Responding Parties and Reporting Parties have the right to submit a written appeal of the decision rendered at a Sexual Misconduct Case Review within four days of receiving the decision rendered at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review. Responding Parties and/or Reporting Parties must submit their appeal themselves; no one is permitted to submit an appeal on their behalf. 

Once a decision has been made at the conclusion of the Sexual Misconduct Case Review, the Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process will continue through the final decision regardless of the enrollment status of either party.  

Either party may submit an appeal of the decision made at a Sexual Misconduct Case Review on one or more of the following grounds. When referenced below, “affected the outcome of the matter” refers to the entirety of the decision rendered including the determination regarding responsibility or remedies and outcomes assigned, if applicable.  

• Procedural irregularity that affected the outcome of the matter.  

• New evidence that was not reasonably available at the time the determination regarding responsibility or dismissal was made, that could affect the outcome of the matter.  

• The Title IX Coordinator, Investigator(s), or Decision-Maker(s) had a conflict of interest or bias for or against Reporting Parties or Responding Parties generally or the individual Reporting Party or Responding Party that affected the outcome of the matter.  

If either party submits an appeal, the other party will be notified in writing that the appeal was submitted. OSARP reserves the right to redact information from the submitted appeal to be used by the Appeal Board that is prohibited by the Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process or that violates the rights of either party. If redactions are made, the party who submitted the appeal may challenge these redactions to the Case Coordinator or designee within two days of their receipt of the submitted appeal to be used by the Appeal Board. 

After all challenges to redactions have been resolved or the deadline to challenge redactions has passed, the other party will then be notified in writing that the appeal submission is ready for review and provided four days to submit a response to the appeal.

OSARP reserves the right to redact information from the other party’s response submitted that is prohibited by the Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process or that violates the rights of either party. If redactions are made, the party who submitted the response may challenge these redactions to the Case Coordinator or designee within two days of their receipt of the submitted response to be used by the Appeal Board.   

For appeals involving new evidence, if a party wishes to have witnesses participate at the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review, they must submit their witnesses within two days of being notified that an Appeal Review regarding new evidence will occur where the parties are permitted to participate.

OSARP typically schedules Sexual Misconduct Appeal Reviews to occur within fifteen business days of notifying the parties in a case that a Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review will be held. However, the circumstances surrounding the case may make it necessary for the university to shorten or extend that timeline.   

When applicable, OSARP reasonably schedules Sexual Misconduct Appeal Reviews around the availability of Appeal Board members, OSARP Staff, and University Witnesses. If a Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review is to occur when the Responding Party and/or Reporting Party are enrolled in classes at JMU, the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review will reasonably be scheduled around their academic schedule(s). If a Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review is to occur when the Responding Party and/or Reporting Party are not enrolled in classes at JMU, it will be reasonably scheduled around their availability. The availability or academic schedules of witnesses called by either party or a Support Person for either party will reasonably be considered in scheduling a Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review.

Sexual Misconduct Appeal Reviews will be conducted by three voting faculty or staff decision-makers called University Case Administrators who form the Appeal Board; they are not employed by OSARP but have received training to hear Sexual Misconduct-related cases. One of the faculty or staff members, in addition to being a voting member, will also serve as the chairperson. The faculty or staff members serving as Appeal Board members will not be the Title IX Coordinator, Investigator(s) in the case, or the decision-maker from the Sexual Misconduct Case Review.  If any of the Appeal Board members feel that their previous contact with the case or the parties involved will prevent them from rendering a fair decision, the decision-maker must request that they not be assigned to the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review. Responding Parties and Reporting Parties will be informed of the Appeal Board assigned to the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review. Upon receiving notification of the assigned Appeal Board, a Responding Party or Reporting Party may request that a decision-maker be replaced if the student can show a bias or conflict of interest on the part of the decision-maker. In order to make such a request, a Responding Party or Reporting Party must contact the Case Coordinator or designee immediately, setting forth their reasons in writing. The Case Coordinator or designee will review all requests. Any decision to remove a decision-maker and/or to postpone a Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review for cause is at the discretion of the Case Coordinator or designee.   

