I. Call to order
Ruth Jones called to order the meeting of the Campus Committee on Sexual Responsibility & Misconduct (CCSRM) at 3:00PM on October 19, 2015 in Hameetman Science Room #225.
II. Members Attending
The following persons were present: Dana Michels, Brian Erickson, Heather Lukes, Richard Mora, Victor Clay, Vivian Garay Santiago, Anne Schell, Olivia Sabbins, Katelyn Fink, Karla Aguilar, Ruth Jones, Jordan Brown
III. Administrative Matters
A. Review minutes from 10/12/15 meeting
B. CCSRM tentative schedule of meeting topics for the duration of the semester:
October 26: Role of Review and Appeals Panel
November 2: Role of Review and Appeals Panel
November 9: Relationship provision and any community feedback
November 16: Community feedback
November 23: Review of any revisions
November 30: Review of any revisions
December 7: Climate Survey
C. The Feedback on Policy Changes website has been created and is located here: . The webpage features an anonymous feedback form for those who are unable to attend the Community meetings on 10/26 and 10/27 or would like to share their feedback privately. The webpage will be open until November 15, 2015.
IV. Discussion of Policy & Protocols
A. Relationships by Authority
It was discussed that currently, the policy regarding Consensual Relationships may need additional clarification or revision, specifically whether the provision is applicable to those in an indirect supervisory relationship and whether the policy should prohibit romantic relationships between faculty and students. This topic will be further discussed during the November 9 CCSRM meeting.
B. Access to Relevant Title IX Case Files
i. One Hub and Confidentiality
The Title IX Office currently uses the secure file-sharing website One Hub for sharing documents with those involved in Title IX cases. Typical files that are shared with complainants, respondents, and advisors are investigation reports, witness summaries, and adjudicator’s findings.
Currently, One Hub automatically adds a watermark to all documents containing the user’s email address, the current date and the word "Confidential". Although this watermark is better than having no watermark, electronically sharing our files is still concerning. It can be easier for viewers to screenshot and share the electronic documents with others, but we will hold those accountable for violating the Workspace Agreement on One Hub, stated below.
ii. Workspace Agreement
Here is the current Workspace Agreement that all parties (complainant, respondent, advisor) must sign electronically before accessing any documents:​
"This Workspace contains confidential and time-sensitive information. By accessing this Workspace you agree to hold and maintain the information contained in strictest confidence. You agree to carefully restrict access to the information contained to employees, contractors and third parties as is reasonably required and shall require those persons to sign nondisclosure restrictions at least as protective as those in this Agreement.
The Workspace Administrator reserves the right to update, amend, supplement or otherwise alter the information without notice. You must not distribute the information on this web site to, or cause it to be used by, any person or entity in a place where its distribution or use would be unlawful."
CCSRM members will email their feedback and suggested edits to the Workspace Agreement to Jordan by 10/26.
iii. Electronic File Sharing Vs. In-Person Review of Files
Each method of sharing Title IX case documents has its pros and cons. While in-person reviews can help limit the risk of capturing the screen shot and sharing with others on the web, it can also be difficult for students to be present on campus during the summer months. The Title IX Office is open year-round and if new cases appear during the end of the Spring semester, we handle these cases throughout the summer months. In-person reviews may also be traumatizing for survivors, as the Investigation Reports are generally over one hundred pages long and can be a lot to review and process in one sitting. Ultimately, we agreed that electronic access of the files is currently the most realistic and practical manner of file sharing. The Title IX Coordinator will continue to monitor any security breaches and implement an in-person review if necessary.
C. The Role of Advisors in the Complaint Resolution Process
i. Provide Clarification on Expectations
As we continue to work with the advisors of both complainants and respondents, we need to provide clarification in our policy and procedures to outline the expectations and boundaries of the advisors role. The Title IX Office is integrating a process in which advisors sign an expectation agreement that outlines their expected behaviors, and if they fail to meet these expectations, they can be removed from their role.
ii. Attorneys as Advisors
In addition, students are now permitted to select an attorney as their advisor. Attorneys and others selected as advisors are offered training from the Title IX Coordinator on º£½ÇÉçÇø’s policies and procedures. An aspect of the transition period of including attorneys in the College Process is educating those involved in the more limited role of an advisor compared to the transitional representation of clients in other settings. It was also discussed how the Title IX Office can balance a student who may have a greater access or resources to an attorney and a student who does not.
D. Timeline
It was mentioned from one of the CCSRM members that the current dates listed in the policy would extend the entire Title IX complaint resolution process to over 4.5 months. To shorten the process, some of the deadline changes have been made to the draft policy that was shared with the community on October 21. An idea was also brought up during the meeting to create a visual – either a flow chart or infographic – that clearly shows the timeline of the formal complaint resolution process. More on this TBD.
E. Policy Vs. Protocols
The Title IX Office has shared two documents with the º£½ÇÉçÇø community: the draft Sexual Misconduct Policy and the draft Student Grievance Procedures. The policy is a formal document that explains the prohibited conduct and the process to resolve complaints, while protocols are the operational process employed by the Title IX Office to implement said policy.