.331.
TRACKING FORM 

New Complaint Reconsiderati (WEE) ?tional Info 

  

Date: 

Complainant/POM Requesto I
Recipient?nstitution: ??yai. I
Issue or Subject: 7-45 {his 8 0/342/  Am

Case Number:

 

 

 

 

 

Original Complaint Processed by 

 

Recon Assigned To TeamiAtty:

 

Due Date (60 days from receipt of request):
FOIA Assigned To Teamj'Atty:

 

Due Date (20 working days from receipt of request): 

Technical Assistance (TA) Request for TA Speaker 

Recipient 



 

Requestor:
Assigned To Team on TA Duty:

 

**ConferenceMeeting/Date: 
Assigned To:

 

General Correspondence

Writer: IssueISubject: 
Assigned To:

 

 

Congressional Control Correspondence 
Name of Writer, Congress Person, Referral, etc: 
Constituent: Institution
Issue or Subject: A
Assigned To:

Congressional DUE DATE:
Control Correspondence No: DUE DATE: 

 

 

 

 

 



Perez, Lydia

 

 

 

From: 

Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2011 2:49 PM

To: OCR Dallas
Subject: OCR Electronic Complaint Submission

 

PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS E-MAIL. THIS E-MAIL ADDRESS IS USED BY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
AUTOMATED SYSTEMS AND IS NOT MDNITORED.

Your complaint with the Office for Civil Rights, a copy of which is reproduced below, has
been automatically forwarded to the following office for review:

Office for Civil Rights/ED
Dallas Office

1999 Bryan Street, Suite 1629
Dallas, Texas, 75291*6816
So that we can best assist you, we call your attention to the Following:

1. If you need to communicate with OCR regarding your complaint before you are contacted
directly, please do not reply to this message, which would result in your reply going to a
send-only server address. Instead, please direct your correspondence to the above office at
OCR.Da11as@ed.gov.

2. If you need to modify or supplement your complaint, please do not use the complaint form
to submit another complaint with the new information. Instead, you may simply send an email
to the office that has your complaint. Filing duplicative complaints may impede our ability
to review your concerns in a timely manner. (If you have a separate complaint involving
other matters, you may of course use this form to submit it.)

3. Remember that before OCR can process your cemplaint it must receive at the above address
a signed copy of the Office for Civil Rights Consent Form, which you can obtain at


4. It is recommended that you print a copy of this message and retain it for yoor records.

The following information has been sent to the specified office:

DCR COMPLAINT FORM

1. Enter information about you.

(WWHC) (WUHC)
Your First Name: Your Last Name:

(WW0)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your Address:


 

 

 

 

City:

 

 

 

 

b? (WUh?l
Statezlcl} Zip Code:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. (WUKC)
Best Time to Call You: DAY Primary Phone No:

 

 

 

Alternative Phone No:

 

Your Email 

 

 

 

2. who else can we call if we cannot reach you?

Contact's Name: m?n?n
Daytime Phone 

(WUHC)

 

 

Relationship to you:

 

 

3. who was discriminated against?

 

(DEMO)

 

 

 

4. What institution discriminated?

Institution Name: Southern Methodist University
Address: 3315 Daniel Avenue

City: Dallas

State: TX

Zip Code: T5295

School or department involved: 

5. Have you tried to resolve the complaint through the institution's grievance process, due
process hearing, or with another agency?

Yes
Agency Name: EMU

Date Filed: 96/91f2919 

Status: I first contacted suu in!92m 2919 about the com-laint. At that time I told them I
would send written complaint in 2919, and at the said this would
be fine. In 2919, I submitte a written complaint to SMU's office of Access and Equity.
They made a determination in 2919, and I appealed. 0n I2911, SMU's Faculty
Ethics and Tenure CoMmittee found that  violated SMU's Sexual Harassment

Policy (University Policy No. 2.5) through to, in the presence of, and about,

 

 

 

 

 

 

2

 

 

 

 

However Mr. Turner, President of SMU, sent me - 2611,
stating that 1e was "not persuaded? by the panel's report that conduct
violated SMU's seual harassment policy but that he does find this conduct "objectionable and
unprofessional" and has directed Dean to take "appropriate corrective action." I

have now exhausted all remedies SMU offered me. They have done nothing to remedy the
situation.

6. Describe the discrimination

OCR enforces regulations that prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national
origin; sex; disability; and/or age.

All that apply:

race or color

SEX

retaliation
you filed a complaint or asserted your rights

Why you believe the discrimination was because of race, sex, disability, or whatever basis
you indicated above or why you believe the action was retaliatory.

 

 

 

 

1. On mung? I went to mung? home to practice the materials I
prepared for thelmm l..which was set for while going through mylm?n?? I, I
used a sentence that began with ?Now I?d like to talk about HMUHC) stopped me and

said something to the effect of ?Stop using the word 1. It?s always about you. What, were
you some type of prom/beauty queen or something?'"

(WUHC)

 

 

 

During hearing, acknowledged making this "prom/beauty queen" remark to me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. On 2616 house, the same time and lace as in item 1 above,
another clinic student, arrived to practice For Um ucoming . The three
of us an a ed ir. small talk, and I mentioned that prior to i, I worked in
Iim??c) Iasked me what I did there, and I res onded by telling that I
worked for a Home) Iand then -For (WHO) IWWC) Iasked me what I did at
$513?) . I responded by I was when  for  and that I
(m?yc) Fm?xc) [than said, 'Oh, so you
were a hired bimbo.'"
was present in the room at the time.

. -- word "bitch" several times in reference to me during a class held on
acknowledged making these remarks. Following are the remarks,

as transcrined From an audiotape of the class that WHNWU created:

3

(1) During her cross-examination, mxn?n comments on m?n?n performance by saying

"You?re not getting bitchy yet, but you?re just this side of it."

ii AI-roximately six minutes later, during a critique of mnn?n performance, E?l


says "Here comes the bitch again"

 

Just under three minutes later, during the same critique, mung? says: "You don't

have to be bitchy about it or catty about it or anything."

 

 

 

(iv) Approximately fifteen minutes later, in response to a question from me, answers by
saying "If you haven't already pissed them off by being a bitch(WHO) class, (?mm lectured us about paying attention to details. said

that failure to pay attention to details was 'like looking at a beautiful woman only she?s
wearing dirty panties.'"

During the hearing, stated that said: ?It's like a beautiful woman with

dirty panties."

5- 9? 0" about f3?) . I. a fellow student, informed me that in of
the beginning of the semester, lopenly disparased me in the presence of several
students and staff Ian: others). Specifically, informed me that
made comments about how I was "just one of those girls? who ?thinks she?s so pretty? and that
I have ?guys do my work? for me."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

During the hearing, and in response to a question about why thought it was appropriate to
use words such as rett about a "certain type of girl," meaning one who has men do their
work for them,ImHn?? Isays: "Well, because you are a girl, aren't you? You're not a
guy.? ?estified at the hearing and confirmed the statement.

5 

       
 
   

eferred to me as a "doody blonde." I assumed that it was a reference to
feces. acknowledged making that remark when asked about the meaning of the
adjective, he indicated that the entire phrase is a descriptor for someone who
"doesn't quite get it."

.
7. mnn{) =lso dis-araged another former m?n?n in front of the
panel, saying that "drugged other student?s and bragged about it?.

 

 

Conclusion: remarks are sexual and inappropriately sexist in nature, as they
are all gender-specific and pertain to female attractiveness (the "promfbeauty queen" remark
and the "pretty girl" remark), female undergarments (the "dirty panties" remark), female
competency (the "doody blonde" remark), or the characterization of feu- assertiveness or
aggressiveness (the "bitch/bitch rmarks). The explainations that gave for making these
statements are also sexist justification was that had just watched the movie
Charlie Wilson's war, and that Charlie Wilson "had lots of young congressional aides that
worked for him, and they were all very good, very efficient. They were also very young
beautiful little girls. called them 'jailbait? throughout the movie. That movie had just
been on; I had seen it. So, I didn't say "ailbait.' I said, 'oh, so you were like beauty
queens,? whatever, etc). Throughout the semester, I was subjected to an overall
pattern of offensive, gender-specific statements. This caused me great humiliation and made
it difficult for me to learn and improve. Also, the grades were not anc sly Jiven and I
received the lowest grade in the class from this professor. Onlm?n?n E?n the I
refused to review my complaint as to my grade; I believe the grade I was
retaliatory, and was told that the only way to have it changed would be through a finding of

?unethical behavior?. I exhausted all remedies to obtain such a finding, but president
single handedly overturned it. In another document, this professor admits to deducting points

 

 

 

 

4

from my grade, while not reducing the grades of others for the same alleged shortcomings. SMU
has further ratified this behavior by overturning the findings of a 6 member unanimous panel,

which found that min lviolated Sexual Harassment Polic University Policy
No. 2.5) through remarkslovlmade to, in the presence of, and about, 

 

T. Your complaint must be filed within 180 days of the discriminatory action

When did the last act of discrimination occur?

 

 

 

Enter the 

 

Are you requesting a waiver of the 186-day filing time limit for discrimination that occurred
more than 188 days before the filing of this complaint?

Yes. Reason for not filing complaint before 186 days.

The school's final decision was given to me on W, however the last of the events
initially complained about took place in . As I Understand it, this means the
relevant date is . Either way, I tried in good faith and in a timely fashion to
resolve my sexual harassment complaint through SMU's procedures. Furthermore, this professor
made furexist comments in relation to me at the ethics hearing which took place on

 

8. what would you like the institution to do as a result of your complaint what remedy are
you seeking?

I would like SMU to adopt the recommendations of the SMU Faculty Ethics and Tenure Committee,
to terminate this professor's employment, and to change the tainted grade I received in this
class to a "pass". In the alternative, I would like to pursue sanctions and damages for the
damages this has caused me.

Do you have written information that you think will help us understand your complaint?

YES

UNETED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

OFFICE FOR CIVIL REGION VI

 

August 17, 2011

 



Reference: 06112126

 

 

 

Dear (bll7l?3l

The US. Department of Education (Department), Of?ce for Civil Rights (OCR), Dallas
Office, has completed its evaluation of your complaint against Southern Methodist
University (SMU), Dallas, TX, which was received in our office on June 2, 2011. In the
complaint, you alleged that SMU discriminated against you on the bases of racefnational
origin and sex/gender. You also alleged that SMU retaliated against you. Speci?cally,
you alleged that SMU:

 

1. Discri initiated against you on the basis of seal gender during the Pg?)

semester, when SMU failed to take prompt and effective action to address
sea/gender based harassment by an SMU Eprofessor the professor
referred to you as a ?doody blonde,? a ?beauty queen,? and a ?hired bimbo? and
stated that you were acting ?bitchy? during a classroom lecture), which was
suf?cient to constitute a hostile environment, of which SMU had or should have
had notice;

2. Discriminated against you on the basis of raeefnational origin when on were
subjected to harassment (based on race/national origin) by an SMU professor
throughout th semester the professor made disparaging and
inappropriate comments about you and anotheremale student, such as
accusing you of having other students doing your work and calling the other
tudent ?lazy,? a ?user,? and a ?big mistake?);

3. Discriminated against you on the basis ot?sexf?gender when you were subjected to
harassment based on sex! gender) by an SMU professor during a grievance
hearing in (Le, the professor repeated several of the inappropriate
remarks that made during the 2010 semester and made other ?sexist?
comments);

4. Discriminated against you on the basis of racefnational origin when you were
subjected to harassment (based on racei?national origin) by an SMU professor
during a grievance hearing in the professor repeated several of
the inappropriate remarks that a - uring th semester and
accused another student of ?drugging other stu ents and bragging about

and

 

 

 

 

 

1999 BRYAN ST, SUITE 1620, DALLAS, TX 75261-6310


The Department of Eduea tron-?5 mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global mmpen'n?veness
by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.

page 2 IlbliiliCl I .

. . . (bit?) . . .
S. Retaliated against you in {ct Elam by giving you the lowest grade in the

lbeoause an law professor has a problem with ?pretty
WW3) females who dress nicely.?

 

 

 

 

 

OCR is responsible for determining whether organizations or entities that receive or
bene?t from Federal ?nancial assistance, either from the Department or an agency that
has deiegated investigative authority to the Department, are in compliance with Title VI
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), 42 1.1813. and its implementing
regulations at 34 C.F.R. Part 100, which prohibit discrimination on the grounds of race,
color, and national origin. Title VI provides in part:

No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or
national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits
of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity
receiving Fedora} ?nancial assistance.

individuals filing a compiaint, participating in an investigation, or asserting a right under
Title VI are protected from intimidation or retaliation by 34 C.F.R. which
provides in part:

No recipient or other person shall intimidate, threaten, coerce, or discriminate
against any individual for the purpose of interfering with any right or privilege
secured by [Title or because he has made a complaint, testi?ed, assisted, or
participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding or hearin under this
part.

OCR is also responsible for determining whether organizations or entities that receive or
bene?t from Federal ?nancial assistance, either from the Department or an agencyr that
has delegated investigative authority to the Department, are in compiiance with Title 1X .
of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX), 29 U.S.C. 168} at seq, and its
implementing regulations at 34 CPR. Part 106, which prohibit discrimination on the
basis of sex. Title IX provides in relevant part:

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from
participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination
under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial

assistance . . . .

individuals filing a complaint, participating in an investigation, or asserting a right under

Title IX are protected from intimidation or retaliation by 34 LFR. 106.71, which
incorporates 34 C.F.R. 

SMU is a recipient of Federal ?nancial assistance from the Department. Therefore, OCR
has jurisdiction to process this complaint for resolution under Title VI and IX.

 

Page 3 Itbl?itCl I .

Because OCR has determined that it has jurisdiction and that the complaint was ?led
timely, it is opening allegation one for an investigation. Please note that opening an
investigation pertaining to this allegation in no way implies that OCR has made a
determination with regard to its merit. During the investigation, OCR is a neutral fact-
?nder, collecting and analyzing relevant evidence from the complainant, the recipient,
and other sources, as appropriate. OCR will ensure that its investigation is legally
suf?cient and is dispositive of the allegation, in accordance with the provisions of Article
of Case Processing Manual (CPM).

Based on your allegation, OCR will investigate the following issue:

Whether, during the {bliillcl (mm semester, SMU discriminated against you on the
basis of sex! gender by at mg to take prompt and effective action to address the

sex! gender based harassment directed toward you an SMU professor referred
to you as a ?doody blonds,? a ?beauty queen,? and a ?hired bimbo? and stated that
you were acting ?bitchy? during a classroom lecture), which was suf?cient to
constitute a hostile environment, of which SMU had or should have had notice, in
violation of Title IX, at 34 C.F.R. 106.31.

Please note that case resolution processes include Early Complaint Resolution
(ECR). ECR allows the parties (the complainant and the institution that is the subject of
the complaint) an opportunity to resolve the complaint allegations quickly; generally,
soon after the complaint has been opened for investigation although ECR may take place
at any time during the investigative process. If both parties are willing to try this
approach, and if OCR determines that ECR is appropriate, OCR will facilitate settlement
discussions between the parties and work with the parties to help them understand the
legal standards and possible remedies. Please let OCR know if you are interested in the

ECR process.

