by a physician, psychiatrist, psychologist, or other recognized professional or paraprofessional acting in the professional's or paraprofessional's capacity, or assisting in that capacity, and which are made and maintained in connection with the provision of treatment to the party, unless the university obtains that party's voluntary, written consent to do so for the formal resolution process. In those instances, the investigator will summarize relevant information from those records in the preliminary report. Each party will be allowed to review the preliminary report and the relevant portions of the records.

When specialized expertise is needed, the investigator may seek authorization from the title IX coordinator to consult experts who have no connection to the reported incident.

A respondent's prior or subsequent conduct will not be used to prove that the respondent had the character to engage in the alleged conduct.

Prior or subsequent conduct may be considered for other purposes, such as determining preparation or plan, intent, knowledge, or the respondent's motive for taking an action. To that extent, evidence of a pattern of substantially similar prohibited conduct by the respondent (regardless of any other finding of a policy violation) may be deemed relevant to the matter under investigation.

If the investigator determines that a respondent's prior or subsequent conduct is relevant, both persons will be informed in writing.

Prior sexual contact between a complainant and a respondent is generally not relevant. It will be considered only in limited circumstances.

For example, if the question is whether consent was given through mutually understandable actions, information about prior sexual contact may assist the investigator and decision-makers to better understand the manner and nature of the parties' sexual communication. To that extent, the information may be relevant in determining whether consent was sought and given during the incident under investigation.

If the investigator determines that the parties' prior sexual contact is relevant, both persons will be informed in writing.

Witnesses are persons who observed the acts in question or have information relevant to the incident. A witness may not participate solely to speak about an individual's character unless relevant.

The investigator will give each identified witness the opportunity to discuss the investigation process and participate in an interview. After the interview, the investigator will provide each witness a summary of their statement from the preliminary investigation report for their review and comment.

The investigator will provide a written summary of each witness's interview to the complainant and the respondent for their review and comment. The summary will identify the witness by name and by their relationship to each other person and the university.

The investigator will provide this information in or with the preliminary investigation report.

If the university learns of a concurrent criminal investigation, the title IX coordinator or designee will inform the criminal investigator that a university investigation is in progress; inquire into the status of the criminal investigation and determine whether law enforcement officials will make any evidence available to the university.

Upon request, BGSU may agree to defer part or all of its investigation until law enforcement evidence gathering is complete.

To the extent consistent with the law enforcement request, the investigator will communicate with the parties about resources and support, procedural options and anticipated timing, and any interim measures deemed necessary for the safety and well-being of the affected individuals.

Because the standards for a criminal proceeding differ from the standards for a violation of this policy, BGSU will not base its decisions solely on law enforcement reports or actions. BGSU will take immediate and appropriate action in response to a report of prohibited conduct, even if a law enforcement action is pending. If BGSU finds that prohibited conduct has occurred, it will take appropriate action, even if a law enforcement action is pending or dismissed.

The period from the start of an investigation, which begins with the investigator's notice to the respondent, to a final investigation report (as described in this policy) typically should not exceed sixty to ninety business days.

In some situations, however, this target may not be achievable. For example, additional time may be needed to ensure the integrity and completeness of the investigation (particularly in complex cases involving multiple witnesses or large volumes of information); the absence of a party or a witness; concurrent law enforcement activity; the need for language assistance or accommodation of disabilities; or for other well-supported reasons.

If the investigator determines that the ninety-day period must be exceeded, both parties will be informed in writing.

After interviewing the complainant and the respondent, completing witness interviews, and gathering relevant information, the investigator will prepare a preliminary report.

Usually, the preliminary report will include the complainant's statement, the respondent's statement, and a statement from each available witness, and a copy of the other relevant information obtained during the investigation and/or a written summary of it. The preliminary report will not contain any findings.

The investigator will provide the preliminary report to the complainant the respondent, and their respective advisors (if any) for review and comment. In addition, the investigator will provide the parties and their advisors any evidence obtained as part of the investigation that is directly related to the allegations raised in a formal complaint, including the evidence which the university does not intend to rely on in reaching a determination regarding responsibility and inculpatory or exculpatory evidence whether obtained from a party or other source, so that each party can meaningfully respond to the evidence prior to the final investigation report.

The preliminary report and evidence will be provided electronically or in a hard copy. Each party will have ten business days from the date the preliminary report is shared to submit a written response, which the investigator will consider before completing the final investigation report.

