Back to Top

Procedures for Addressing

Purpose

The purpose of these Procedures for Addressing & Responding To Allegations of Discrimination, Protected Class Harassment, Sexual Misconduct, Intimate Partner Violence, Stalking, & Retaliation (these “Procedures”) is to establish how the Colorado State University-Pueblo (the “University”) will respond when it is made aware of a concern or allegation of a potential violation of the University’s Policy on Discrimination, Protected Class Harassment, Sexual Misconduct, Intimate Partner Violence, Stalking, & Retaliation (the “Policy”).

These Procedures are intended to comply with the applicable requirements of the following laws, including their implementing regulations: Equal Pay Act, Titles IV, VI and VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments, the Americans with Disabilities Act, as amended, Section 503/504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the Age Discrimination Act, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, Executive Order 11246, as amended, Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013, the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008, and all civil rights laws of the State of Colorado.

These Procedures are only intended to address how the University will respond to alleged violations of the Policy, and not every aspect of civil rights compliance at CSU-Pueblo. For example, these Procedures do not address the procedures by which students, faculty, staff, and guests with disabilities make request for reasonable accommodations. Such policies and procedures are maintained and published independently of these Procedures.

Resolution Procedures

  •  

    Conflicts of Interest

    (A)    Requests by an involved party

    (1)     If the Reporting Party or the Responding Party believes that the investigator assigned to the Complaint, or any other individual involved in the resolution process, has a conflict of interest or is impermissibly biased in the matter, the Reporting Party or the Responding Party may request that the person be removed from their role with respect to the process.

    (2)     This request must be made in writing to the Director of OIE within seven (7) days of when the Reporting Party or Responding Party knew or should have known of the alleged conflict of interest or impermissible bias. Failing to file a request within this timeframe may waive an individual’s objection to the alleged conflict of interest or alleged impermissible bias.

    (3)     The written request must contain sufficient information and details to establish that the investigator, or other individual involved in the resolution process, has a conflict of interest or impermissible bias.

    (B)    Requests by an Investigator or other Involved Individual

    (1)     An investigator, or other individual involved in a resolution process, may seek to recuse themselves from an investigation or resolution process if they believe there may be a conflict of interest or impermissible bias that prevents the individual from carrying out their duties.

    (2)     A request by an investigator, or other individual involved in a resolution process, to recuse themselves must be made in writing to the Director of OIE and state the basis for the request.

    (C)    Consideration of Requests

    (1)     Upon receipt of a request to replace an investigator, or other individual involved in the Complaint resolution process, it is within the Director of OIE’s discretion to:

    (a)     appoint an alternative individual to serve in the role of the individual with the conflict of interest or impermissible bias;

    (b)     direct the individual to fairly address the alleged conflict of interest or impermissible bias during the investigation or other stage of the resolution process; or

    (c)     reject the request on the grounds that no conflict of interest or impermissible bias was demonstrated.

    (2)     The Director of OIE’s decision will be communicated in writing to the individual making the request, as well as anyone else the Director deems appropriate.

  •  

    Resolution Processes

    (A)    The University offers various options for resolving concerns or allegations regarding conduct prohibited by the Policy. The specific resolution process available and undertaken will depend upon numerous factors, including, but not limited to, the nature of the allegations or concerns, the relationship between the parties, the Reporting Party’s desired outcome, and the University’s obligation to provide a safe environment free from prohibited conduct.

    (B)    Upon actual or constructive notice of an alleged violation of the Policy, and prior to initiating a formal investigation, OIE will undertake a preliminary review of the allegations to determine if the alleged conduct, if true, could constitute a violation of the Policy. If the alleged conduct could not constitute a violation of the Policy, OIE: may advise of another administrative unit with appropriate jurisdiction to address the alleged conduct or other resources that may be available. If a Complaint has been filed (see Section 1.01(A)), written notification regarding the decision not to initiate a resolution process under these Procedures and the rationale for that decision.

    (C)    All allegations of a violation of the Policy must be proven by a preponderance of the evidence. This means that in the judgment of the individual or institutional body responsible for determining if a violation occurred, it is more likely than not that a violation of the Policy occurred. If there is insufficient information to prove the alleged conduct constituted conduct prohibited by the Policy, then no violation of the Policy can be found to have occurred.

Back to Top