 

Regarding allegation two you alleged that, during the I semester, you were
subjected to racefnational origin based harassment by an SMUMrofessor when the
rofessor made disparaging and inappropriate comments about you and another
tudent. Specifically, you alleged that the professor accused you of having er
students doing your work and called the other student ?lazy,? a ?user,?
and a ?big mistake?. During a telephone conference on ?Elm Elf?) (Telephone
Conference), OCR advised you that Section 106 of CP 'vi provides that OCR will
take action only with respect to those complaint allegations that have been ?led with
OCR within 180 calendar days of the date of the last act of alleged discrimination, unless
the complainant is granted a waiver under Section 107. At that time, you requested a
waiver of the ISO-day ?ling requirement for this allegation. You informed OCR that you
?led an internal grievance with SMU in IiblliliCl lam alleging sex based harassment;
however, you did not allege racefnational origin basec harassment. You stated that you
did not pursue an internal grievance alleging racefnational origin based harassment
because, to your knowledge, SMU did not have policies/?procedures to resolve
discrimination complaints based on race/national origin. -

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

bl?C
.

Section 10? of the CPM provides that the Of?ce Director, or designee, may grant a
waiver of the ISO-day ?ling requirement-for good cause shown, such as under any of the
following circumstances: the complainant could not reasonably be expected to know
that the act was discriminatory and the complaint allegation was filed within 60 days after
the complainant bacame aware of the alleged discrimination; the complainant was
unable to ?le a complaint due to an incapacitatng illness or other incapacitating
circumstances during the lSO?day period, and the complaint allegation was filed within
60 days after the period of incapacitation ended; the complainant ?led a complaint
alleging the same discriminatory conduct within the ISO-day period with another Federal,
state, or local civil rights enforcement agency, or Federal or state court, and ?led a
complaint with OCR within 60 days after the other agency had completed its
investigation or, in the case of a court, reached a determination, or the agency or court
noti?ed the complainant that it would take no further action; the complainant ?led,
within the l?O-day period, an internal grievance, or a due process hearing, alleging the
same discriminatory conduct that is the subject of the OCR complaint, and the complaint
is filed no later than 60 days after the internal grievance was concluded; or unique
circumstances generated by action have adversely affected the complainant.

 

 

 

As noted above, CPM Section i0?(d) may be appropriate when a complainant has ?led,
within the iSll-day period, an internal grievance with a recipient of Federal ?nancial
assistance, or a due process hearing, alleging the same discriminatory conduct that is the
subject of the OCR complaint, and the complaint is filed no later than 60 days after the
internal grievance is concluded. In the subject case, you informed OCR that you did not
file an internal grievance with SMU with regard to this allegation; therefore, CPM
Section i?7(d) does not apply. OCR has further determined that none of the other
grounds for a waiver apply to this allegation; thus, your request for a waiver of the 130-
day filing requirement is denied. Accordingly, OCR will dismiss this allegation as
untimely.

In allegations three-five, you also alleged that you were subjected to discrimination on
the bases of sexfgender and racefnational origin, during a grievance hearing that was held
in when an SMU professor repeated several of the inappropriate remarks that
{bl made during the Whemester, made various ?sexist? comments, and accused
another  student of ?drugging other student: and bragging about it?. You
further alleged that you were retaliated against in {bilillcl when the same SMU 
professor retaliated against you by giving you the lowest grade in the
because the professor has a problem with ?pretty ho dress

nicely."

{bit?trill?!) (mgOCR sent you a letter requesting add1tional information regarding
these allegations. The letter informed you that the information provided in your
complaint and during the Telephone Conference was not suf?ciently detailed for OCR to
infer that discrimination or retaliation may have occurred. You were advised that if OCR
did not receive the requested information by August 3, 2011, these allegations would be
dismissed. As of the date of this letter, you have not provided OCR with any infonnation
in response to our request. Thus, OCR has determined that these allegations laclt

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

bit:
.

suf?cient detail for OCR to infer that discrimination or retaliation may have occurred.
Accordingly, OCR will not proceed further with these allegations,

 

This letter sets forth determination in an individual OCR case. This letter is not a
formal statement of OCR policy and should not be relied upon, cited, or construed as
such. formal policy statements are approved by a duly authorized OCR official
and made available to the public. You may have the right to file a private suit in Federal
court whether or not OCR ?nds a violation.

Under OCR procedures, OCR is obligated to advise the complainant and the institution
against which a complaint is ?led thatintimidation or retaliation against any individual is
prohibited by regulations enforced by this agency. Speci?cally, the regulations enforced
by OCR, directly or by reference, state that no recipient or other person shall intimidate,
threaten, coerce, or discriminate against any individual for the purpose of interfering with
any right or privilege secured by regulations enforced by OCR or because one has made a
complaint, testi?ed, assisted or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding
or hearing held in connection with a complaint.

Under the Freedom of Information Act, it may be necessary to release this document and
related correspondence and records upon request. In the event that OCR receives such a
request, we will seek to protect, to the extent provided by law, personally identi?able
information, which, if released, could reasonably be expected to constitute an
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

OCR is committed to prompt and effective service. We will communicate with you
periodically regarding the status of your complaint. If you have any questions, you may

contact Mr. Gregory McGhee, the attorney assigned to your complaint at 
or via email I You may also contact me at mimic)



 

 

 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

FDR ClVil- 
OFFICE

 

Mr. R. Gerald Turner, President
Southern Methodist University

6425 Boaz Lane
Dallas, TX 75205 I Reference: 06112126

Dear Mr. Turner:

The U.S. Department of Education (Department), Of?ce for Civil Rights (OCR), Dallas
Office, has completed its evaluation of the above-referenced complaint against Southern
Methodist University (SMU), Dallas, TX, which was received in our of?ce on June 2,
2011. The complainant alleged that SMU discriminated against her on the basis of

sex! gender. Speci?cally, the rom slainant alleged that she was subjected to sexfgender
based harassment by an SMU professor during the  semester the
professor referred to the complainant as a ?cloudy blonde,? a ?beauty queen,? and a ?hired
bimbo" and stated that she was acting ?bitchy? during a classroom lecture). The
complainant further alleged that SMU failed to take prompt and effective action to
address the harassment, which was suf?cient to constitute a hostile environment, of
which SMU had or should have had notice.

 

 

 

 

 

OCR is responsible for determining whether organizations or entities that receive or
bene?t from Federal ?nancial assistance, either from the Department or an agency that
has delegated investigative authority to the Department, are in compliance with Title IX
of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title TX), 20 U.S.C. l68i et seq, and its
implementing regulations at 34 C.F.R. Part 106, which prohibit discrimination on the
basis of sex. Title IX provides in relevant part:

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from
participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination
under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial

assistance . . . .

SMU is a recipient of Federal ?nancial assistance from the Department. Therefore, OCR
hasjurisdiction to process this complaint for resolution under Titie IX.

Because OCR has determined that it has jurisdiction and that the complaint was tiled
timely, it is opening an investigation regarding the aforementioned allegation. Please
note that opening an investigation pertaining to this allegation in no way implies that
OCR has made a determination with regard to its merit. During the investigation, OCR is
a neutral fact??nder, collecting and analyzing relevant evidence from the complainant,
the recipient, and other sources, as appropriate. OCR will ensure that its investigation is

199??! BRYAN SUITE 1520. DALLAS, TX 755201-6810


The Department of Education '5 mission is to promote student arnr'ei-emenr and preparation for
probe! competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and entruring mun! access-

Page 2 Mr. R. Gerald Tu President .

legally sufficient and is dispositive of the allegation, in accordance with the provisions of
Article of Case Processing Manual.

Based on the complainant?s allegation, OCR-willhinvestigate ihe following issue:

 

Whether, during {mm semester, SMU discriminated against the
complainant on the bears o. sex! gender by failing to take prompt and effective
action to address the sex/ gender based harassment directed toward her an
SMU professor referred to the complainant as a ?doody blonde,? a ?beauty
queen,? and a ?hired bimbo? and stated that she was acting ?bitchy? during a
classroom lecture), which was suf?cient to constitute a hostile environment, of
which SMU had or should have had notice, in violation of Title TX, at 34 C.F.R. 
106.3 1.

For your information, we have enclosed OCR ?s Complaint Processing Procedures to
provide you with an overview of our complaint evaluation and resolution process. Please
note that case resolution processes include Early Complaint Resolution (ECR).
ECR allows the parties (the complainant and the institution that is the subject of the
complaint) an opportunity to resolve the complaint allegations quickly; generally, soon
after the complaint has been opened for investigation, although ECR may take place at
any time during the investigative process. If both parties are willing to try this approach,
and if OCR determines that ECR is appropriate, OCR will facilitate settlement
discussions between the parties and work with the parties to help them understand the
legal standards and possible remedies. You will be contacted in the near future, usually
within ten days from the date of this letter, to discuss this case, Please let OCR know if
you are interested in the ECR process.

Section 100.6(c) of Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations stipulates that each
recipient of Federal ?nancial assistance shall permit access to pertinent sources of
information to responsible Department o?icials or designees. Enclosed is an initial data
request. Please provide the requested information to OCR within 15 calendar days of the
date of this letter. Please be advised that this request does not preclude OCR from
requesting additional information during the course of the complaint resolution process.
After reviewing all information received, OCR will determine whether an onwsite
investigation is warranted. If so, you will be contacted to arrange a mutually convenient

date .

Under OCR procedures, OCR is obligated to advise the complainant and the institution
against which a complaint is ?led that intimidation or retaliation against any individual is
prohibited by regulations enforced by this agency. Speci?cally, the regulations enforced
by OCR, directly or by reference, state that no recipient or other person shall intimidate,
threaten, coerce, or discriminate against any individual for the purpose of interfering with
any right or privilege secured by regulations enforced by OCR or because one has made a
complaint, testified, assisted or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding
or hearing held in connection with a complaint.

Page 3 Mr. R. Gerald President .

Under the Freedom of Information Act, it may be necessary to reiease this document and
related correspondence and records upon request. In the event that OCR receives such a



information, which, if reieased, could reasonably be expected to constitute an
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

.. on have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me at Em
Erasers) or via email ?atware) I
Sincerely,

ae/V/Xf??-

Gregory D. McGhee
Civil Rights Attorney

 

 

Initial Data Request for information
Southern Methodist University

    --  --  .. ..  ..  ..      ..    ..     ..    

To facilitate resolution of the above-referenced complaint, the Of?ce for Civii Rights
(OCR) requests that Southern Methodist University (SMU) provide the following
information to OCR within 15 caiendar days of the date of the attached letter.

1. The name, address, and telephone number of the person who will serve as 
contact person during the resolution of this complaint;

2. The name and of?ce telephone number of SMU's Title IX Coordinator (please be
sure to indicate how this information is disseminated to students);

3. A copy of Title policies and procedures, inciuding grievance
procedures, for the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 schooi years (please be sure to
indicate how this information was! is disseminated to students);

4. Provide copies of grievances or compiaints ?led by the complainant
libillilci regarding sex! gender based discrimination (including harassment), from
mimic) lZOl 0 to present, verbal or written, and all documentation regarding any
inquiries or investigations conducted by SMU and conclusions or determinations
reached. Piease also provide the name, title and contact information for all
individuals involved in the processing ofthe grievances or complaints;

 

 

 

- In
5. A copy of the roster(s) for the complainant?s Haiti) ?are? WHO) I

class, inciuding the names, and contact information of the students and clinical
instructor(s);

6. A narrative response to the complainant?s allegations, including identification of
any relevant witnesses, and any other supporting documentation SMU would like
OCR to consider. identify individuals by name, positionftitle, telephone number,
and reason you identified them;

7. A copy of student handbook for the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 school
ear and if different, a copy of the student handbooks for students enroiled in SMU

. and

8. Please provide OCR with information regarding any video teleconferencing
equipment in use by SMU, including IPN or ISBN phone capability. Please
include the namo and teiephone number for information technology
personnel. This information wit? be usedfor video conferencing {fit is determined
that interviews will be required



OCR COMPLAINT PROCESSING PROCEDURES

OCR enforces the following laws:

0 Title Vi of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the
basis of race, color or national origin;

a Title IX of the Education Amendments of 197?, which prohibits discrimination on
the basis of sex;

in Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of l973, which prohibits discrimination on
the basis of disability;

0 Age Discrimination Act of 1975, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of
age;

a Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, which prohibits
discrimination on the basis of disability;

in Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act, part of the No Child Left Behind Act
of 2001, which prohibits denial of access to or other discrimination against the
Boy Scouts or other Title 36 U.S.C. youth groups in public elementary schools,
public secondary schools, local education agencies, and state education agencies
that have a designated open forum or limited public forum.

EVALUATION OF THE COMPLAINT

OCR evaluates each complaint that it receives in order to determine whether it can
investigate the complaint. For example, OCR must determine whether OCR has legal
authority to investigate the complaint; that is, whether the complaint alleges a violation of
one or more of the laws OCR enforces. OCR must also determine whether the complaint
is ?led on time. Generally, a complaint must be ?led with OCR within 180 calendar days
of the last act that the complainant believes was discriminatory.l If the complaint is not
?led on time, the complainant should provide the reason for the delay and request a
waiver of this filing requirement. OCR will decide whether to grant the waiver. in
addition, OCR will determine whether the complaint contains enough information about
the alleged discrimination to give the recipient fair notice of what the claim is. If OCR
needs more information in order to clarify the complaint, it will contact the complainant;
the complainant has 20 calendar days within which to respond to request for
information.

OCR will dismiss the complaint if OCR. determines that:
- OCR does not have legal authority to investigate the complaint;
I The complaint was not ?led timely' and that a waiver will not be granted;

 

Complaints that allege discrimination based on age are timely if ?led with OCR within 13!] calendar days
of the date the complainant ?rst knew about the alleged discrimination.

 

 

Page 2 OCR Complagl?rocessing Procedures .

The complaint is unclear or incomplete and the complainant does not
provide the information that OCR requests within 20 calendar days of
request; I

I The allegations raised by the complaint have been resolved;

I The complaint has been investigated by another Federal, state, or local
civil rights agency or through a recipient?s internal grievance procedures,
including due process proceedings, and the resolution meets OCR
regulatory standards;

0 The same allegations have been ?led by the complainant against the same
recipient with another Federal, state, or local civil rights agency, or
through a recipient?s internal grievance procedures, including due process
proceedings, and OCR anticipates that there will be a comparable
resolution process under comparable legal standards;

- The same allegations have been ?led by the complainant against the same
recipient in state or Federal court;

a The allegations are foreclosed by previous decisions of the Federal courts,
the US. Secretary of Education, the us. Department of Education?s Civil
Rights Reviewing Authority, or OCR policy determinations.

OPENING THE COMPLAINT FOR INVESTIGATION

If OCR determines that OCR has legal authority to investigate the complaint, that the
complaint is ?led timely (or that a waiver of the timeliness requirement is granted), and
that the complainant has alleged facts that, if true, would constitute a violation of one of
the laws OCR enforces, and that give fair notice of what the claim of discrimination is,

OCR will open the complaint for investigation.