OSARP may initiate the Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process in accordance with the procedures listed in the Student Handbook. The Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review for New Evidence will typically be conducted virtually in a manner in which participants simultaneously see and hear each other; instructions will be provided via email for accessing the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review. Parties may request the process be conducted in person for cause, which will be granted or denied at the discretion of the Case Coordinator or designee. Requests for the appeal review to be conducted in person for cause may include but not be limited to an accommodation through the Office of Disability Services. If a party is unable to secure a private location for their virtual Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review or requires an in-person case review as an accommodation, the party should contact OSARP immediately upon receiving the notification email to let OSARP know of the concern and request; such concerns or requests will be granted or denied at the discretion of the Case Coordinator or designee.

Responding Parties and Reporting Parties may request reasonable safety measures, including but not limited to police presence, be put in place during the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review, if the parties are physically present in the same geographic location; such request will be implemented at the university’s discretion. 

The Appeal Board will review the Case File, a recording of the Sexual Misconduct Case Review, the submitted appeal with any appropriate redactions, any responses provided to the submitted appeal with any appropriate redactions, and, when applicable, the information provided by those in attendance at the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review.    

The decisions rendered at a Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review are based on a preponderance of the evidence and determined by a majority vote of the Appeal Board members. During the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review the chairperson has the authority to prohibit information, and/or instruct Appeal Board members to disregard information, from being shared that violates the rights of a party, is not allowed by the Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process, or bears no relevancy to the grounds for appeal submission. Any participant may be removed by the chairperson if they violate the Rules of Decorum or procedures outlined in the Student Handbook.

At the conclusion of the Appeal Review process, the Appeal Board will provide a decision, including a rationale, to OSARP within five business days of the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review. OSARP will concurrently notify the Responding Party and the Reporting Party of the final decision, rationale, and any outcomes rendered on the fifth business day from the scheduled Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review. Decisions rendered by the Appeal Board at an Appeal Review are considered final. As such, there is no mechanism for a Responding Party or Reporting Party to appeal the decision made by the Appeal Review Appeal Board.

If, as a result of an Appeal Review, the Appeal Board determines that the decision rendered at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review is final, OSARP will communicate that final decision simultaneously to both parties, including any information for completing required outcomes. Failure to complete, schedule, attend, or be on time for programs/meetings, failing to complete related assignments, or failing to follow program expectations may result in a $50 fine per program/meeting not completed by the deadline and a student account hold, which prevents class registration and is typically only removed once outstanding outcome(s) are verified as completed by OSARP. Repeated failure may result in an alleged policy violation of Failure to Comply with an Outcome.

In cases where both the Reporting Party and Responding Party submit an appeal for an Appeal Review, there will be one Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review to render decisions considering the arguments raised in both appeals.

If an appeal is submitted based on procedural irregularity that affected the outcome, by either one or both parties, the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review will follow the procedures listed in “Procedures – Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review: Procedural Irregularity.” Neither the Reporting Party nor the Responding Party participate or attend this type of Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review.   

If an appeal is submitted on grounds that the Title IX Coordinator, Investigator(s), or Decision-Maker(s) had a conflict of interest or bias for or against Reporting Parties or Responding Parties generally or the individual Reporting Party or Responding Party, by either one of both parties, the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review will follow the procedures listed in “Procedures – Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review: Conflict of Interest or Bias.” Neither the Reporting Party nor the Responding Party participate or attend this type of Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review.

If an appeal is submitted based on new evidence that was not reasonably available at the time the original decision was made (i.e. Sexual Misconduct Case Review) that could affect the outcome of the case, by either one or both parties, the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review will follow the procedures listed in “Procedures – Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review: New Evidence.” Both parties may choose to attend this type of Appeal Review only if the Appeal Board determines the appeal submission meets the criteria for new evidence, per the procedures outlined in the Handbook. The party who submitted the appeal may choose to present the new evidence to the Appeal Board and the party who submitted a response may choose to present their response to the Appeal Board.

If an appeal is submitted based on multiple grounds, by either one or both parties, one Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review will be held and follow the procedures listed in “Procedures - Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review: Multiple Grounds for Appeal.”