If a party identifies new relevant information, the investigator will address any relevant issues identified and pursue additional investigative steps as needed. The investigator will include those matters in a revised preliminary report and give the parties two business days to review and comment on it before writing the final report.

After all review and comment periods have ended, the investigator will write a final investigation report. The final investigation report will fairly summarize the relevant evidence and include the investigator's findings and a summary of the investigator's rationale for those findings.

If the final investigation report determines that the conduct alleged in the formal complaint would not constitute prohibited conduct even if proved, did not occur in a BGSU education program or activity, or did not occur against a person in the United States, then the university will dismiss the formal complaint with regard to that conduct for purposes of this policy.

The title IX coordinator may dismiss the formal complaint, or any allegations in the formal complaint, if at any time during the investigation or hearing any of the following occur: the complainant notifies the title IX coordinator in writing that the complainant would like to withdraw the formal complaint or any allegations in it; the respondent ceases to be enrolled at or employed by the university; or specific circumstances prevent the university from gathering evidence sufficient to reach a determination as to the formal complaint or allegations.

A dismissal under this policy will not preclude action under another applicable university policy or code of conduct. For example, if the alleged conduct by a student would constitute a violation of the code of student conduct, the matter will be referred to the office of the dean of students. If the alleged conduct by a university employee could violate any other university policies, the matter will be referred to the equity and compliance officer or other appropriate authority.

If the formal complaint or any allegations are being dismissed under this policy, but are being referred to another department for assessment, the written notice will simultaneously be sent to the parties advising them of this action and the reasons for it. This notice will also be provided to the appropriate department to institute their assessment process regarding the complaint or allegations.

If the formal complaint or any allegations are dismissed under this policy and are not being referred to another department for review, the title IX coordinator will promptly and simultaneously send written notice to the parties advising them of the dismissal and the reasons for it.

If the formal complaint is not dismissed, the investigator will submit the final investigation report to the title IX coordinator for review and approval with copies to the office of general counsel for review. The final investigation report will then move forward for adjudication and be included with other relevant materials for the hearing.

The title IX coordinator will simultaneously provide a copy of the final investigation report to the complainant and respondent and their respective advisors (if any) at least ten business days before the scheduled hearing for their review and written response. The notice will include a scheduled meeting with each party to provide information about next steps, which may include information on an informal resolution process and will include information on the hearing process. Information about appeals will be provided at designated points in the process.

The university may consolidate formal complaints as to allegations of sexual harassment against more than one respondent, or by more than one complainant against one or more respondents, or by one party against the other party, where the allegations of sexual harassment arise out of the same facts or circumstances.

If a decision-maker or board member has direct, firsthand knowledge of the case, is personally acquainted with the complainant or respondent, has any other conflict or for other good cause as determined by the board chair or by the title IX coodinator in matters involving a single decisionmaker, that individual will be recused and be replaced.

The board chair shall maintain records related to the selection of the hearing board in accordance with applicable university records retention schedules.

The board chair or single decision-maker will set a hearing date, which cannot occur sooner than ten business days after the final investigation report was sent to each party and advisor. At least five business days before the hearing date, the dean of students office or office of title IX will give written notice to the complainant and the respondent and their respective advisors (if any).

The written notice will specify the hearing date and list the name(s) and job title(s) of the single decision-maker or board members. It will also specify a date by which the complainant and respondent must each submit a list of witnesses, provide copies of any documents the party intends to present (including any written impact or mitigation statements), identify any advisor who will attend the hearing, and submit a written explanation seeking to disqualify the single decision-maker or any member of the board for bias or conflict of interest.

If the university chooses to have legal counsel present the case to the hearing decision-maker or board, the written notice will include that information. If so, the respondent may also present their case through legal counsel.

At least three business days before the hearing, the single decision-maker or board chair will make a list of all witnesses and copies of all documents available to the complainant and the respondent.

The hearing will be live and audio-recorded. The live hearing may be conducted with all parties physically present in the same geographic location or, at the university's discretion, any or all parties, witnesses, and other participants may appear at the live hearing virtually, with technology enabling participants simultaneously to see and hear each other. The recording is university property and shall be an education record of a student complainant and a student respondent. The university will make the recording available to the parties for inspection and review upon request.

The university expects that the complainant and the respondent will each be present and available for the entire live hearing. The complainant and respondent need not be present in the same room. At the request of either party, the university will provide for the live hearing to occur with the parties located in separate rooms with technology enabling the single decision-maker or hearing board and parties to simultaneously see and hear the party or the witness answering questions.