Opening a complaint for investigation in no way implies that OCR has made a
determination with regard to the merits of the complaint. During the investigation, OCR
is a neutral fact-finder. OCR will collect and analyze relevant evidence from the
complainant, the recipient, and other sources as appropriate. OCR will ensure that
investigations are legally suf?cient and are dispositive of the allegations raised in the

complaint.
INVESTIGATION OF THE COMPLAINT

OCR may use a variety of fact??nding techniques in its investigation of a complaint.
These techniques may include reviewing documentary evidence submitted by both
parties, conducting interviews with the complainant, recipient?s personnel, and other
witnesses, andr'or site visits. At the conclusion of its investigation, OCR will determine

with regard to each allegation that:

a there is insuf?cient evidence to support a conclusion that the recipient failed to
comply with the law, or



Page 3 a- OCR ComplaQProcessing Procedures .

a a preponderance of the evidence supports a conclusion that the recipient failed to
comply with the law-

RESOLUTION OF THE 
COMPLIANCE

If OCR determines that a recipient failed to comply with one of the civil rights laws that
OCR enforces, OCR will contact the recipient and will attempt to secure the recipient?s
willingness to negotiate a voluntary resolution agreement. If the recipient agrees to
resolve the complaint, the recipient will negotiate and sign a written resolution agreement
that describes the speci?c remedial actions that the recipient will undertake to address the
area(s) of noncompliance identi?ed by OCR. The terms of the resolution agreement, if
fully performed, will remedy the identi?ed violation(s} in compliance with applicable
civil rights laws. OCR will monitor the recipient?s implementation of the terms of the
resolution agreement to verify that the remedial actions agreed to by the recipient have
been implemented consistent with the terms of the agreement and that the area(s) of

noncompliance identi?ed were resolved consistent with applicable civil rights laws.

 

If the recipient refuses to negotiate a voluntary resolution agreement or does not
immediately indicate its willingness to negotiate, OCR will inform the recipient that it
has 30 days to indicate its willingness to engage in negotiations to voluntarily resolve
identi?ed areas of noncompliance, or OCR will issue a Letter of Finding to the parties
providing a factual and legal basis for a finding non-compliance.

if, after the issuance of the Letter of Finding of non?compliance, the recipient continues
to refuse to negotiate a resolution agreement with OCR, OCR will issue a Letter of
Impending Enforcement Action and will again attempt to obtain voluntary compliance.
1f the recipient remains unwilling to negotiate an agreement, OCR will either initiate
administrative enforcement proceedings to suspend, terminate, or refuse to grant or
continue Federal financial assistance to the recipient, or will refer the case to the
Department of Justice. OCR may also move immediately to defer any new or additional
Federal ?nancial assistance to the institution.

RESOLUTION OF THE COMPLAINT PRIOR TO THE CONCLUSION OF THE
INVESTIGATION

Early Complaint Resolution (ECR):

Early Complaint Resolution allows the parties (the complainant and the institution which
is the subject of the complaint) an opportunity to resolve the complaint allegations
quickly; generally, soon after the complaint has been opened for investigation. If both
parties are willing to try this approach, and if OCR determines that Early Complaint
Resolution is appropriate, OCR will facilitate settlement discussions between the parties
and work with the parties to help them understand the legal standards and possible
remedies. Staff assigned by to facilitate the Early Complaint Resolution process
will not he the staff assigned to the investigation of the complaint.

 

 

Page 4 OCR Comp.t Processing Procedures .

OCR does not approve, sign or endorse any agreement reached between the parties as a
.. result and OCR does not monitor the agreement-

However, if the recipient institution-doeshotshotva attractant-ins o'fthe'      

complainant may ?le another complaint with OCR within 180 days of the date of the
original discrimination or within 60 days of the date the complainant learns of the failure
to comply with the agreement, whichever date is later.

Resolution of the Complaint Prior To the Conclusion of an Investigation

A complaint may also be resolved before the conclusion of an investigation, if the
recipient asks to do so. If OCR determines that resolution of the complaint before the
conclusion of an investigation is appropriate, it will notify the complainant of the
recipient?s request and will keep the complainant informed throughout ail stages of the
resolution process. The provisions of the resolution agreement that is reached must be
aligned with the complaint allegations and the information obtained during the
investigation, and must be consistent with applicable regulations.

A resolution agreement reached before the conclusion of an investigation must be
approved and will be monitored by OCR.

REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF DETERMINATIONS

If the complainant disagrees with decision to dismiss or ciose a complaint for any
reason jurisdiction, timeliness, other administrative reasons, insuf?cient evidence to
support the aliegation(s)), he or she may send a written request for reconsideration to the
Of?ce Director within 60 days of the date of dismissal or closure ietter. The
complainant must explain he or she believes the factual information was incompiete,
the analysis of the facts was incorrect, andr'or the appropriate iegal standard was not
applied, and how this wouid change determination in the case. Failure to do so
may result in the closure of the request for reconsideration.

The Of?ce Director wiil respond to the request for reconsideration in writing. If the
complainant disagrees with the Of?ce Director?s decision, he or she may appeal in
writing to Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Right to File a Separate Court Action

The complainant has the right to ?le suit in Federal court, regardless of findings.
OCR does not represent the complainant in case processing, so if the complainant wishes

to ?le a court action, he or she must do so through his or her own attorney or on his or
her own through the court?s pro se clerk?s of?ce.

 

 

Page 5 OCR Comp. Processing Procedures .

If a complainant alleges discrimination prohibited by the Age Discrimination Act of
1975, a civil action in Federal court can be filed oniy after the complainant has exhausted

 transientsExhausted When either of the

following has occurred:

1) 130 days have elapsed since the complainant filed the complaint with
OCR and OCR has made no ?nding; or

2) OCR issues a ?nding in favor of the recipient. If this occurs, OCR
will notify the complainant and will provide additional
information about the right to ?le for injunctive relief.

Prohibition against Intimidation or Retaiiation

An institution under the jurisdiction of the Department of Education may not intimidate,
threaten, coerce, or retaliate against anyone who asserts a right protected by the civil
rights laws that OCR enforces, or who cooperates in an investigation. Anyone who
believes that he or she has been intimidated or retaliated against should file a complaint
with OCR.

Investigatory Use of Personal Information

in order to investigate a complaint, OCR may need to collect and analyze personal
information such as student records or employment records. No law requires anyone to
give personal information to OCR and no formal sanctions will be imposed on
complainants or other persons who do not cooperate in providing information during the
complaint resolution process. However, if OCR is unable to obtain the information
necessary to process a complaint because of the complainant?s failure to provide
information or sign a consent form, OCR may dismiss or close the complaint.

The i?rivacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a, and the Freedom of information Act (FOIA),
5 U.S.C. 552, govern the use of personal information that is submitted to all Federal
agencies and their individual components, including OCR. It applies to records that are
maintained by the government that are retrieved by the individual?s name, social security
number, or other personal identi?er. It regulates the collection, maintenance, use and
dissemination of certain personal information in the ?les of Federal agencies. The
Department of Education has published a Privacy Act system of records notice entitled
?Complaint Files and Log, 18-08-01? that applies to these types of records.

The information that OCR collects is anaiyzed by authorized personnel within the agency
and will be used only for authorized civil rights compliance and enforcement activities.
However, in order to resolve a complaint, OCR may need to reveal certain information to
persons outside the agency to verify facts or gather additional information. Also, OCR
may be required to reveal information requested under FOIA, which gives the public the
right of access to records of Federal agencies. OCR wilt not release any information to
any other agency or individual except in accordance with the provisions of FOIA and the
Privacy Act, or otherwise provided by law.

 

 

Page 6 OCR Compiapl?rocessing Procedures .

FOIA gives the public the right of access to records of Federal agencies, except to the
?extent that of fiQmP?ibiil-i Fli?ci?sure by 0113 Of

nine In addition,aFederalagency?s useof'anyo'rie'of'the  

FOIA exemptions is discretionary. Individuals may obtain items from many categories
of records of the Federal government, not just materials that apply to them personally.
OCR must honor requests for records under FOIA, with some exceptions. Although each
request will be reviewed on a case?by-case basis, generally, OCR is not required to
release documents during complaint evaluation and investigation or enforcement
proceedings, if the release could affect law enforcement activities. 5 U.S.C. 
552(b)(5) and Also, a Federal agency may refuse a request for records if their
release would result in an unwarranted invasion of privacy of an individual. 5 U.S.C. 
552(b)(6).

UNITED DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

 

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS Attica.wa



1999 BRYAN ST., SUITE 1:321} hithlH'Hll?I?I
DALLAS. TX Barn-sate 'rlaxas

October 16, 2012

Dr. R. Gerald Turner, President
Southern Methodist University
6425 Boaz Lane
Dallas, TX 75205
Reference: 06?] 1-2 I 26

Dear Dr. Turner:

The US. Department of Education (Department), Office for Civil Rights (OCR), Dallas
Of?ce is currently investigating a complaint filed against Southern Methodist University
(SM U). Dallas, Texas, which was received in our office on June 2. 20] l. The complainant
alleged that SMU discriminated against her on the basis ofsexfgender, in violation of Title
IX ofthe Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX), 20 U.S.C. 1681 at seq, and its
implementing regulations at 34 C.F.R. Part 106. On August 17, 201 I. OCR Dallas informed
SMU that we would investigate the following issue:

Whether, during the Eli?) gm semester, SMU discriminated against the
complainant on the basis of sexfgender by failing to take prompt and effective
action to address the sex/gender based harassment directed toward her an
SMU rofessor referred to the complainant as a ?doody hlonde," a ?beauty
queen," and a ?hired bimbo" and stated that she was acting ?bitchy? during
classroom lecture), which was sufficient to constitute a hostile environment, of
which SMU had or should have had notice, in violation of Title IX at 34 C.F.R. 
106.31.

 

 

 

During investigation. SMU expressed a desire to voluntarily resolve the complaint.

OCR submitted a proposed resolution agreement on April 19, 2012 and received counter
proposal on May 24, 20 I 2. However, during the course ofOCR?s review of SMU's counter
proposal, OCR learned of additional concerns about SMll?s grievance procedures and complaint
process for complaints of sexual harassment, sexual assault, and sexual violence. As a result.
OCR withdraws the proposed resolution agreement that was sent to your of?ce on April 19.
2012, and requests additional information concerning grievance procedures and
complaint process pursuant to Title IX.

Section 100.6(c) of Title 34 ofthe Code of Federal Regulations stipulates that each recipient of
Federal ?nancial assistance shall permit access to pertinent sources of information to responsible
Department of?cials or designecs. Enclosed is a supplemental data request. Please provide the

The Department nt'Et't'tn?atr'onis mission is to prcunotestudvnt at'hi't'vmnunt and pro 
in: Int: Ting a'u?tn with um! m1 vi: r' and 'ns'mfn?rf equal a: ?l we.

ww wad .gov

Page 2 Southern Methodist University Case No. 06] 12 [26)

below requested information to OCR within 15 calendar days ofthe date of this letter. Please be
advised that this does not preclude OCR from requesting additional information during the
course ofthc complaint resolution process.

1. A copy of all Title IX policies and procedures, including grievance procedures. complaint
processing procedures, and hearing procedures, for the 2009?20l 0. 2010-20! 1 and 20] l-
2012 school years. Please include any and all procedures for investigating or otherwise
responding to complaints ol?sex discrimination. gender discrimination, sexual
harassment, gender harassment, sexual assault, andfor sexual violence and indicate how
these policies or procedures arei?wcrc disseminated to students.

Ex.)

A copy of all complaints or grievances filed by current or former SMU students during
the 2009?2010, 2010-201 1 and 201 1-2012 school years alleging sex discrimination,
gender discrimination, sexual harassment, gender harassment, sexual assault. and/or
sexual violence. Please include any inquiries or investigations conducted by SMU and
conclusions or determinations reached, including evidence gathered or relied upon in the
determination, appeals and responses, hearing transcripts, andfor sanctions imposed.

3. The name, title, and contact information for any individual responsible for receiving
andlor responding to complaints of sex discrimination, gender discrimination. sexual
harassment. gender harassment. sexual assault. andx?or sexual violence.

Under OCR procedures. OCR is obligated to advise the complainant and the institution against
which a complaint is ?led that intimidation or retaliation against any individual is prohibited by
regulations enforced by this agency. Speci?cally, the regulations enforced by OCR. directly or
by reference, state that no recipient or other person shall intimidate, threaten, coerce. or
discriminate against any individual for the purpose ofinterfering with any right or privilege
secured by regulations enforced by OCR or because one has made a complaint, testilied. assisted
or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding or hearing held in connection with
a complaint.

Under the Freedom of Information Act, it may be necessary to release this document and related
correspondence and records upon request. In the event that OCR receives such a request. we will
seek to protect. to the extent provided by law, personally identifiable information, which. if
released, could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion personal
privacy.

If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me at mimic}
I You may also contact the attorney assigned to this complaint. Lori
Howard. at mimic) or 

 

 

 

 

 

Sit 'erely,

Marx/W?

Gregory D. McGhee
Supervisory Attorney/Team Leader

Page 3 Southern Methodist University Case No. 06] 12126}

CC:

 

(bHTiiC)

 

 

 

Associate Vice President for Access Equin
Executive Assistant to the President

Southern Methodist University

PO. Box 750200

Dallas. TX 75275-0200

Via Electronic Mail to: 

 

 



 

 

UNITED STAT ES DEPA OF EDUCAHCW v1

 

OFFICE FOR Cl?v'iL ARKANSAS

LOUISIANA

l999 BRYAN ST.. SUITE loll! 
DALLAS. ?Dt Tilttl-oaltl Texas

December 1 l. 2014

 

{bit?F'HC}

 

 

 

RE: OCR Complaint 06-11-2126
Southern Methodist University

 


Dear

 

 

 

Enclosed please find the disposition ofthe complaint you tiled on June 2. 20] 1. against
Southern Methodist University (SMU or the University) with the US. Department of
Education's Of?ce for Civil Rights 0C alleging discrimination on the basis of
sexr?gender. OCR received three complaints between June 201 and March 2013 alleging
gender harassment. sexual harassment. andfor sexual assault. The complainants alleged
that the University failed to and equitably respond to complaints of gender
harassment. sexual harassment. and sexual violence of which it had notice. including the
students? reports of gender harassment and sexual assault: and. as a result. students.
including the students who ?led two of the three complaints. were subjected to a hostile
enviromnent.

explain the basis for ?ndings concerning all three complaints in the enclosed
letter to the University. In the letter. you are referred to as "Complainant The names
of students and other parties also were not used in the letter in order to protect
individualsl privacy.

On November 16. 2014. OCR entered into a resolution agreement (Agreement) with the
University to resolve the identi?ed compliance concerns in all three complaints. Enclosed
is a copy for your information. OCR will monitor the implementation ot?the Agreement.
If the University fails to itnplement the Agreement. OCR may initiate administrative
entorcement or judicial proceedings to enforce the speci?c terms and obligations ol?thc
Agreement. Before initiating administrative enforcement (34 C.F.R.  100.9. 100.10). or
judicial proceedings to enforce the Agreement. OCR shall give the University written
notice of the alleged breach and a minimum t? sixty (60) calendar days to cure the
alleged breach.