The Responding Party and the Reporting Party will be notified via email of the outcome of the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review simultaneously by OSARP on the fifth business day after the date of the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review. This notification will be to inform them that a new Sexual Misconduct Formal Complaint Investigation Process has been ordered, a new Sexual Misconduct Case Review has been ordered, or of the final decision in the case.  

The Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review will generally follow the procedures below based on the reason(s) for appeal. Adaptations to the process may be made to ensure the fair review of cases including, but limited to, if OSARP initiated the Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process without the authorization of the Reporting Party or to allow for multiple Reporting Parties and/or Responding Parties; if this occurs, Reporting Party(s) and the Responding Party(s) will be notified of the adaptations prior to the Sexual Misconduct Case Review. 

Procedures – Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review: Procedural Irregularity  

Responding Parties and Reporting Parties are not present for and do not participate in Sexual Misconduct Appeal Reviews based on procedural irregularity. If both parties submitted this type of appeal, then each appeal submission and its response will be reviewed separately in the order they were received by OSARP using the following procedures. The Responding Party and the Reporting Party will be notified of the outcome of the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review in accordance with the procedures listed in the Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process.  

1. For the first, or only, submitted appeal and response, the Appeal Board will determine whether a procedural irregularity occurred by considering the arguments made in the appeal and any response submitted.   

   • If the Appeal Board determines that no procedural irregularity occurred, the decision rendered at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review will stand.   

   • If the other party in the case also submitted an appeal based on procedural irregularity, then the Appeal Board will proceed to Step 3.   

2. If the Appeal Board determines that a procedural irregularity occurred, they will then determine if the procedural irregularity can reasonably be said to have affected the outcome of the case for the first, or only, party who submitted the appeal. 

   • If the Appeal Board determines that the procedural irregularity cannot reasonably be said to have affected the outcome of the case for the first party who submitted an appeal, the decision rendered at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review will stand.     

     • If the other party in the case also submitted an appeal based on procedural irregularity, then the Appeal Board will proceed to Step 3.

   • If the Appeal Board determines that the procedural irregularity can reasonably be said to have affected the outcome of the case for the first party who submitted an appeal, the Appeal Board will either send the case to the Title IX Coordinator’s supervisor or designee (for procedural irregularit(ies) that occurred during the investigation) or to the OSARP Case Manager or designee (for procedural irregularit(ies) that occurred only during the case review). For cases that are sent to the Title IX Coordinator’s supervisor or designee, the Title IX Formal Complaint Investigation Process will be re-conducted which will also result in a rehearing of the Title IX Sexual Harassment Case Review. For cases that are sent to the OSARP Case Manager or designee, OSARP will conduct a new Sexual Misconduct Case Review.

     • If the case is sent to the Title IX Coordinator’s supervisor or designee or the OSARP Case Manager or designee after review of the first appeal where a second appeal was submitted by the other party, the Appeal Board will review the second submission using the process as described in steps 3-4 of this section.

3. For the second submitted appeal and response, the Appeal Board will determine whether a procedural irregularity occurred by considering the arguments made in the appeal and any response submitted. 

   • If the Appeal Board determines that no procedural irregularity occurred, the decision rendered at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review will stand. 

4. If the Appeal Board determines that a procedural irregularity occurred, they will then determine if the procedural irregularity can reasonably be said to have affected the outcome of the case for the second party who submitted the appeal. 

   • If the Appeal Board determines that the procedural irregularity cannot reasonably be said to have affected the outcome of the case for the second party who submitted the appeal, the decision rendered at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review will stand. 

   • If the Appeal Board determines that the procedural irregularity can reasonably be said to have affected the outcome of the case for the second party who submitted the appeal, the Appeal Board will either send the case to the Title IX Coordinator’s supervisor or designee (for procedural irregularit(ies) that occurred during the investigation) or to the OSARP Case Manager or designee (for procedural irregularit(ies) that occurred only during the case review). For cases that are sent to the Title IX Coordinator’s supervisor or designee, the Title IX Formal Complaint Investigation Process will be re-conducted which will also result in a rehearing of the Sexual Misconduct Case Review. For cases that are sent to the OSARP Case Manager or designee, OSARP will conduct a new Sexual Misconduct Case Review. 

