After a determination is issued by the decision-maker, both the Complainant and Respondent have the option to submit an appeal to the Equity Resolution Appellate Officer (ERAO) based on one of four grounds for appeal:

• A procedural irregularity that affected the outcome of the matter (e.g., material deviation from established procedures, etc.);
• To consider 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/Equity Officer, Investigator(s), or decision-maker(s) had a conflict of interest or bias for or against Complainants or Respondents generally or the individual Complainant or Respondent that affected the outcome of the matter; or
• The sanctions fall outside the range typically imposed for this offense, or for the cumulative conduct record of the Respondent.

First, let’s talk through the meaning of each of these grounds for appeal.

• A procedural irregularity occurs when the procedures as outlined in the complaint resolution policy are not followed; if the irregularity is substantial enough to have possibly affected the findings or sanctions (if issued), either party may appeal on this basis.  
• The availability of new evidence may be a basis for appeal when evidence surfaces that would not have been reasonably available at the time of the resolution. 
• Conflicts of interest or biases on the part of the Title IX Coordinator/Equity Officer, the investigator, or the decision-maker(s) in the complaint resolution process, either for or against aggrieved individuals or accused individuals, or against the specific Complainant or Respondent involved the complaint, may serve as a basis for an appeal. 

The ERAO is likely to grant an appeal if they believe any of the above may have affected the finding or sanctions issued (if applicable).

• When a decision-maker finds the Respondent in violation of University policy and issues sanctions, these sanctions may be appealed if the Complainant or Respondent believes they are out of line with what would be expected for the violation(s), or if either believes the Respondent has prior conduct violations that should have influenced the sanctions issued. 

If the decision-maker does not find the Respondent in violation of any policy, the lack of sanctions cannot be appealed.  

Next, if you are considering an appeal, you should review the applicable timeline.

• All requests for appeal must be submitted in writing to the ERAO within five (5) business days of the delivery of the notice of dismissal or resolution. 
• When either party requests an appeal, the other party will be notified and receive a copy of the request for appeal.  Upon receipt of this notice, the other party will have five (5) business days to submit a response that speaks to the lack of grounds for appeal (see above) or addresses the merits of the appeal.
• The ERAO will accept the request for appeal within fifteen (15) business days of receiving the request if all three of the following conditions are met; otherwise, the request will be denied.  The decision of the ERAO will be sent in writing to both parties and is final.
  • The request was submitted on time;
  • The request indicates at least one of the four grounds for appeal outlined above; and
  • The request, if granted, could result in an adjusted finding or sanction(s). 
    •  The ERAO’s review of the request will be “in the light most favorable to the requesting party” which means that is the Complainant submits the request, the ERAO will consider the request as if the information submitted by the Complainant is more likely true than not.  Similarly, if the Respondent requests the appeal, the ERAO will consider the information submitted by the Respondent to be more likely true than not and will review the request from this perspective.
• The ERAO will then consider whether to grant the appeal based on the information provided by the appealing party and the non-appealing party (if applicable).  A written decision will be sent to both parties within ten (10) business days from date of acceptance of the request.  If there are any delays, the ERAO will let both parties know of the delay in writing.

Are there any extensions available if a party misses the above deadlines?
Yes; the ERAO may grant a reasonable extension to any of these deadlines for good cause and will send notice of this extension to both parties in writing.

What happens during the review of the appeal?
The ERAO does not reconsider all of the evidence and testimony as if issuing a resolution for the first time in the process, because the appeal is not meant to be a full review of the complaint from start to finish.  Instead, the ERAO typically considers the findings of the Hearing Panel or Equity Officer (or Provost, with faculty Respondents) to be binding on the parties.  However, the ERAO does review the Investigative Report and Exhibits, the record of the Hearing (when applicable), and the documentation relevant to the appeal itself.  

If the appeal is requested because new evidence is available, the ERAO will send the complaint back to the original decision-maker for a reconsideration of the finding and any sanctions issued (if applicable).  

For all other grounds, the ERAO will determine whether the reason for appeal is supported by evidence, and then whether the evidence is strong enough to possibly have changed the findings or sanctions issued (if applicable).  If the strength of the evidence is more likely than not to have changed the findings or sanctions, the ERAO will grant the appeal. 

For procedural irregularities or conflicts/bias, this may result in a reopening of the investigation, a new Hearing, or review of the Investigative Report and Exhibits by an alternate Equity Officer.  For a change in sanctions, the ERAO may revise the sanctions issued, reducing or expanding sanctions as they deem appropriate, or send the complaint back to the original decision-maker for a reconsideration of sanctions based on the evidence submitted in the appeal.