This concludes OCR's investigation of your complaint and should not be interpreted to
address the niversity?s compliance with any other regulatory provision or to address any
issues other than those addressed in this or the enclosed letter. You may ?le a private suit
in Federal court whether or not OCR finds a violation.

The Departurth ot'Eo?ta'at?nvtis nu?ssavt 
by first; v?t'nj; t'tt'm at: 1-H: In: I and savoring; :Itjtm Ht :1 

\vww.?x  

 


Pagel? (06-1  ~2 26l

 

 

 

This letter sets forth determination in an individual OCR case. This letter is not a
formal statement policy and should not be relied upon. cited. or construed as
such. Formal policy statements are approved by a authorized OCR ol?ticial
and made available to the public.

Please be advised that the University may not harass. coerce. intimidate. or discriminate
against any individual because he or she has ?led a complaint or participated in the
complaint resolution process. Il?this happens. the harmed individual may file a complaint
alleging such treatment.

Under the Freedom of Information Act. it may be necessary to release this document and
related correspondence and records upon request. In the event that OCR receives such a
request. we will seek to protect. to the extent provided by law. personally identi?able
information. which. if released. could reasonably be expected to constitute an
umvarranted invasion of personal privacy.

If you have any questions about this letter or resolution ofthis case. please contact

me at mimic} or Emily Babb. the attorney assigned to the complaint. at (him


 

 

 

 

Sineerel y.

 
     

 

. ust-in--T.? svans
Supervisory Attorneyr?Team Leader

Enclosure

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION nI-tutm vI

 

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS nttxawsas



I999 BRYAN ST, MESISSIPPI
DALLAS, TX 75201-6810 TEXAS

December 1 l. 2014

Dr. R. Gerald Turner, President
Southern Methodist University
P.O. Box 750100

Dallas. TX 75275?0100

Re: OCR Case Nos. 06-1 1-2126, 06-13-2081, and 06-13-2088
Southern Methodist University

Dear Dr. Turner:

The U.S. Department of Education (Department), Of?ce for Civil Rights (OCR), Dallas
of?ce, has completed its investigation of the above-relerenced complaints ?led against
Southern Methodist University (SMU or the University). OCR investigated whether the
University failed to and equitably respond to complaints, reports andi?or incidents of
gender and sexual harassment ofwhieh it had notice, including the complainants? reports of
gender and sexual harassment and sexual assault, and whether. as a result. students, including
the complainants, were subjected to a sexually hostile em-tironment.

OCR is responsible for determining whether recipients of Federal ?nancial assistance from the
Department are in compliance with Title IX ofthe Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX), 20
U.S.C. 1681 et seq, and its implementing regulation at 34 CFR. Part 106, which prohibit
discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs and activities. SMU is a recipient of
Federal ?nancial assistance from the Department. Therefore, OCR had jurisdictional authority to
investigate these complaints pursuant to Title 1X.

OCR received three complaints between June 201 and March 2013 alleging gender harassment,
sexual harassment, andfor sexual assault. The complainants alleged that the University failed to
and equitably respond to complaints of gender harassment, sexual harassment, and
sexual violence of which it had notice, including the students? reports of gender harassment and
sexual assault; and, as a result, students, including the students who ?led two of the three
complaints, were subjected to a hostile environment.

SMU is a private, four-year university. main campus is located in Dallas, Texas and the
University has two smaller campuses located in Taos, New Mexico and Plano. Texas. In
academic year 2013?2014, the University had a total student population oi" 10,929 students,
comprising 6,357 undergraduate students and 4,572 graduate students. The student body was
approximately 62% percent male and 38% percent female.E

 

See houtSM Jr?l?acl Ii he.

The Dryveu'tmmt nu?s?sr?rut 1's topnunott' student or hint-tuner}! 
rt warring t?t?tt um! I will 1m twmu? r'nsurmg tyne: an 11135.



Page 2 Dr. R. Gerald Turner

investigation of the three complaints included interviewing all three complainants:
interviewing relevant faculty and staff; reviewing all relevant University policies; and reviewing
the University's responses to complaints of sexual harassment. sexual assault. and gender
harassment from the 2009-2010 through 201 1-2012 academic years. OCR conducted on-site
visits in 2013. OCR also reviewed information contained in the Department?s Of?ce of
Postsecondary Education?s Campus Safety and Security Data Analysis Cutting Tool. including
statistics collected pursuant to the Jeanne lery Disclosure of Campus Security and Campus
Crime Statistics Act (?Clery Act"); 20 U.S.C. this information is located at
and is discussed in more detail below.

OCR determined that the University?s notice of nondiserimination failed to adequately notify
students and employees of the University?s Title Coordinator. OCR also determined the
University's prior and current grievance procedures failed to comply with the requirements of
Title IX. OCR further concluded that the University did not provide prompt and equitable
responses to Complainant is complaint of gender harassment or to Complainant 3?s report of
sexual assault. OCR further determined that for Complainant 3. this failure allowed for the
continuation ofa hostile environment that limited and denied his access to the education
opportunities at the University. On November 16. 2014, the University provided OCR with a
signed Resolution Agreement to resolve the complaints and address the identified compliance
concerns.

Legal Authority

The Title 1X implementing regulation, at 34 C.F.R. provides that no person shall, on
the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in. be denied the bene?ts of. or be subjected to
discrimination under any academic. extracurricular, research. occupational training. or other
education program or activity operated by a recipient of Federal ?nancial assistance. Speci?c
obligations are set forth at 34 C.F.R. 106.31tb). including a recipient?s obligation to ensure that
its students are not denied or limited in their ability to participate in or benefit from the
recipient?s programs or activities on the basis of sex.

Sexual harassment and gender-based harassment that create a hostile environment are forms of
sex discrimination prohibited by Title IX.2 Sexual harassment is unwelcome conduct ofa sexual
nature. Sexual harassment can include unwelcome sexual advances; requests for sexual lavors;
and other verbal, nonverbal, or physical conduct of a sexual nature. such as sexual assault or acts
of sexual violence. Gender-based harassment may include acts of verbal. nonverbal. or physical
aggression; intimidation; or hostility based on sex or sex-stereotyping. even il?those acts do not
involve conduct ofa sexual nature. Sexual harassment and gender-based harassment ofa student
create a hostile environment if the conduct is suf?ciently serious that it interferes with or limits a
student's ability to participate in or bene?t from the recipient's program.

 

3 The applicable legal standards described herein are more fully discussed in EOI Dem- ("m?fengue Letter on
Sexual Violence, which is available at: littn: 
(Apr. 4. EDI See m?so OCR's 20?} Dew" (.?otleagae Letter on Harassment and Bullying. which is available at:
(Oct. 26. Revised Sexual
Harassment Guidance: Harassment of Students by School Employees. Other Students, or Third Parties; which is
avaimmc 31;; lm (.lan. l9, 20m 

 

 

 

 

Page 3 Dr. R. Gerald Turner

In determining whether this denial or limitation has occurred, OCR examines all the relevant
circumstances from an objective and subjective perspective. including: the type of harassment
whether it was verbal or physical); the frequency and severity ofthe conduct; the age, sex,
and relationship of the individuals involved professor-student or student-student}; the
setting and context in which the harassment occurred; whether other incidents have occurred at
the college or university; and other relevant factors. The more severe the conduct, the less need
there is to show a repetitive series of incidents to prove a hostile environment. particularly if the
harassment is physical. or example. a single instance of rape is suf?ciently severe to create a
hostile environment. Title IX protects all students at recipient institutions from sex harassment,
including male and female students.

Ifa recipient knows or reasonably should have known about sexual or gender-based harassment
that creates a hostile environment, Title IX requires the recipient to take immediate and
appropriate action to investigate or otherwise determine what occurred. If a recipient delays
responding to allegations of sexual harassment or responds inappropriately, the recipient?s own
action may subject the student to a hostile environment. Ifit does, the recipient will be required
to remedy the effects of both the initial sexual harassment and the effects of the recipient?s
failure to respond and appropriately. If an investigation reveals that discriminatory
harassment has occurred- a recipient must take prompt and effective steps reasonably calculated
to end the harassment. eliminate zuiy hostile environment and its effects, and prevent the
harassment from recurring. These duties are a recipient's responsibility regardless of whether a
student has complained, asked the recipient to take action, or identi?ed the harassment as a 
ofdiserimination. Ifneedcd, the recipient must take immediate steps to protect the complainant
from further harassment prior to the completion of the Title IX investigationtresolution.

Sexual harassment of a student by a faculty member or other recipient employee also violates
Title IX. If an employee who is acting (or who reasonably appears to be acting) in the context of
carrying out these responsibilities over students engages in sexual or gender-based harassment,
the recipient is responsible for the discriminatory conduct. The recipient is. therefore, also
responsible for remedying any effects ofthe harassment on the victim, as well as for ending the
harassment and preventing its recurrence.

Additionally. the Title IX regulation, at 34 C.F.R. Section requires recipients to adopt
and publish grievance procedures providing for the prompt and equitable resolution of
complaints alleging any action that would be prohibited by Title IX. Title IX does not require a
recipient to provide separate grievance procedures for sexual lu?rrassment and gender harassment
complaints. A recipient may use student disciplinary or other separate procedures for these
complaints. However, any procedures used to adjudicate complaints of sexual harassment or
gender harassment, including disciplinary proceedings. must afford the complainant a prompt
and equitable resolution.

In evaluating whether a recipient?s grievance procedures are prompt and equitable, OCR
considers whether the procedures provide for:

1. notice to students and employees ofthe procedures, including where complaints may be
?led:

Page 4 Dr. R. Gerald Turner

2. application of the procedures to complaints alleging harassment carried out by
employees, other students, or third parties;

3. adequate. reliable, and impartial investigation of complaints, including the opportunity to
present witnesses and other evidence;

4. designated and reasonably prompt timeframes for the major stages ofthe compiaint
process;

5. written notice to the parties ofthe outcome ofthe complaint and any appeal; and

6. an assurance that the recipient will take steps to prevent recurrence of any harassment and

to correct its discriminatory effects on the complainant and others, if appropriate.

To ensure that students and employees have a clear understanding of what constitutes sexual
violence. the potential consequences for such conduct. and how the recipient processes
complaints; the recipient's Title IX grievance procedures should also include the tollowing in
writing:

1. a statement ofthe recipient'sjurisdiction over Title IX complaints;

2. adequate definitions of sexual harassment (which includes sexual assault} and an
explanation as to when such conduct creates a hostile environment;
3. reporting policies and protocols; including provisions for confidential reporting:

4. identi?cation of the employee or employees responsible for evaluating requests for

confidentiality;

notice that Title IX prohibits retaliation;

6. notice ofa student?s right to file a criminal complaint and a Title IX complaint
simultaneously;

notice of available interim measures that may be taken to protect the student in the
educational setting;

8. the evidentiary standard that must be used (preponderance ofthe evidence) in resolving a
complaint;

9. notice ot?potential remedies for students;

It). notice of potential sanctions against perpetrators; and

1. sources of counseling. advocacy and support.

U1

Pending the outcome of an investigation. Title IX requires a recipient to take steps to ensure
equal access to its education programs and activities and to protect the complainant from further
harassment as necessary, including taking interim steps before the final outcome of the
investigation. The recipient should undertake these steps once it has notice ofa
harassment allegation and should provide the complainant with periodic updates on the status of
the investigation. It should notify the complainant of his or her options to avoid contact with the
alleged perpetrator and allow students to change academic or living situations as appropriate. For
instance, the recipient may prohibit the alleged perpetrator from having contact with the
complainant pending the results of the investigation. The speci?c interim measures implemented
and the process for implementing those measures will vary depending on the facts of each case.
hen taking steps to separate the complainant and the alleged perpetrator; a recipient should
minimize the burden on the complainant. Recipients should also check with complainants to
ensure that the interim measures are effective and. if ineffective, identify alternatives. In
addition. recipients should ensure that complainants are aware of their Title IX rights and any

Page 5 Dr. R. Gerald Turner

available resources, such as counseling services. and their right to file with local law
enforcement.

To ensure individuals can invoke these grievance procedures without fear of reprisal. Title IX
also prohibits the university and others, including students. from retaliating against any
individual ?for the purpose of interlering with any right or privilege secured by [Title or
because that individual ?has made a complaint. testified. assisted, or participated in any manner
in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing" under Title IX. Prohibited retaliatory acts include
intimidation, threats. coercion, or discrimination against any such individual. Universities
therefore should take steps to prevent any retaliation against a student who makes a complaint or
any student who provides information regarding the complaint. At a minimum. under Title IX,
the university must ensure that complainants and their parents. if appropriate. know how to
report any subsequent problems; and should follow up with complainants to determine whether
any retaliation or new incidents of harassment have occurred.

In addition, if there is an incident involving potential criminal conduct. the university must
determine, consistent with state and local law, whether appropriate law enforcement or other
authorities should be notified. But a university?s Title IX investigation is different from any law
enforcement investigation, anti a law enforcement investigation does not relieve a university of
its independent Title IX obligation to investigate the conduct. A university therefore should not
wait for the conclusion ofa criminal investigation or criminal proceeding to begin its own Title
IX investigation, and if needed, must take immediate steps to protect the complainant in the
educational setting. These duties are a university?s responsibility. regardless of whether a student
has complained. asked the university to take action, or identified the harassment as a form of
discrimination.

lfthe complainant requests con?dentiality or asks that the complaint not be pursued, a university
should take all reasonable steps to investigate and respond to the complaint consistent with the
request for confidentiality or request not to pursue an investigation. if the complainant insists
that his or her name or other identifiable information not be disclosed to the alleged perpetrator,
a university should inform the complainant that its ability to respond may be limited. A
university also should tell the complainant that Title IX prohibits retaliation. and that university
officials will not only take steps to prevent retaliation but also take strong responsive action if it
occurs. if the student still requests that his or her name not be disclosed to the accused or that the
recipient not investigate or seek action against the accused, the recipient will need to determine
whether or not it can honor such a request while still providing a safe and nondiscriminatory
environment for all students, including the student who reported the harassment. A recipient
should take all reasonable steps to investigate and respond to the complaint consistent with the
request for con?dentiality or request not to pursue an {In-'estig'atiOII.

Grievance procedures generally may include voluntary informal mechanisms mediation)
for resolving some types ofgendcr-based harassment complaints. However. it is improper for a
complainant to be required to work out the problem directly with the alleged perpetrator. and
certainly not without appropriate involvement by the recipient participation by a trained
counselor. a trained mediator, or, ifappropriate, a laculty member or administrator}. The
complainant must be noti?ed ofthe right to end the informal process at any time and begin the

Page 6 Dr. R. Gerald Turner

formal stage of the complaint process. Moreover. in cases involving allegations ofsexual
assaultlviolence. mediation is not appropriate even on a voluntary basis.