5. If the appeal submission solely contained arguments for procedural irregularit(ies), then the appeal will end.  

6. If the appeal submission contained arguments for conflict of interest or bias, the appeal board will follow the procedures for reviewing those aspects of the appeal submission.  If the appeal submission did not contain arguments for conflict of interest or bias, the appeal board will follow the procedures for reviewing the new evidence portion of the appeal, if applicable.

Procedures – Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review: Conflict of Interest or Bias  

Responding Parties and Reporting Parties are not present for and do not participate in Sexual Misconduct Appeal Reviews based on grounds that the Title IX Coordinator, Investigator(s), or Decision Maker(s) had a conflict of interest or bias for or against Reporting Parties or Responding Parties generally, or the individual Reporting Party or Responding Party, that affected the outcome of the case. If both parties submitted this type of appeal, then each appeal submission and its response will be reviewed separately in the order they were received by OSARP using the following procedures. The Responding Party and the Reporting Party will be notified of the outcome of the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review in accordance with the procedures listed in the Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process.  

1. For the first, or only, submitted appeal and response, the Appeal Board will determine whether a conflict of interest or bias occurred by considering the arguments made in the appeal and any response submitted.   

   • If the Appeal Board determines that no conflict of interest or bias occurred, the decision rendered at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review will stand.   

   • If the other party in the case also submitted an appeal based on alleged conflict of interest or bias, then the Appeal Board will proceed to Step 3.

2. If the Appeal Board determines that a conflict of interest or bias occurred, they will then determine if the conflict of interest or bias affected the outcome of the case for the first, or only, party who submitted an appeal. 

   • If the Appeal Board determines that the conflict of interest or bias did not affect the outcome of the case for the first party who submitted an appeal, the decision rendered at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review will stand. 

     • If the other party in the case also submitted an appeal based on an alleged conflict of interest or bias, then the Appeal Board will proceed to Step 3. 

   • If the Appeal Board determines that the conflict of interest or bias affected the outcome of the case for the first party who submitted the appeal, the Appeal Board will either send the case to the Title IX Coordinator’s supervisor or designee (for bias by the investigator(s) or Title IX Coordinator) or to the OSARP Case Manager or designee (for bias of a decision-maker). For cases that are sent to the Title IX Coordinator’s supervisor or designee, the Title IX Formal Complaint Investigation Process will be reconducted. For cases that are sent to the OSARP Case Manager or designee, OSARP will conduct a new Sexual Misconduct Case Review. 

     • If the case is sent to the Title IX Coordinator’s supervisor or designee or the OSARP Case Manager or designee after review of the first submitted appeal in a Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review where a second appeal was submitted by the other party, the Appeal Board will review the second submission using the process as described in steps 3-4 of this section. 

3. For the second submitted appeal and response, the Appeal Board will determine whether a conflict of interest or bias occurred by considering the arguments made in the appeal and any response submitted. 

   • If the Appeal Board determines that no conflict of interest or bias occurred, the decision rendered at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review will stand. 

4. If the Appeal Board determines that a conflict of interest or bias occurred, they will then determine if the conflict of interest or bias affected the outcome of the case for the second party who submitted the appeal. 

   • If the Appeal Board determines that the conflict of interest or bias cannot reasonably be said to have materially affected the outcome of the case for the second party who submitted the appeal, the decision rendered at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review will stand. 

   • If the Appeal Board determines that the conflict of interest or bias affected the outcome of the case for the second party who submitted the appeal, the Appeal Board will either send the case to the Title IX Coordinator’s supervisor or designee (for bias by the investigator(s) or Title IX Coordinator) or to the OSARP Case Manager or designee (for bias of a decision-maker).  For cases that are sent to the Title IX Coordinator’s supervisor or designee, the Title IX Formal Complaint Investigation Process will be reconducted. For cases that are sent to the OSARP Case Manager or designee, OSARP will conduct a new Sexual Misconduct Case Review. 

5. If the appeal submission solely contained arguments for procedural irregularit(ies)and/or conflict of interest or bias, then the appeal will end.  

6. If the appeal submission also contained arguments for new evidence, the appeal board will follow the procedures for reviewing the new evidence portion of the appeal.