The single decision-maker or board chair will exercise control over the proceedings. The single decision-maker or board chair is also permitted to ask questions.

Formal rules of evidence will not apply.

The single decision-maker or hearing board may only consider relevant evidence. Prior conduct history of any party or witness may be considered if relevant.

Questions and evidence about the complainant's sexual predisposition or prior sexual behavior are not relevant, unless such questions and evidence about the complainant's prior sexual behavior are offered to prove that someone other than the respondent committed the conduct alleged by the complainant, or if the questions and evidence concern specific incidents of the complainant's prior sexual behavior with respect to the respondent and are offered to prove consent.

During the hearing, each party may refer to any relevant evidence obtained as part of the investigation that is directly related to the allegations raised in a formal complaint (including the evidence upon which the university does not intend to rely in reaching a determination regarding responsibility and inculpatory or exculpatory evidence whether obtained from a party or other source), including for purposes of crossexamination.

The single decision-maker or board chair will determine whether evidence is relevant.

The members of the hearing board or single decision-maker and the investigator may ask questions directly to each witness. Each party's advisor may ask the other party and any witnesses all relevant questions and follow-up questions, including those challenging credibility. This cross-examination at the live hearing must be conducted directly, orally, and in real time by the party's advisor of choice and never by a party personally. If a party does not have an advisor present at the live hearing, the university will provide an advisor of the university's choice to conduct cross-examination on behalf of that party.

The single decision-maker or board chair may disallow any question that seeks information that is not relevant. Before a complainant, respondent, or witness answers a cross-examination or other question, the single decision-maker or board chair must first determine whether the question is relevant and explain any decision to exclude a question as not relevant.

Each witness (other than the complainant and the respondent) will be excluded from the hearing while another witness speaks before the hearing panel.

No witness may be compelled to answer a question. In general,, if a party or witness does not submit to cross-examination at the live hearing, the single decision-maker or hearing board must not rely on any statement of that party or witness in reaching a determination regarding responsibility. The only exception to this rule is if the party admitted to engaging in the prohibited conduct. The respondent may choose to speak on their own behalf or remain silent. The single decision-maker or hearing board cannot draw an inference about the determination regarding responsibility based solely on a party's or witness's absence from the live hearing or refusal to answer cross-examination or other questions.

The single decision-maker or hearing board will not require, allow, rely upon, or otherwise use questions or evidence that constitute, or seek disclosure of, information protected under a legally recognized privilege, unless the person holding such privilege has waived the privilege.

The investigator will be the first person to present evidence to the single decision-maker or hearing board.

The second person who may present evidence to the single decisionmaker or hearing board is the complainant.

The third person who may present evidence to the single decision-maker or hearing board is the respondent.

After the investigator, the complainant, and the respondent have each had the opportunity to present evidence to the single decision-maker or hearing board, the single decision-maker or board will allow each of them to ask concluding questions of each other (directly or through an advisor as applicable). Finally, the single decision-maker or board will ask concluding questions of the investigator, the complainant, and the respondent.

The hearing will end after the concluding questions. The single decisionmaker or hearing board will consider the prohibited conduct presented in the final investigation report. While presuming that the respondent is not responsible, the hearing board or single decision-maker will deliberate on the evidence presented at the hearing. The hearing board or single decision-maker will objectively evaluate all relevant evidence, including both inculpatory and exculpatory evidence, and will not base its credibility determinations on a person's status as a complainant, respondent, or witness.

Written impact or mitigation statements, if any, will be requested during hearing preparation but not considered until after a responsibility determination is made.

If a majority of the hearing board or single decision-maker agrees that a preponderance of the evidence compels the conclusion that respondent engaged in an act of prohibited conduct, it will find the respondent to be responsible.

The office of the dean of students will simultaneously provide a copy of the single decision-maker or hearing board's written determination to the complainant and respondent.

As noted in this paragraph, if the respondent is a student employee of the university, one of the sanctions imposed by the single decisionmaker or hearing board may be a prohibition or limitation of university employment.

As noted in paragraph (L)(6)(i) of this rule, if the respondent is a student employee of the university, one of the sanctions imposed by the single decision-maker or hearing board may be a prohibition or limitation of university employment.

The complainant and respondent each may appeal from a determination regarding responsibility and from the dismissal of a formal complaint or any allegations in it, on the following bases:

Because informal resolution is not appropriate in all situations, the title IX coordinator has discretion to determine when a case is appropriate for informal resolution. The title IX coordinator will keep records of all matters referred to informal resolution and review them to assess pattern or systemic behavior.