Throughout the recipient?s investigation and in any hearing. both parties must have equal
opportunity to present relevant witnesses and other evidence. Also. in order for a recipient?s
grievance procedures to be consistent with the Title IX evidentiary standard. the recipient must
use a preponderance ofthe evidence standard for investigating allegations of genderebased
harassment. Ifa recipient provides for appeal ofthe findings or remedy. it must do so for both
parties. The recipient must maintain documentation of all proceedings.

In addition. recipients should provide training to employees about their grievance procedures and
their implementation. Recipients should provide such training to any employees likely to witness
or receive reports of sexual harassment and violence. including professors. university law
enforcement unit employees. university administrators. university counselors. general counsel.
health personnel. and resident advisers. Recipients need to ensure that their employees are
trained so that they know to report harassment to appropriate officials. and so that employees
with the authority to address harassment know how to respond properly. All persons involved in
implementing a recipient?s grie ance procedures Title IX coordinators. investigators and
adjudicator-s} must have training or experience in handling complaints ofsexua] harassment. and
in the recipient?s grievance procedures as well as applicable con?dentiality requirements. In
sexual assault cases in particular. the fact-tinder and the decision-maker also should have
adequate training or knowledge regarding sexual assault.

The Title IX regulation. at 34 C.F.R. Speci?cally requires that each recipient
designate at least one employee to coordinate its responsibilities to comply with and carry out its
responsibilities under Title IX. including any investigation of any complaint communicated to
such recipient alleging its noncompliance with Title IX. This provision further requires that the
recipient notify all of its students and employees of the name (or title). and office address and
telephone number of the employee(s') so designated. In addition. 201 1 Dear Colleague
Letter on Sexual Violence states that recipients should notify all students and employees ofthe
electronic mail (email) address ofthc Title IX Coordinator. The recipient ensure that
employees designated to serve as Title IX coordinators have adequate training on what
constitutes sex discrimination {including gender-based harassment) and that they understand how
the recipient's grievance procedures operate.

The regulation implementing Title IX. at 34 CPR. 106.9ta). requires that a recipient
implement speci?c and continuing steps to notily applicants for employment. students.
employees. and all unions or professional organizations holding collective bargaining or
professional agreements with the recipient that it does not discriminate on the basis of sex in the
education programs or activities it operates; that the prohibition against discrimination extends to
employment; and that inquiries to recipients concerning the application of Title IX and its
implementing regulation may be referred to the Title IX coordinator or to OC R. The regulation
implementing Title IX. at 34 CPR. {5 requires recipients to include the notice of
nondiscrimination in each announcement. bulletin. catalog. or application form that it makes
available to the persons described above. or which is otherwise used in the recruitment of

Page i" Dr. R. Gerald Turner

students or employees. OCR policy provides that pursuant to the Title IX regulation, the
noti?cation must include the contact information for the Title IX coordinator.

Factual Information
A. Titie IX Coordinator and Notice ofNomiiscriminrttiott

SMU designated the Associate Vice President for Access and Equity. and Executive Assistant to
the President and Director Access and Equity (Title IX Coordinator) as its Title
IX Coordinator and published her contact information. including her name. title. email and office
address, and telephone number on the website for the Office ofInstitutional Access and Equity.
The Title IX Coordinator is responsible for implementing the niversity?s sexual harassment
policies and procedures and is charged with the oversight of all Title IX claims. The Title iX
Coerdinator indicated that she had ten years ofexperience in her position. was the liaison for the
University with Federal enforcement agencies. including OCR and the EEOC. and state
agencies. responded to all internal complaints. and was responsible for providing online and in-
person training programs on discrimination laws.

SMU's notice ofnondiscrimination. published on the University website.3 identi?es the Director
of the Office of Institutional Access and Equity (Title IX Coordinator) as being designated, ?to
handle inquiries regarding the nondiscrimination policies." The notice does not include the of?ce
address. email address. or telephone number ofthe Title IX Coordinator. current student
handbook. as well as earlier versions examined during investigation. do not include
contact information for the Title IX (.?oordinator.4

B. Prior Grier-amen! Procedures

With respect to Title IX grievance procedures. during investigation. the University
identified University Policy 2.5. entitled. ?Savant Harassment and consensual Reintionships.? as
the grievance procedure for students to raise allegations of gender-based or sexual harassment.
University Policy 2.5 was in effect until the University adopted Interim Policy on January
13. 2013 (the revised policy is discussed in more detail below).

University Policy 2.5 governed the University?s responses to sexual harassment and consensual
relationships and outlined the procedures for tiling a complaint alleging sexual harassment.
providing two levels of review?an informal proceeding and a [brutal proceeding. University
Policy 2.5 applied to all administrators. faculty. staff. students and visitors at all of SMU's
schools and campuses. University Policy 2.5 did not make any reference to gender?based
harassment complaints or other types of sex discrimination complaints.

University Policy 2.5 included specific provisions concerning confidentiality. The policy stated:
will investigate allegations ofTitle IX harassment and take corrective action. if

 

3 z=z.
4 The current handbook is posted on the SMU website at:


 

 

Page 8 Dr. R. Gerald Turner

appropriate. in those circumstances where the complainant does not wish to pursue these
procedures or corrective action. A complainant?s desire for anonymity or inaction may hinder
investigation ofa Title IX harassment complaint."

Under the informal proceeding, a complainant ?may bring an allegation of violation ofthis
policy to an appropriate Adn'tinistrative Official. who may be any academic or administrative
of?cer such as the Director Access and Equity ['l?itle Coordinator]: a Vice
President; a Dean; the Dean ofStudent Life; or other director. supervisor, department chair, or
head." The Administrative Of?cial would counsel the complainant regarding his or her rights
and encourage, but not require. the complainant to seek first a direct resolution of any concerns
by stating objections to the alleged behavior orally or in writing to the alleged oftending party. If
the ?direct approach" referenced above was successful, the matter would be deemed closed and
the Administrative Of?cial would notify the Title IX Coordinator of the allegation and outcome.
If the direct approach were unsatisfactory. the Administrative Official would direct the
complainant to the "Appropriate Authority? to hear the complaint and handle the case. The
Administrative Of?cial would consult with the Title IX Coordinator to determine the
Appropriate Authority. The Title IX Coordinator could then handle the investigation or select
another Appropriate Authority to handle the investigation.

The Appropriate Authority was required to "conduct a preliminary investigation to determine
whether there is a reasonable basis for believing that a violation ofthis Policy has 
would meet separately with the complainant and the accused and obtain signed written
from each, if possible; and could also meet with any other persons reasonably
believed to have knowledge about the allegations and obtain signed written statements from
them. if possible. If the Appropriate Authority found a reasonable basis for believing that the
policy was violated during the preliminary investigation. the Appropriate Authority would
inform the accused and conduct an "administrative review? ofthe complaint. including: 
review of the allegations by the complainant; review ofthe response ofthe accused to the
allegations; responses from others; and negotiations to resolve the matter in a manner
reasonably acceptable to both interested parties. If the Appropriate Authority concluded there has
been a violation ofthe policy. the Appropriate Authority "may structure an agreed settlement
which includes, but is not limited to. an oral or written warning. a promise not to commit such an
abuse again, an oral or written apology. professional counseling for the individual who violated
the policy. or any other sanction which appropriately re?ects the severity ofthe violation."

The informal proceeding could be discontinued and formal proceedings initiated: if. alter the
informal proceedings, the Appropriate Authority concluded that there was no reasonable basis
for the complaint; or the complainant wished to end the informal proceeding at any time and
requested a formal proceeding. The University policy concerning informal proceedings also
stated: ?[T]he University reserves the right to act as deemed appropriate at any time with or
without written statements and without the agreement of a party or parties."

University Policy 2.5 stated that formal proceedings would take place in accordance with the
following guidelines:

Ifa complaint is filed against either a full~time or part-time member ofthe liaculty, a
teaching assistant or a student teaching assistant in hisfher teaching capacity. or any

Page 9 Dr. R. Gerald Turner

other instructional personnel. the matter shall be submitted to the Faculty Senate
Ethics and Tenure Committee for its consideration and action in accordance with its
then-current guidelines and procedures:

lfa complaint is ?led against a University staffmember. the matter shall be submitted
to the Vice President, or to the person designated by the Vice President, responsible
for the unit employing the accused. A Formal hearing may be convened in accordance
with the University's Grievance Policy and Procedures. Policy 2.8. if appropriate.

It?a complaint is ?led against a student. the matter shall be submitted to the
University Judicial System for adjudication in accordance with thejudieial
procedures for alleged violations of the Student Code ot?Conduct.

OCR examined the formal proceedings submitted to the Faculty Senate Ethics and Tenure
Committee {Committee}. At the time Complainant I ?led her complaint with the University in
(mm . the Committee did not have any hearing panel procedures in place. The "Southern
Methodist University Faculty Senate Ethics and Tenure Committee Hearing Panel Procedures"
(hearing procedures) were developed during the University's response to Complainant The
hearing procedure provided liar both parties to make a position statement and present witnesses.
allowed both parties to have an advisor or counsel present during the hearing. established the
evidentiary standard as preponderance ofthe evidence. ensured the con?dentiality ofthe hearing.
and required the committee chair to submit the hearing pane] report to the Title IX Coordinator
within 10 days ofthe hearing. While the hearing procedures provided that the panel submit the
report to the Title IX Coordinator. as discussed below for Complainant l. the University
President served as the ?nal decision maker for the complaint. Neither the hearing procedures
nor University Policy 2.5 indicated that the President was the ?nal decision maker for the
complaint. The only mention of this comes in a memorandum from the Title IX Coordinator to
the Committee relating to the complaint ?led by Complainant l.

 

University Policy 2.5 stated that a complainant alleging sexual violence may simultaneously
pursue a criminal complaint with the appropriate law enforcement agency and ?le a complaint
for Title IX harassment with the Title IX Coordinator. It went on to state that the University
would pursue the Title lX complaint and not delay its handling ofa complaint ofsexual violence
until the commencement or conclusion ofa criminal investigation or proceeding; however.
"notwithstanding the lioregoing, at the request of law authorities. SMU may
temporarily delay its processing ofthe complaint while law enforcement authorities gather
evidence concerning the allegation of sexual assault."

SMU maintains its own police department. which is a fully empowered law enforcement agency
that is certi?ed by the State of Texas. Campus police of?cers are state-commissioned peace
of?cers with full police authority. duties and responsibilities. In addition to the SMU Police
Department. the University Park Police Department has concurrentjurisdiction on the campus
and assists the SMU Police Department if needed. OCR interviewed the SMU hicfof Police.
who explained that he serves as the point of contact between the SMU Police Department and the
University and shares information with Student Affairs concerning criminal investigations.

C. Um't'crxity Responses to Gender Harassatem and Sexual Hmtestament!lr'ioi'ence
Compi?rmits.

1 10120112101003 1201010101 1011201121003 X1 01111 0111 111111} {31111161} 111 1.200 001510012 0111 11200012

0110011 01 512 p0.1111b01 121112 10112111111003 x1 01111 0111 12010121000 1 10121111210010 3 111111) {31111111} 01

 

 

 

 

?1011 01 0111121112112 2001110110 5111311 1121101110111212012 101 g'z 11011011 11115000 01 1 101201121111003

1201001113 12012 93 110110d 121011210111 1055010111 0111 112111 30111011 12 1101111115 1011 121p 0000121110

0111112111 1 10001121111003 12011110010112111111003 31.51 011111 0111  111 '1 10120101111003 1112111
101110 51110p1115 11111211110111.1000 100 13112101120112.1003 x1 01111 0111 ?1 11.112011211111103 1110.11 5100011100p
001150111201 12012 011111 11110005 12 10550.101d 0111 11011001111000 120111011111 12012 ?'93 111011011 1111510111111]
01 1111211511111 p01011p000 512m 10011121311150.1111 1112011011010 0111 ?10 00111211011000 12 512111 1111121111000
1311111011 51 10120101110103 01111 00111231150101 10011b0511115 .1011 1121111130 1201010101 1011201131003

X1 31111 3111. 111018 lily-0 1111011111100 1101111111 11210101 12 110111 1 10120112101003 (111131311 131111111) 111

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

?011011 10010551211211 11202105 0111110 11000 12 1111111 510550110111 11100 110121110111

10012 ?51055010111 111011 1111111 1011011 10010551211211 112111105 511111115; 110551105112 1110110000 5111 01 503012110
10 100111110 12 0111211012011 01 [1055011001 01111 13031111, 111150.112 512 p012 ?101215155111 0.1111211510110111; 1112 p012
11055011010101110012 ?1055010111 0111 ?0120111 11112151551111 01113011110111.10101 ?11 00110011501101 11112011011010
12 1101011131100 0115 '11111211111100 (31111111) .1011 11111111 1 10120101111003 01101111 ?112111330
1201111011111 1011201111003 x1 01111 0111 1311111111111 12012 111115;
010.11 11011211p1213 0115 101112 111011011 1001055121120 [12111105 51111113 110111210111 12 1101315101112 1111121111000 1121111011
12 0111 01 100101 1011110 10111 1201010101 12012 '551210 111 10550101d 0111 1111 130511 001211011121 p012 051000

0111 111131 15110121213 .1011 1001112 (111200 1111215155111) 5111211111 111013013 101 0120(1 1111215155191 1311111131}

1 11 1 9111 P31391L103 1 ?1015011105 011110 0015010000 011110
0 1 r1

"50111112111121.1113 111111120111 50115 111110 111211101111 111111111200 12 112 30111001 01111., 51211-1 511121011

01 0011001112 11011-11211 1011 112111 551210 0111 1201111001 12012 11110012,. 10012 1111011111 ?11111120., 5.0101111?
05 510115 51101111 01111-1 511111 050111 ?10 0110 151111, 1301111., _f00011b 11111120111100.1111

512 1011 01 110110.101 10550101,;1 0111 ?50015505 551210 11111an 101112 010011 5110550110.? 0111 111011 112

112111 1130 1201010101 1 10120112111010 3 1221 1201110011 '1 21011 11101112 12012 01 5111000000 [00500-10110011 013010
(1055011001) 105501001 0011015010051 1311111111 0111 r1111111110 112111 1130 p00001111 1 10120101111003

?1390 131011119111

?11 1055010111 0111 150112312 0011121 50011012110 110501 0111110 120000101 100 5121.1 0115 112111 2,1130 1201100101
1 10001121111003 1101120000111 1121111111 12 .101 5011113000111 120110121 1211510111111 0111 112111 13012 301120000111
1121010101 0111 :10 1111501 0111 1120d1112 011.0011 00 0011121010101 112010 .1011 0121110111100 13101011120111.1003
1.11 01111 0111 112111 12011215 05112 0115; 00011125101112 1011110 00111231150001 0111120051201 12 1011130100
05110101110 .10 5055001110 1011110 11012 1101010101 1011 p1p 1111113 112111 13011215 0113 111,113 01111111115512.1011
12051211-10121103110 30101121111000 .1011 55000111 0111 1111111 001112115101 120550111110 1 11101110101003
11101000111100 01115011 12 0101115000 01 100101111115 51210 110111-11 110015512112 01115501101112 01 0011012
0111100110 p102 111100.111 011121 01 11011121 111/113 112111 101112 1015011105 ?0111 110111112 1055010111

012 1111 10010551211211 12051211-10p110311105 01 120100111115 51210 005 112111 130501112 1 10001121111003

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

13111110)

 

91111-1 1-911 1111111111100 1100
11011001150101 51110 111211 512 1131?) 2111 130011110110 01010 112111 5112011 01111017112012 5103-1103 p012 ?1 [03

111031311113: 0111 31111111) 130111 51111121111000 101110 512 [1011-1 512 10120112101003 [0012 3 10120112101003
?1 10120101111003 110111 5101121111000 01 5050011501 5311151011011 0111 12001011011 93 K0110d 1111510211011

1001111 12112109 '3 111 031211

Page I Dr. R. Gerald Turner

that she needed to submit a request for a formal proceeding to the Title IX Coordinator.
Complainant I sent the Title IX Coordinator a request to initiate a formal proceeding and two
weeks later, the Title IX Coordinator informed Complainant I that her complaint had been
forwarded to the Chair of the Faculty Senate Ethics and Tenure Committee (Chair). who would
notify Complainant 1 when the date of the review was set, and requested that Complainant I
provide to the Title IX Coordinator all documents that she wanted the Committee to consider and
the names of witnesses she wished to testify, their contact information, and a brief summary of
their anticipated testimony. lam . the Title IX Coordinator forwarded a memorandum
to the Committee concerning the complaint. which set a meeting with the Title IX Coordinator
and Associate General Counsel for late (?Ell?fl I requested the Committee schedule a date
[or the formal proceeding within two weeks ot tie meeting, informed the Committee that
following its review it was to make a recommendation on the appropriate outcome to the SMU
President, and explained the hearing should be conducted in accordance with Title IX and its
regulations. The memorandum was not provided to Complainant and the University did not
provide OCR any documentation demonstrating that it informed Complainant I that the
Committee?s determination would only be a recommendation to the SMU President and not a

linal University determination.