Procedures – Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review: New Evidence   

If an appeal submission included arguments based on new evidence that was not reasonably available at the time the determination regarding responsibility or dismissal was made, that could affect the outcome of the matter, the Appeal Board will first evaluate if the new evidence included in the appeal submission meets the stated criteria to be considered new evidence by conducting the following procedures. The Appeal Board will also have access to the case documentation, a recording of the Sexual Misconduct Case Review, the appeal submission and any responses to the submitted appeal, administrative items provided by OSARP, and the Respondent’s previous disciplinary history maintained by OSARP.

Per the SMAP, new evidence is defined as information that was not reasonably available at the time the determination regarding responsibility or dismissal was made, that could affect the outcome of the matter. When referenced here, “affected the outcome of the matter” refers to the entirety of the decision rendered including the determination regarding responsibility or remedies and outcomes assigned, if applicable. 

1. The Appeal Board will determine if the evidence was not reasonably available at the time the determination regarding responsibility or dismissal was made, based on the information in the first submitted appeal. 

   • If the Appeal Board determines that the evidence included in the first appeal submission does not meet the criteria for being new, they will keep the decision and outcomes and remedies, if applicable, rendered at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review. 

     • If there was not a second appeal submission based on new evidence, then the appeal board will conclude the Appeal Review. 

     • If there was a second appeal submission based on new evidence, then the appeal board will move to step 2. 

   • If the Appeal Board determines that the evidence included in the appeal submission does meet the criteria for being new, they will then determine if the evidence included in the appeal submission could have affected the outcome of the case.

     • If the Appeal Board determines that the evidence included in the appeal submission could not have affected the outcome of the case, they will keep the decision and outcomes and remedies, if applicable, rendered at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review.

       • If there was not a second appeal submission based on new evidence, then the appeal board will conclude the Appeal Review. 

     • If the Appeal Board determines that the evidence included in the appeal submission could have affected the outcome of the case, then one of the following will occur: 

       • If there was a second appeal submission based on new evidence, then the appeal board will move to step 2.  

       • If there was not a second appeal submission based on new evidence, and new evidence was the only grounds in the appeal submissions, then the Appeal Review will proceed using the procedures below. OSARP will schedule an Appeal Review to provide an opportunity for relevant participants to present and/or respond to the new evidence; this next step is considered to be the second stage of an Appeal Review involving new evidence. 

       • If there was not a second appeal submission based on new evidence, and it was already determined during the Appeal Review that a re-investigation or a new case review will need to occur based on prior decisions made on arguments of procedural irregularit(ies) and/or conflict of interest or bias, then the Appeal Review will end. 

         • If the new evidence was determined to meet the criteria for being new and it was determined that the new evidence could have affected the outcome of the case, then the new evidence and any response(s) to it will be given to the Title IX Coordinator’s supervisor or designee to be added to the new investigation or given to the OSARP Case Manager or designee to be added the Case File to be used in the new Sexual Misconduct Case Review.  

         • If the new evidence was not determined to meet the criteria for being new or it was not determined that the new evidence could have affected the outcome of the case, then the new evidence and any response(s) to it will not be given to the Title IX Coordinator’s supervisor or designee to be added to the new investigation or given to the OSARP Case Manager or designee to be added the Case File to be used in the new Sexual Misconduct Case Review. 

2. The appeal board will determine if the evidence was not reasonably available at the time the determination regarding responsibility or dismissal was made, based on the information in the second submitted appeal. 

   • If the Appeal Board determines that the evidence included in the second appeal submission does not meet the criteria for being new, they will keep the decision and outcomes and remedies, if applicable, rendered at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review and conclude the Appeal Review. 

   • If the Appeal Board determines that the evidence included in the second appeal submission does meet the criteria for being new, they will then determine if the evidence included in the second appeal submission could have affected the outcome of the case.  

     • If the Appeal Board determines that the evidence included in the second appeal submission could not have affected the outcome of the case, they will keep the decision and outcomes and remedies, if applicable, rendered at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review and conclude the Appeal Review. 