 

 

 

 

 

In. nearly four months after receiving Complainant l's appeal. the Committee
convened a hearing pursuant to the new ?Southern Methodist University Faculty Senate Ethics
and Tenure Committee Hearing Panel Procedures? and issued its report It] days later. The
Committee concluded the Professor violated University Policy 2.5. Specifically. the Committee
found that the Professor made the "promfbeauty queen." "hired bimbo," "dirty
panties," "pretty girl," and ?doody blonde?1 statements as alleged by Complainant I and
concluded that these remarks "are either sexual or inappropriately sexist in nature? and ?are
consistent with an overall pattern ofoftensive, gender-speci?c statements." The Committee
determined that ?when the totality ofthe situation is considered, a reasonable adult female would
?nd [the Professor?s] remarks to be a source ofdiscomfort and humiliation" and that the
Professor "engaged in sexual harassment in violation of University Policy The Committee
recommended specific sanctions. including I) a face-to-face meeting among the Professor, Title
IX Coordinator and Dean to ?discuss the necessity of adhering to SMU policicsf?
(2) that the Professor no longer meet with students at his home: a requirement that the
Professor participate in a sexual harassment education program prior to the beginning of the
semester; and (4) the placing ofa copy ofthe sanctions letter in the Professor?s personnel
tile. The Committee also recommended that the Professor issue a written apology to
Complainant I and that the content of his class be monitored for three years.

 

 

 

 

in (ml?ll the SMU President informed Complainant I that he was ?not persuaded that the
conduct of [the Professor] described in this report constitutes a violation of SMU Policy 
however, he stated that he found the conduct to be ?objectionable and unprofessional" and
directed the Dean oftheo take appropriate corrective action to remedy the
situation. The President informed OCR that in making this decision, he reviewed the

ommittees report and met with the Title IX Coordinator and Vice President of Legal Affairs to
discuss the report and the applicable Title IX legal standard.

 

Page 12 Dr. R. Gerald Turner

 

. (bit?) (bit?) (mono) . . . . .
Later to the Dean intormed the Professor that he was tmposmg the
sanctions recommended by the Committee. with the exception of the having the Professor issue a

formal written apology to Complainant and monitoring the content of the Profess {gnmm
sessions for three years.3 Complainant was not informed of the steps taken by thej

 

 

 

 

 

OCR Complaint 06?13?2081

During the course of investigation of complaint Hod 1?2126. OCR Dallas opened a
second complaint against SMU ((16-13-2081) in March 2013. in which a tbrmer SMU employee
(Complainant 2) alleged that SMU has a pattern and practice of condoning sexual harassment of
and therefore sex discrimination against its female students and of retaliating against anyone who
attempts to rectify the situationfJ Complainant 2 stated that she believed SM had a pattern of
not responding appropriately to complaints of sexual harassment. citing to Clery Act data. news
reports about campus sexual assaults. and other anecdotal information about sexual harassment
ofcolleagues and students by a co-worker that Complainant 2 reported to SMU and about a
student not knowing how to report sexual assault to campus officials. OCR's investigation
revealed that investigation ofthc sexual harassment reported by Complainant 2 did not
substantiate that the harassment had occurred. OCR considered the other provided
by the Complainant as part of its investigation ofthe University's responses to sexual harassment
and sexual assault complaints and reports.

OCR Complaint 06-13-2083

OCR opened a third complaint against SMU {06-13-2088) in April 2013. in which an SMU
student (Complainant 3) alleged that SMU discriminated against him on the basis of sex when
the University failed to appropriately respond after he notified the University that he had been
sexually assaulted and that the University also failed to protect him from the retaliatory actions
ofthc alleged perpetrator?s friends and associates. During the school year.
Complainant 3 was aat SMU and a member ofa University program.
Complainant 3 alleged that in the earlv morning of he was sexually
assaulted on campus by student (Student 2).

OCR's investigation revealed that on Ilbllillcl Complainant 3 reported the sexual
assault to the SMU Police Department and also reported the sexual assault to an SMU staff

member who encouraged him to report the sexual assault to the Associate Provost and also
informed the Associate Provost (who oversees the scholarship program) of Complainant 3?s
report. investigation showed that after receiving notice ofthe alleged sexual assault, the
Associate Provost informed the Dean of Student Life. the Chief of Police and the Provost. The
Associate Provost stated that she did not inform the Title IX Coordinator and believed the Dean
of Student Life was designated as an Assistant Title IX Coordinator. The evidence indicates that

 

 

5 OCR notes that when a recipient works to address sex harassment. it must respect the free?Speech tight?- Of faculty.
Title IX does not regulate the content ofspeech protected under the US. Constitution.

Complainant 2 also alleged to OCR that. as a result of her complaint to SMU about alleged sexual harasmnent. she
was retaliated against I. Complainant 2?s retaliation allegation was

included in a lawsuit she filed Iibl  Aecordinglv - ause OCR had not investigated or made any


compliance determinations regarding the retaliation as of . OCR closed this allegation.

 

Page  3 Dr. R. Gerald Turner

the Dean ofStudent Life also met with Complainant 3 after she was made aware ofthe alleged
sexual assault.

SMU officials informed OCR that the SMU Police Department conducted the investigation into
Complainant 3?s sexual assault allegations and based on the evidence obtained. arrested Student
2 Complainant 3 informed OCR that he was not provided information
from the SMU Police Department concerning his Title IX rights and felt that he was encouraged
by University officials to only use the student conduct process and not the criminal justice
system.

 

 

The hiefof Police stated that during the investigation he worked with the Dean of Student
Life?s office because that office issues no?contact letters. moves housing. changes classes. etc.
The Dean of Student Life informed OCR that she was not provided a copy ofthe police report
but was provided a written summary. She also stated that she knew when the investigation
started and ended but did not recall receiving any specifics from the police about the
investigation. The Chiefof Police further stated that the Title IX Coordinator receives the same
briefing and that he would ?eventually? share the investigation with the Title IX Coordinator ifit
does not interfere with the criminal investigation and the district attorney was not pursuing
prosecution. However. evidence reveals that although the District Attorney dropped the charges,
the Chiefof Police did not give the Title IX Coordinator a copy of the police report.

The University responded to the initial report ofthe alleged sexual assault by issuing an interim
suspension for Student 2 (three days after the incident) and by referring Complainant 3 to the

 

 

 

niversity?s counseling services, advising Complainant 3?s (bitiitcl 
[tblti?ttCl having the SMU Chaplain and Chief of Police speak to

 

members of Student 2?s libliflicl  notitying Complainant 3?s professors that he would be unable
to take exams or complete coursework. issuing Student 2 a "No Contact Order." changing
Complainant 3?s housing as he requested and having follow-up meetings with the Associate
Provost and ompiainant 3 to verify that his professors were accommodating him and to check-
in on Complainant 3?s well-being. The University did not conduct its own investigation of
Complainant 3?s sexual assault allegation.

 

Complainant 3 informed OCR that after I. incident he was subjected to
retaliation by students other than Student 2. Com ilainant 3 stated that a group of male students
asked him and his friends. ?Did you know that rapes guys??", and stated that Student
2?s {bmm knew who Complainant 3 was and that they wanted to ?beat the shit out of" him.
Complainant 3 stated that members would smile at him in the cafeteria. furrow their
brows in an exaggerated way, yell across the cafeteria "Hey. Com lainant and ?Look it's
[Complainant and test him invitations to come to the Complainant 3 stated that he
overheard his saying that he believed Complainant 3 was the victim in the crime alert,
that his said to him. ?come here. you need a hug." and that his also sent him
a picture ofa shirtless guy with the caption. ?Hi. [Complainant Complainant 3 also stated
that after he changed housing, he received phone calls late at night where someone would call
and then hang up. and that someone would knock on his window or door and run away.
Complainant 3 did not provide OCR with the names ofany witnesses to these incidents: however
he stated that he informed the Associate Provost and Of?cer I ofthese incidents.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Page I4 Dr. R. Gerald Turner

SMU confirmed that Complainant 3 had reported these incidents and the Associate Provost and
Of?cer I advised Complainant 3 to contact the police dispatch if he felt unsa Th Associate
Provost stated to OCR. that Student 2 was ?well-liked" and ?power?d in the Elam system? and
that Complainant 3 ?was not wrong to think that [Student 2] could cause people to dislike him."
Of?cer I said that Complainant 3 was unable to provide speci?c details about the incidents and
that there were no direct threats to Complainant 3 but Complainant 3 ?perceived a lot of threats."
The Title IX Coordinator informed OCR that she was aware that Complainant 3 was concerned
about Student 2?s friends and Ilbllillcl I  but she believed the police and the Associate
Provost were providing Comlainant 3 support. She further con?rmed that the University
Chaplain spoke with the involved. However. the University did not investigate any of
Complainant 3?s concerns regarding retaliatory harassment by Student 25 I Ior
friends.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Both Complainant 3 and Studert 2 withdrew from the Universitv. Com )lainant 3 submitted his
withdrawal to the University in mimic) . On . Student 2 was indicted
by a grandjury on sexual assault charges relating to tie incident Invoivtng Com )lainant 3. On
. the Dean ofStudent Life sent a letter to Student 2 following indictment
and confirmed that the interim suspension and the terms of the Criminal Trespass Warning
remained in effect until ?the matter is resolved." The District Attorney later dropped the charges
against Student 2. The Dean of Student Life and Vice President ofStudent Affairs stated that
Student 2 would be required to rc-apply to return to the University and would be required to
include a written statement and be interviewed by the Dean of Admissions. Dean of Student Life,
and Chiefof Police to determine ?tness to return to the University.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Additional Incidents of Sexual Harassment, Sexual Assault. and Gender Harassment

According to the Clery Act statistics outlined in the Department of Education. Of?ce of
Postsecondary Education?s Campus Safety and Security Data Analysis CuttitU 'l?ool. SMU
reported one sex off forcible in two sexual offenses forcible in  and five sexual

offenses forcible in{ on its Main Campus.

 

 

OCR reviewed the fifty complaint ?les SMU produced in response to OCRs request for all
sexual and gender harassment and sexual assault complaints or grievances ?led by current or
former students during the 2009-2010. 2010-201 1. and 201 1-2012 school years:

I 15 of the complaints involved allegations ofsexual assault or sexual violence:

a of the complaints involved an allegation of gender harassment:

I 22 ofthe complaints involved allegations of peer-on-peer harassment:

a 16 of the complaints involved allegations concerning harassment by faculty or staff:

0 22 ofthe complaints had some SMU police im-tolvement; and

12 ofthe complaints resulted in a hearing through the University?s grievance procedure.

OCR observed that some of the files included a "Complaint! Inquiry Record Form." which
identi?ed who filed the complaint. the basis. the individuals involved. and the disposition. Only
twelve of the ?fty ?les included these forms. When OCR inquired as to the purpose fthis form,

Page 15 Dr. R. Gerald Turner

the Associate General Counsel informed OCR that the Title IX Coordinator developed the form
to be used in ail complaint investigations; however, OCR found that the form was not
consistently used. When the ?le included the form. it was often incomplete. In reviewing the
complaints and grievances provided by SMU. OCR observed that the files generally did not
include any written complaints or other documents initiating an investigation. In addition, several
complaint ?les were incomplete (cg. only a single document was included in the file).

The files further revealed that when SMU conducted an investigation, the University did not
routinely issue specific findings or maintain witness statements or notes of conversations. Many
?les did not Show that complainants were offered interim remedies in all cases. In several
instances involving both complaints against students and against facultyistaff. the ?les did not
indicate that the complaining party was noti?ed of the disposition. In one case. when the
University received a report from a student that had a "quid pro quo? relationship with a
professor. the University took steps to remove the professor from campus: however. the
investigative file did not provide any information to indicate whether the student was noti?ed of
the disposition or provided any individual remedies. such as counseling or academic support.
Further. OCR observed that in several situations ofstudent-on-student harassment. 
response appeared to be limited to talking to the students. referring the students to counseling
services, andior issuing no-contact orders. unless the student ?led a complaint with the
University Conduct Board.

D. SMU Tusk Force on Sexuoi Misconduct Poiicies und Procedures

On September 28. 2012. the SMU President created the Task Force on Sexual Misconduct
Policies and Procedures to ?re-examine the University's procedures and policies related to sexual
misconduct." The twenty members ofthe Task Force included the Title IX Coordinator.
representatives from Student Affairs and Residence Life. the Director of Counseling. faculty
members. undergraduate and graduate students. alumni. SMU trustees. community leaders. and
representatives from the Dallas County District Attorney?s of?ce. The Task Force invited
feedback from sexual misconduct complainants and respondents who had cases reviewed
through the University student conduct process. as well as from campus and external
constituents. including law enforcement and community resource agencies. During meetings. the
Task Force heard from a variety ofstudents and alumni regarding their perspectives and
concerns about the issues of sexual assault and harassment on campus.

The Task Force issued its report and recommendations on April 22. 2013. The Task Force found
that SMU has a strong commitment to and procedures for helping students report sexual
misconduct and obtain needed assistance and resources in dealing with issues of sexual
misconduct. The Report included 41 recommendations concerning the following categories:
sesuoi misconduct reporting. marketing and cotntnunicution. Titie 1X poiicies. the student
conduct process and Student Corie ofC'onciuct. and education and training.

The Task Force?s recommendations regarding sexqu reporting asked the University
to provide clear information about internal and external support services available to the campus
community in the event o?fsexual misconduct. The Task Force further recommended that the
University explicitly define con?dential and non-con?dential campus resources and inform
students that any sexual misconduct reported to a non-con?dential resource must be referred to

Page 16 Dr. R. Gerald Turner

the Title IX Coordinator. The recommendations included permitting anonymous reporting of
sexual misconduct and allowing students to request anonymity. In addition. the Task Force
recommended encouraging complainants to undergo a health assessment by a Sexual Assault
Nurse Examiner encouraging students to report sexual misconduct to the SMU Police
Department or other law enforcement agency; funding after-hours counselors and/or publicizing
the Dallas Area Rape Crisis Center; enSuring that adequate resources are provided to the SMU
Health Center for specially trained and dedicated sexual assault counselors and to the SMU
Police Department for specialized training for police officers; creating a pocket-sized card [or all
SMU employees with information about how to support students who report sexual misconduct;
and creating a checklist for staff members who may meet with a student to outline their rights
and the resources available. Similarly, the Task Force?s recommendations concerning tnarketingr
and communication recommended the University develop a comprehensive print and online
publication that addresses sexual misconduct prevention and resources and develop an
outreachtmarketing team through the Health Education Of?ce to coordinate further efforts to
publicize information on campus resources and support.

The Task Forces recommendations regarding the University's Title Policies recommended
that Interim University Policy become permanent policy. the University enhance its efforts
to educate students about the Title IX Coordinator?s role. and the University ensure that neither
the Title IX Coordinator nor the Deputy Title IX Coordinators directly oversee the student
conduct process. With regard to the student conduct process. the Task Force recommended that
the language in the Student Code of Conduct preamble be more accessible and conversational;
the SMU sexual misconduct policy be a separate section ofthe Student Code ofConduet: the
Student Code of Conduct indicate that amnesty for alcohol and drug violations may be extended
to students in sexual misconduct cases; the policy affirm that the University may serve as the
complainant in the conduct process: the University review the definition in other
conduct codes and make appropriate changes; and the sexual misconduct policy forbid retaliation
against the complainant and others involved in the reporting. Further, the Task Force
recommended the University take clear steps to address the possibility of retaliation and
adjudicate any retaliatory behavior immediately. The Task Force recommended ensuring that
students understand the difference between pursuing a sexual misconduct case through the
University conduct process and through a criminal process and their option to pursue both or
either process. With regard to hearing boards. the Task Force recommended that the University
continue to use hearing boards. and the complainant and the respondent be treated fairly
throughout the process. The Task Force further recommended that the University should
continue to use the multidisciplinary teams currently in place to determine whether the
respondent should be removed from campus and whether any temporary action should be taken
to protect the complainant prior to the formal disciplinary hearing.

With regard to accoantat?n?tity. the Task Force recommended mobilizing its internal auditing
department to monitor compliance with Title IX and OCR's Dear Letter and
establishing regular communication between the University and the District Attorney's of?ce.
local law enforcement agencies. and local service providers. In education and training. the Task
Force recommended the student body adopt a new SMU Values Statement: the Residential
Commons leadership devel0p a mandatory citizenship program for ?rst year students: the
University review and evaluate all current sexual misconduct prevention education and training

Page Dr. R. Gerald Tamer

programs; the student leaders? training emphasize their importance as role models in Fostering
positive values and developing a culture that does not tolerate sexual misconduct; the definitions
of consent. sexual misconduct and sexual assault be reviewed with incoming students during
orientation and during other training programs: the University initiate mentorship programs; the
University develop a bystander intervention program; and the University educate parents of
incoming students.

On May 6. 2013. the SMU President accepted all ot?the Task Force?s recommendations. The
Task Force Report and the President?s acceptance ofthe recommendations are both published on
the University?s website.7

E. Revised Grievance Pi'ocert'iires

During the course of investigation, SMU revised its Title IX grievance procedures.
University Policy 2.5.1. interim This Horus-stricter. replaced the previous policy (Policy 2.5)
and became effective January 13. 2013.

SMU provided notice to all students and employees of the revised grievance procedures by
publishing University Policy 2.5.1 on its website.? The policy is also available on the Of?ce of
Institutional Access and Equity website. under the Policies and Procedures subheadingq In
addition. SMU maintains a page on its website entitled. Live Rexponsir??y i-tenitii Stifer
Information div Resources. which includes specific information concerning sexual misconduct.
such as a posterfhandout about resources for victims of sexual assault. a link to the revised

policies. and the contact infonnation for the Title IX Coordinator.m

University Policy 2.5.1 addresses Title IX harassment complaints. including gender~based
harassment and sexual assaultisexual violence complaints and applies to complaints alleging
discrimination or harassment carried out by students. staff. liteulty. applicants. all other members
ofthe SMU community. and visitors participating in the educational activities or programs of the
University. The policy provides notice concerning where to file a complaint. and identi?es the
Title IX Coordinator and four Deputy Title IX Coordinators. along with their names. titles. office
addresses. telephone numbers. fax numbers. and email addresses.

University Policy 2.5.1 allows both the complainant and respondent timely access to information
used and presented at the hearing: requires that all records ofTitle IX. harassment complaints and
the investigation and internal adjudication be maintained by the Office of institutional Access
and Equity: includes assurances that the University will take steps to prevent recurrence of
harassment and to correct its discriminatory effects. if appropriate; and includes a range of
potential remedies and sanctions. The procedures include definitions of?gender?based
harassment." ?sex discrimination." ?sexual harassment." and ?sexual violence." including a non?
exhaustive list of examples of impermissible harassment. Further. the procedures address

 

Responsihh 

a l1 slit-1.51m: . edit-"I A ic iesand Proced tires? 3:5: 1, 3152 1130 




 

Page IS Dr. R. Gerald Turner

con?dentiality and notify the complainant that the University will investigate allegations of
sexual harassment but that a desire for anonymity may hinder the University?s investigation of
the complaint.

Pursuant to the revised grievance procedures. the complaint must be reported within 180
calendar days of the date ofthe act or if the person believes that he or she is being subjected to
recurring instances or patterns of Title IX harassment, within 30 days of the date ofthe last
incident. Further. the Title IX Coordinator must interview the complainant and respondent
separately within 10 days of receipt ofthe complaint. conclude her investigation within 20 days
of receipt of the complaint, and prepare a written report within 10 days of the conclusion of the
investigation. For complaints filed against students, within 10 days of receiving this request, the
Of?ce of the Dean of Student Life must refer the complaint to the University Conduct Review
Process. The procedures provide timeframes for providing information to the complainant and
respondent throughout the hearing; however, the procedures do not indicate that the hearing will
be concluded within a certain period of time.

The revised procedures also prohibit retaliation; offer the complainant and respondent equal
opportunity to present witnesses and other evidence; use a preponderance of the evidence
standard it is more likely than not that sexual harassment or violence occurred); allow the
investigation to continue even if a criminal investigation or proceeding is pending; provide that
the University may take interim steps to protect the students involved; provide for Title IX
training for all individuals involved in the hearing process; permit the presence of attorneys or
representatives for the complainant and respondent at a hearing; provide for written notice ofthe
outcome to the complainant and respondent; and include an appeal procedure for both parties.
The procedures address the ?sequencing oferiminal investigations of allegations ot?sesual
violence? and provide that the complainant may simultaneously pursue a criminal complaint with
the appropriate law enforcement agency and file a complaint for Title lX harassment with the
Title IX Coordinator.

The procedures provide that the ?nal decision is subject to the discretionary review ofthc
University President. The President?s review includes the power to ?take any action deemed
appropriate, including reversing, amending. or remanding with instructions? and the power of
review is ?not limited in any way-x"

The procedures do not include specific notice that the parties may end the informal process and
begin the formal process at any time- do not speci?cally address con?icts of interest. and do not
speci?cally disallow evidence of past relationships.

F. Training and Outreach

The Office of Institutional Access and Equity offers two online training tutorials concerning
sexual harassment: Preventing Sexual Tutoriui and Fret-curing l-lt?orkpiuee
Tutorial. Both trainings are available to faculty. staff. students and members of
the public with separate links for individuals to select "faculty," ?supervisory.? ?non-
supervisory." ?student,? or "guest." The Preventing Sexual Harassment Tutorial includes
training for ?rst-time users and a refresher course. The Title IX Coordinator informed OCR that

Page l9 Dr. R. Gerald Turner

She is responsible for the online and in-pcrson training programs on discrimination lawsrequires that all new employees complete this training.

In addition, the University provides training on sexual misconduct to all incoming students
during its new student orientation program. The University currently provides training on sexual
misconduct for leaders of all student ornanizations and. lbllowing Complainant 3's notice of the
alleged sexual assault during thesemester. a staff member from legal affairs and a staff
member from student affairs visited all of the fraternities and sororities on campus and discussed
harassment and provided examples of prohibited conduct. The SMU Police Department
developed a pamphlet to provide to individuals reporting sexual assault or sexual violence, which
includes information about their rights under Title IX and resources for counseling and other
services.

As noted above, the University established a website, Live Responsibly. Health Sofer
[nfbr-rirotfon cf: Resources, which provides a link to University Policy 2.5.1; contact information
for campus resources, such as the SMU Police. the Title 1X Coordinator, the Of?ce of
Services for Women and Gender Issues, Counseling and Services, the
Chaplain?s Of?ce. the Office of Institutional Access and Equity. the Of?ce of the Dean of
Student Life, the Dallas Area Rape Crisis Center, and a description ofthe services each provides;
contact information for ?Giddy-Up," which offers free rides on campus from 9:00 pm. 3:00
and Rides," which provides service to campus with an SMU ID: information on
SMU's Sexual Harassment Assault and Rape Prevention Program (SHARP). which is designed
to help students, faculty and staff defend themselves against physical attacks and sexual assault;
and multiple pamphlets and posters on what to do in case of sexual assault.

On February 21, 2014, SMU announced the creation of the .ludgc Elmo 13. Hunter Legal Center
for Victims of Crimes Against Women at the SMU Dedman School of Law, which will assist
victims ol?domestic violence, sex traf?cking. and other crimes against women.

On March 4. 2014. SMU Counsel informed OCR that the Student Senate recently initiated a
?Not on My Campus? campaign against sexual assaults in the SMU Community. The student-led
movement asks students to sign a pledge to uphold five statements: l) drunken sex is not
consensual; (2) students will step up; students will speak out: students will not be
bystanders; and (5) students will not let friends become rape victims. In September 2014. SMU
joined a national campaign called ?It?s On Us," which asks all members ofthe university
community to take responsibility to prevent sexual assault and create an environment in which
sexual assault is unacceptable. On October 27', 2014. the SMU Student Senate sponsored an ?It's
On Us" signing day.


OCR concluded that the University did not provide a prompt and eqoitable response to

Complainant 1's complaint ofgender harassment. While SMU University Policy 2.5 1was in
piace at the time for complaints ofsexual harassment, the grievance procedures did not make any

 

 

See 

Page 20 Dr. R. Gerald 'l"urner

reference to gender-based harassment and were incomplete. as no policy was in place to conduct
a [brutal proceeding at the time Complainant I ?led her complaint. As a result. the complaint
processing was delayed approximately four months while the Faculty Committee drafted the new
procedures. Moreover, Complainant was not provided a copy ofthese procedures or informed
that the Committee?s decision was only a recommendation to the University President and not a
final University decision. OCR notes that SMU ultimately responded to Complainant 1?s
complaint. held a hearing where both parties were al lowed to present evidence. and informed
both Complainant and the respondent in writing of the outcome 0 the hearing and the
President?s review. OCR also noted that the University took several remedial actions in response
to Complainant l?s complaint. including rcquirin Title IX sexual harassment training for the
Professor and placing a letter of reprini' (bl nployment file; however. Complainant was
not noti?ed of the actions taken by OCR further determined that the evidence
did not support a conclusion that Complainant lwas subjected to a gender-based hostile
environment. The Professor's comments. while offensive to Complainant and ?objectionable
and unprofessional" in the University's view. were not sufficiently serious to limit Complainant
1's ability to participate in or benefit from the University's education program.

 

For Complainant 3. the SMU police investigated the assault and arrested Student 2. but
the University did not conduct a separate investigation under Title IX and did not make any
determination as to whether Complainant 3 was subjected to a sexually hostile environment.
OCR found that the University removed and suspended Student 2 from campus and issued a
no-contact letter within three days of receiving notice ofthe alleged harassment; offered
Complainant 3 counseling and a housing change as requested: notified Complainant 3?s
profemors and requested leniency regarding his assignments: and later granted Complainant 3?s
request for a withdrawal. However. the evidence established that Complainant 3 reported to
SMU on multiple occasions that other students were harassing him with threatening and taunting
comments. text messages. phone calls and visits to his room. and that the University did not
investigate these concerns and instead advised Complainant 3 to contact the police if he felt
concerned for his safety. OCR determined that the University did not provide a prompt and
equitable response to Complainant 3?s complaint under Title IX and that there was sullicient
evidence to support a conclusion that Complainant 3 was subjected to a sexually hostile
environment as a result ofthe sexual assault and that he continued to be subjected to a sexually
hostile environment as a result of the University's inadequate response to his reports of
retaliatory harassment.

Additionally. in reviewing handling of other complaints ?led under the former grievance
procedure in the 2009-2010. 2010-201 1 and 2011-2012 academic years. OCR observed that the
tile documentation did not support that the University provided prompt and equitable responses
to the harassment complaints and reports. Many complaint liles were incomplete. lacking
information about whether and how the University responded to the complaints and reports. The
files generally did not include the written complaint or other documents initiating an
investigation. Files did not include the University?s speci?c findings or indicate that the
Unit-ersity provided notice ofthe outcome of its investigation to both parties or offered interim
remedies to complainants. Files also lacked documentation witness statements or interview
notes.

Page 21 Dr. R. Gerald Turner

OCR also determined that neither former University Policy 2.5 nor revised interim University
Policy 2.5.1 conform to Title IX requirements. While SMU had grievance procedures for
complaints of sexual harassment in University Policy 2.5, OCR found that the grievance
procedures did not make any reference to gender-based harassment or other forms of sex
discrimination. In addition, the procedures were incomplete. as no policy was in place to conduct
a formal proceeding at the time Complainant ?led her complaint.

OCR concluded that the University?s current grievance procedures (Policy 2.5. I address Title
IX harassment complaints, including gender-based harassment and sexual assault/sexual violence
complaints. University Policy 2.5.1 provides for many ol? the procedures outlined in Dear
(.lo?erignc Letter to ensure the grievance procedures are prompt and equitable. Speci?cally, the
policy provides notice to students and employees ot?the procedures and where complaints may
be ?led, applies to harassment carried out by employees. students or third parties. provides for
written notice to the patties of the outcome ofthe complaint and any appeal. provides adequate
definitions of sexual harassment. prohibits retaliation. and sets the evidentiary standard as
preponderance of the evidence. However. University Policy gives the President unrestricted
authority to review all student conduct decisions, without any reference to Title IX or assurances
that the review will comply with Title IX. In addition, the procedures do not provide reasonably
designated timcframes for the appeal process, which is a major stage in the complaint process, or
include speci?c notice that the parties may end the informal process and begin the formal
process at any time. The procedures also do not speci?cally address con?icts ol'interest or
specifically disallow evidence of past relationships.