     • If the Appeal Board determines that the evidence included in the second appeal submission could have affected the outcome of the case, then one of the following will occur: 

       • If new evidence was the only grounds in the appeal submissions, then the Appeal Review will proceed using the procedures below. OSARP will schedule an Appeal Review to provide an opportunity for relevant participants to present and/or respond to the new evidence; this next step is considered to be the second stage of an Appeal Review involving new evidence. 

       • If it was already determined during the Appeal Review that a re-investigation or a new case review will need to occur based on prior decisions made on arguments of procedural irregularit(ies) and/or conflict of interest or bias, then the Appeal Review will end. 

         • If the new evidence was determined to meet the criteria for being new and it was determined that the new evidence could have affected the outcome of the case, then the new evidence and any response(s) to it will be given to the Title IX Coordinator’s supervisor or designee to be added to the new investigation or given to the OSARP Case Manager or designee to be added the Case File to be used in the new Sexual Misconduct Case Review.  

         • If the new evidence was not determined to meet the criteria for being new or it was not determined that the new evidence could have affected the outcome of the case, then the new evidence and any response(s) to it will not be given to the Title IX Coordinator’s supervisor or designee to be added to the new investigation or given to the OSARP Case Manager or designee to be added the Case File to be used in the new Sexual Misconduct Case Review. 

OSARP reasonably schedules the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review on grounds of new evidence around the availability of Responding Parties, Reporting Parties, Appeal Board members, OSARP Staff, Support Persons, and Witnesses. If the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review is to occur when the Responding Party, and/or Reporting Party are enrolled in classes at JMU, the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review will reasonably be scheduled around their academic schedule(s). If the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review is to occur when the Responding Party and/or Reporting Party are not enrolled in classes at JMU, it will be reasonably scheduled around their availability. The availability or academic schedules of witnesses called by either party or a Support Person for either party will reasonably be considered in scheduling the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review. 

In these types of Appeal Reviews, Responding Parties and Reporting Parties have a right to a Support Person in accordance with the restrictions stated in the Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process.  

If a Responding Party, Reporting Party, Responding Party Witness, or Reporting Party Witness fails to appear at a Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review after being properly notified of its date and time, the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review will proceed. The decision to postpone a Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review for cause is at the discretion of the Case Coordinator or designee and will be communicated to each party.

Sexual Misconduct Appeal Reviews on the grounds of new evidence will be audio and/or video recorded; the Appeal Board’s closed deliberation will not be recorded. No party may make their own recordings of the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review.  

For virtual case reviews, OSARP will have a staff member in the Zoom meeting to manage the administrative and technical aspects of Zoom so the Appeal Board can focus solely on the case. The OSARP staff member will not participate in the hearing process or be present while the Appeal Board deliberates. 

The start time of the case review includes the chairperson meeting with each participant to discuss procedural information and answer questions from the participants. The length of these meetings cannot be predetermined.

A Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review will proceed in accordance with the procedures below; however, Appeal Board members may ask additional questions at any time. Any participant, including the Appeal Board members, may request a break at any point during the Sexual Misconduct Case Review. The chairperson has the authority to prohibit information from being shared that violates the rights of a party, is not allowed by the Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process, or bears no relevancy to the case. The chairperson also has the authority to instruct Appeal Board members to disregard information that violates the rights of a party, is prohibited by the Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process, or bears no relevancy to the case.   

Adaptations to the process may be made for cases including, but limited to, if OSARP initiated the Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process without the authorization of the Reporting Party or to allow for multiple Reporting Parties and/or Responding Parties; if this occurs Reporting Party(s) and the Responding Party(s) will be notified of the adaptations prior to the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review.  

If only the Responding Party submitted an appeal based on new evidence, then Steps 7-10 will be eliminated in the procedures below.  If only the Reporting Party submitted an appeal based on new evidence, then Steps 3-6 will be eliminated in the procedures below.  If both parties submitted an appeal based on new evidence, then each appeal submission and its response will be reviewed separately using the entirety of the following procedures. The Responding Party and the Reporting Party will be notified of the outcome of the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review in accordance with the procedures listed in the Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process.  

1. The chairperson meets with each participant to discuss procedural information and answer questions. 

2. The Appeal Board members and participants are introduced.   

3. Information is presented by the Responding Party solely about the new evidence in their appeal.    

   • The Appeal Board may ask questions about the new evidence presented in the Responding Party's appeal.    

   • The Reporting Party, through the chairperson, will be allotted time to question the Responding Party about the new evidence presented in the Responding Party’s appeal.   

4. If applicable, the Responding Party will call their witnesses individually.    

   • Each witness called by the Responding Party will be allotted time to make a verbal statement regarding the new evidence submitted in the appeal or response.    

   • At the conclusion of the statement shared by the Responding Party’s Witness, the Responding Party will be allotted time to question the Responding Party’s Witness.  

   • At the conclusion of the Responding Party’s questions for their witness, the Reporting Party, through the chairperson, will be allotted time to question the Responding Party’s Witness.     

   • At the conclusion of the Reporting Party’s questions for the witness called by the Responding Party, the Appeal Board will ask any questions they have of the witness.    

   • Witnesses called by the Responding Party may provide what they know directly about and/or what they have been told about the new evidence as it relates to the submitted appeal or response. Witnesses called by the Responding Party may not provide their perspective on what they feel the appropriate decision or outcome(s) in the case should be.     

   • The Appeal Board may request that a witness for the Responding Party return at a later point in the Appeal Review for further clarification.

   • Section #4 repeats until all of the Responding Party’s Witnesses have participated.

5. Information is presented by the Reporting Party solely about their response to the new evidence in the Responding Party’s appeal.   

   • The Appeal Board may question the Reporting Party about their response to the new evidence in the Responding Party’s appeal.    

   • The Responding Party, through the chairperson, will be allotted time for questions of the Reporting Party.   

6. If applicable, the Reporting Party will call their witnesses individually.    

   • Each witness called by the Reporting Party will be allotted time to make a verbal statement regarding the new evidence submitted in the appeal or response.    

   • At the conclusion of the statement shared by the Reporting Party’s Witness, the Reporting Party will be allotted time to question the Reporting Party’s Witness.    

   • At the conclusion of the Reporting Party’s questions for their witness, the Responding Party, through the chairperson, will be allotted time to question the Reporting Party’s Witness.    

   • At the conclusion of the Responding Party’s questions for the witness called by the Reporting Party, the Appeal Board will ask any questions they have of the witness.    

   • Witnesses called by the Reporting Party may provide what they know directly about and/or what they have been told about the new evidence as it relates to the submitted appeal or response. Witnesses called by the Reporting Party may not provide their perspective on what they feel the appropriate decision or outcome(s) in the case should be.     

   • The Appeal Board may request that a witness for the Reporting Party return at a later point in the Appeal Review for further clarification.    

   • Section #6 repeats until all of the Reporting Party’s Witnesses have participated.

7. Information is presented by the Reporting Party solely about the new evidence in their appeal.    

   • The Appeal Board may ask questions about the new evidence presented in the Reporting Party's appeal.    

   • The Responding Party, through the chairperson, will be allotted time for questions of the Reporting Party.   

8. If applicable, the Reporting Party will call their witnesses individually.    

   • Each witness called by the Reporting Party will be allotted time to make a verbal statement regarding the new evidence submitted in the appeal or response.    

   • At the conclusion of the statement shared by the Reporting Party’s Witness, the Reporting Party will be allotted time to question the Reporting Party’s Witness.     

   • At the conclusion of the Reporting Party’s questions for their witness, the Responding Party, through the chairperson, will be allotted time to question the Reporting Party’s Witness.    

   • At the conclusion of the Responding Party’s questions for the witness called by the Reporting Party, the Appeal Board will ask any questions they have of the witness.    

   • Witnesses called by the Reporting Party may provide what they know directly about and/or what they have been told about the new evidence as it relates to the submitted appeal or response. Witnesses called by the Reporting Party may not provide their perspective on what they feel the appropriate decision or outcome(s) in the case should be.     

   • The Appeal Board may request that a witness for the Reporting Party return at a later point in the Appeal Review for further clarification.  

   • Section #8 repeats until all of the Reporting Party’s Witnesses have participated.

9. Information is presented by the Responding Party solely about their response to the new evidence in the Reporting Party’s appeal.   

   • The Appeal Board may question the Responding Party about their response to the new evidence in the Reporting Party’s appeal.    

   • The Reporting Party, through the chairperson, will be allotted time for questions of the Responding Party.   

10. If applicable, the Responding Party will call their witnesses individually.    

    • Each witness called by the Responding Party will be allotted time to make a verbal statement regarding the new evidence submitted in the appeal or response.    

    • At the conclusion of the statement shared by the Responding Party’s Witness, the Responding Party will be allotted time to question the Responding Party’s Witness.    

    • At the conclusion of the Responding Party’s questions for their witness, the Reporting Party, through the chairperson, will be allotted time to question the Responding Party’s Witness.    

    • At the conclusion of the Reporting Party’s questions for the witness called by the Responding Party, the Appeal Board will ask any questions they have of the witness.    

    • Witnesses called by the Responding Party may provide what they know directly about and/or what they have been told about the new evidence as it relates to the submitted appeal or response. Witnesses called by the Responding Party may not provide their perspective on what they feel the appropriate decision or outcome(s) in the case should be.     

    • The Appeal Board may request that a witness for the Responding Party return at a later point in the Appeal Review for further clarification.    

    • Section #10 repeats until all of the Responding Party’s Witnesses have participated.

11. Any Reporting Party Witnesses asked by the Appeal Board to return later will be brought in individually, if applicable. 

    • The Reporting Party may ask questions, followed by the Responding Party through the chairperson, and then Appeal Board. This is their opportunity to ask any remaining questions they have of the Reporting Party Witness. 

    • The Reporting Party Witnesses will then be dismissed from the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review.  

    • Section #11 repeats until all of the Reporting Party’s Witnesses have participated. 

12. Any Responding Party Witnesses asked by the Appeal Board to return later will be brought in individually, if applicable. 

    • The Responding Party may ask questions of their witness, followed by the Reporting Party through the chairperson, and then Appeal Board. This is their opportunity to ask any remaining questions they have of the Responding Party Witness. 

    • The Responding Party Witnesses will then be dismissed from the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review. 

    • Section #12 repeats until all of the Responding Party’s Witnesses have participated. 

13. The Appeal Board may ask final questions of the Responding Party and/or Reporting Party.   

14. The Responding Party, Reporting Party, and Support Persons will leave; the Appeal Board will enter closed deliberation.   

15. The Appeal Board will vote to determine if the new evidence and any response(s) are significant enough to alter the decisions made at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review, considering the totality of the evidence.   

    • If the Appeal Board determines that the totality of the evidence, including the new evidence and response(s), is not significant enough to alter the decision made at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review, the decision rendered at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review will stand.   

    • If the Appeal Board determines that the totality of the evidence, including the new evidence and response(s), is significant enough to alter the decision made at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review, they will render the decision of whether or not the Responding Party is responsible for violating policy and proceed to step 16.A or 16.B.

16.  

    1. If the Appeal Board finds the Responding Party not responsible for violating all policies, they will proceed to Step 18. 

    2. If the Appeal Board finds the Responding Party responsible for violating policy, they will proceed to step 17.   

17. The Appeal Board will render outcomes for the case. If an appeal was only submitted by the Responding Party, the Appeal Board may not assign more severe outcomes than those assigned at the Sexual Misconduct Case Review.   

18. The Responding Party and the Reporting Party will be notified of the outcome of the Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review in accordance with the procedures listed in the Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process.   

Procedures – Sexual Misconduct Appeal Review: Multiple Grounds for Appeal  

If both parties submit an appeal based only on procedural irregularity and/or conflict of interest or bias that affected the outcome, the Appeal Board will first review appeal submissions regarding procedural irregularity and then appeal submissions regarding conflict of interest or bias, in the order in which they were received by OSARP.

If an appeal is based on multiple grounds, submitted by one or both parties, OSARP will schedule an Appeal Review where the Appeal Board will first evaluate the portions of the appeal on procedural irregularity, if applicable, then on conflict of interest or bias, if applicable, and then on new evidence, if applicable, proceeding as outlined in the related sections of the Handbook.