Based on the above, OCR concluded that that SMU did not provide prompt and equitable
responses to gender-based harassment and sexual harassmenti?scxual violence complaints. reports
and/or other incidents of which it had notice, and thereby SMU failed to comply with the Title
IX regulation, at 34 CPR.  106.9(a) and 106.31.

OCR also found that while SMU has designated an employee. the Associate Vice President for
Access and Equity, as its Title IX Coordinator, the University?s notice of nondiscrimination does
not include contact information for its Title IX Coordinator. 'l'hus. OCR concluded that the
University failed to properly notify students and employees ot?the Title IX Coordinator pursuant
to 34 C.F.R. 

As noted above, the University requested to resolve these complaint investigations with a
voluntary resolution agreement. The provisions of the resolution agreement are aligned with the
complaint allegations, the information obtained during the investigation. and are consistent with
applicable regulations.

Under the terms ofthe enclosed voluntary Agreement, the University will:

- Revise and, following OCR review and approval. implement and publicize its Title IX
grievance procedures related to sex discrimination, including sexual harassment. gender
harassment. and sexual violence. to comply with Title IX. The niversity's revisions will
clearly state the applicable timetiames for investigation and appeal ot?scxual harassment
complaints. require that the President?s review of any decisions comply with Title IX and

Page 22 Dr. R. Gerald Turner

make clear that parties are aware that they may end informal resolution and proceed to a
formal proceeding at any time;

I Notify students and employees ofthe University?s Title IX Coordinators and their contact
information in its nondiscrimination notice, as well as in other publications and notices;

I Develop and implement a comprehensive system for tracking reports, investigations,
interim measures, and resolutions that may constitute sexual or gender~hased harassment;

I Develop and implement a procedure for sharing information between the SMU Police
Department and the Title IX Coordinator;

I Implement the Task Force Recommendations as specified and report to OCR on their
ongoing in-tpiementation;12

Train staff and students on the revised University policies and procedures to ensure that
the University community understands the University?s obligations under Title IX and
provide instruction on recognizing and appropriately addressing allegations and
complaints ofsex discrimination, including an explanation ofthe differences between
sexual harassment, gender harassment, and sexual assault:

I Develop additional resources for students to advise them of their rights pursuant to Title
1X, including a new brochure for students that will contain an explanation about what
constitutes sex discrimination and gender discrimination, including harassment. and
information regarding the University?s grievance procedures;

I Conduct annual climate assessments of the effectiveness of steps taken pursuant to this
Agreement. including the Task Force Recommendations incorporated into the
Agreement, and use the information gathered during these climate checks to inform
future proactive steps to be taken by the University to provide for a safe and supportive
educational environment;

I Review the sexual harassmentfviolenee complaints filed and reports made of sexual
harassmentx?violence during and since academic year 2012?2013 to determine whether the
University investigated each complaint or report and equitably and. following
OCR review and approval of the niversity?s proposed response, take action to address
any problems identified in the manner in which these complaints were handled: and.

Provi to Complainant 3 reimbursement for all Universitv-related expenses for the

fall?) emester and counseling expenses incurred Ithrough the

date of execution of the Resolution Agreement.

 

 

 

 

The University entered into the Agreement on November 16, 2014. OCR will monitor
implementation ofthe Agreement. If the University fails to implement the Agreement, OCR may
initiate administrative enforcement or judicial proceedings to enforce the specific terms and
obligations of the Agreement. Before initiating administrative enforcement (34 CPR. 100.9,
100.10), orjudicial proceedings to enforce the Agreement. OCR shall give the University written
notice ofthe alleged breach and a minimum of sixty (60) calendar days to cure the alleged
breach.

 

12 The Agreement does not require implementation ofall ofthe Task Force Reconunemiations. For example, the
Task Force recommended that students continue to serve on hearing hoards, including for sexual misconduct cases.
Although Title does not dictate the membership ofa hearing board, OCR discourages schools from allowing
students to serve on hearing boards in cases involving allegations ol'scxual violence. Sec
ti 21-20 i dild?litle-ixpd f.

Page 23 Dr. R. Gerald Turner

This concludes investigation of the complaint and should not be interpreted to address the
University's compliance with any other regulatory provision or to address any issues other than
those addressed in this letter. The complainants may ?le a private suit in Federal court whether
or not OCR ?nds a violation.

This letter sets Forth OCRVs determination in an individual 0C case. This letter is not a formal
statement of OCR policy and should not be relied upon. cited. or construed as such. 
formal policy statements are approved by a duly authorized OCR of?cial and made available to
the public.

Please be advised that the University may not harass. coerce. intimidate, or discriminate against
any individual because he or she has ?led a complaint or participated in the complaint resolution
process. ll?this happens. the harmed individual may ?le a complaint alleging such treatment. A
complainant may have the right to ?le a private suit in Federal court. whether or not OCR ?nds a
violation.

Under the Freedom of Information Act. it may be necessary to release this document and related
correspondence and records upon request. In the event that OCR receives such a request. we will
seek to protect. to the extent provided by law. personally identi?able information. which. if
released. could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal
privacy.

We appreciate the University?s cooperation during the preliminary investigation and resolution
of the complaints. If you have any questions about this letter or resolution this case.
please contact Emily Babb. the attorney assigned to the complaint. at or Justin
T. Evans. Supervisory Attorney. at We look [orward to receiving the

University?s monitoring report by March 2. 20} 5.

Sincerely.

Taylor I). August
Regional Director

VOLUNTARY RESOLUTION AGREEMENT

Southern Methodist University
OCR Case Numbers 06112126, 06132081, and 06132088

The U.S. Department of Education, Of?ce for Civil Rights (OCR), Dallas Regional Of?ce initiated
case investigations with Southern Methodist University (SMU or University) on June 2, 20] 1,
March 8, 2013, and March 20, 2013, respectively, pursuant to Title IX of the Education
Amendments of 1972 (Title BC), 20 U.S.C. 1681 at seq. and its implementing regulation at 34
CPR. Part 106 (which prohibit discrimination based on sex in any education program or activity
receiving Federal ?nancial assistance). The complaint investigations examined the University?s
policies and procedures relating to gender harassment, sexual harassment, and sexual violence and
the University?s implementation of those policies and procedures.

This Agreement has been entered into voluntarily and does not constitute an admission by the
University that it has discriminated or failed to comply with Title or its implementing regulation
at 34 CPR. Part 106 or OCR Title IX Guidance, or otherwise committed any error, omission, or
wrongdoing regarding the complainants in OCR Case Nos. 06112126, 06132081, and 06132088,
SMU expressly denies any and all fault or liability arising under any applicable Federal, state, or
local law, and it expressly reserves any and all rights, defenses, and causes of action pertaining in
any way to the allegations set forth in the three subject complaints. OCR recognizes that SMU has
entered into this Agreement voluntarily, has cooperated with OCR in all three cases, has engaged in
ongoing and proactive efforts to enhance the effectiveness of its policies and procedures, and has
expanded educational and programming initiatives.

investigation found that SMU has implemented and commits to maintaining a number of
policies and procedures: to ensure that students enrolled in the University are not subjected to a
hostile environment on the basis of sex; (ii) to investigate all incidents of sexual
harassment of which it has notice (hereinafter, the term ?sexual harassment? will include sexual
assault, sexual violence, sexual misconduct and any other harassment based on sex); to take
appropriate disciplinary action against students, faculty, and staff who violate the University?s
policies and procedures addressing sexual harassment; and (iv) to take prompt and effective
responsive action to end sexual harassment and prevent its recurrence, and where appropriate take
steps to remedy the etiiects of sexual harassment on the affected students.

On November 6, 2014, the Complainant in Case No. 06132081 noti?ed OCR of the Complainant?s
withdrawal of all complaints against SMU.

During the course of investigation, the SMU President established the SMU Task Force
on Sexual Misconduct Policies and Procedures (Task Force) to ?re-examine the University?s
procedures and policies relating to sexual Among the 20 members of the Task
Force were external experts, including a representative of the Dallas County District Attorney?s
Of?ce and the executive director of the Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) Initiative, as
well as SMU Trustees, faculty, students, and staff. During their 12 meetings and additional small
group meetings, the Task Force reviewed more than 45 benchmarking reports, including student
conduct codes and task force reports from other universities and government agencies.

Page 2 ?Southern Methodist University Voluntary Resolution Agreement

The Task Force issued its 41 receinmendations on April 22, 2013, and the President accepted all
of the recommendations on May 8, 2013. The University has implemented most of the
recommendations, continues with that process, and remains strongly committed to full
implementation. The Task Force speci?cally reaf?rmed ?the University?s ongoing commitment
to respond in a timely manner when a sexual misconduct incident has been reported to
University personnei." (Recommendation 12). The Task Force also af?rmed existing
Interim Title IX Harassment Policy delineating the University?s process for investigating
sexual harassment, including sexual misconduct, in accordance with the requirements of Title EX
and the implementing provisions of the Dear Colleague Letter? and recommended that ?interim
Poiicy 2.5.1 become a permanent SMU policy as soon as the Task Force recommendations have
been reviewed and approved by appropriate University personnel.? (Recommendation Item 14).
The Task Force stated that must do all that it can to ensure compliance with the
requirements of Title IX and the Dear Colleague Letter?" (Recommendation Item 32}. This
Agreement incorporates and includes the following Task Force recommendations set forth, and
revised, below as requirements in this Agreement:

No later than sixty (60) calendar days after January 1, 2015, SMU will:

Sexual Misconduct Reporting

1) Provide ?clear information regarding both internal and external support services
available to the campus community in the event of sexual misconduct, regardless of
which of?ce initially receives a sexual misconduct report.? (Recommendation Item

1).

2) Encourage complainants ?to undergo a health assessment offered by Texas Health
Presbyterian Hospital ofDallas? Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) program or
a comparable program as soon as possible.? (Recommendation Item 2).

3) Encourage students ?to report sexual misconduct to SMUPD Police
Department] or other law enforcement agencies, depending upon where the alleged
misconduct occurred.? SMU will inform students ?that a police report does not
automatically lead to charges being ?led or criminal prosecution, and ?that even if
they talk with the police, they still wiil have some input about the case.? SMU will
also emphasize at the same time, ?that it is important to report the incident to the
police as soon as possible so that police can collect evidence and other information
that may be helpfui in building a criminal case, even if the student decides to wait
until a later date to ?le charges." (Recommendation Item 3).

4) Explicitly define and non-con?dential campus resources.?
?Confidential resources include SMU Counseling and Services and the
SMU Chaplain?s Office. Other campus resources including the Of?ce of the Dean

 

Dear Colleague Letter on student-on-studcnt sexual harassment and sexual violence,

l04pdf. See also Questions and Answers on Title IX
and Sexual Violence, I?-?itle-ixpd f.

Page 3 ?Southern Methodist University Voluntary Resolution Agreement

5)

6)

7)

3)

9)

of Student Life and SMU Women?s Center are required to notify Title IX
Coordinator of sexual misconduct reports. Health and Safety website,
smu.edufliveresponsibly, designates confidential and non-cen?dential resources.?
SMU will develop a ?con?dentiality chart? and include it in all sexual misconduct
information materials. The chart will delineate ?where students can expect
con?dential assistance and where their report of an incident must be reported or
escalated and to whom it will be reported or escalated." (Recommendation Item 4).

Ensure that information related to sexual misconduct reporting informs students that
any sexual misconduct reported to a non-confidential resource must be referred to the
SMU Title IX Coordinator. (Reeommendation Item 5).

Ensure that complainants have the ability to anonymously report a sexual misconduct
incident. (Recommendation Item 6).

Ensure that complainants can request anonymity. Requests ?for anonymity by a
student who is informally reporting an incidence of sexual misconduct to a faculty or
staff member [will] be reSpected if the student does not consent to the release of
personally identi?able information. In these cases, the University employee will
report the details ofthe sexual misconduct incident to the Title IX Coordinator as they
have been disclosed, excluding, the name of the complainant. The name of the
complainant will be released by the person who received the initial report only when
deemed absolutely necessary by the Title IX Coordinator after preliminary
investigation of the details released.? The University will ?apply any remedies that
can be effective within the bounds of complainant privacy, and that it breach
complainant privacy only when a comprehensive investigation and? or full formal
resolution are required to prevent the possible occurrence of another sexual
misconduct incident.? (Recommendation Item 

?[F]und after-hours counselors and/or publicize the Dallas Area Rape Crisis Center
(DARCC) 24?hour rape crisis hotline across campus so that complainants will have
con?dential resources available at all hours.? (Recommendation Item 8).

?[E]nsure that adequate resources are provided to the SMU Health Center for
specially trained and dedicated sexual assault counselors and to SMUPD for
specialized training for police of?cers.? (Recommendation Item 9).

10) Develop an ?instruction document, such as a pocketwsized card? ?for all SMU

employees with information about how to support students who report sexual
misconduct." These instructions will ?be formulated in consultation with campus and
community experts and law enforcement agencies? and will be ?available online and
included in employee training.? (Recommendation Item 10).

11)Develop a checklist ?for staff members who may meet with a student to more

formally review the sexual misconduct reporting process.? The checklist will
?outline the rights of complainants and respondents, and identify the resources

Page 4 ?Southeni Methodist University Voluntary Resolution Agreement

available to them as part of the University?s investigation of sexual misconduct.? The
Task Force recommended ?that this checklist be developed by the Dean of Student
Life Office and Title IX Coordinator in consultation with other campus offices as
appropriate. One side of the checklist might provide information for complainants and
the other side for respondents, so each is aware of the information provided to the
other.? (Recommendation Item 11).

12) As part of its ?ongoing commitment to respond in a timely manner when a sexual
misconduct incident has been reported to University personnel?, ensure that the
SMUPD continues to operate a 24?hour emergency line and that the. Counseling and
Services3 hotline, is available to students 24 hours a day. SMU will also
maintain a ?Bean on Call? procedure, whereby a Student Affairs staff members is
always available to police or other SMU staff when an emergency involving a student
occurs.? (Recommendation Item 12).

13) Will ?ensure the complainant is provided with the reasonable support and protection
necessary to continue her or his education while the sexual misconduct complaint is
investigated.? SMU will include language in the University's sexual misconduct
policy to ?af?rm that the complainant will be provided this support and
Item 13).

Title 1X Policies
14) (Recommendation Item 14 - described above).

15) ?(Enhance efforts to educate students about the role of the Title IX Coordinator in
response to incidents of sexual misconduct.? (Recommendation Item 15}.

16) Ensure that its Title IX Coordinators and Deputy Title IX Coordinators do ?not
directly oversee the student conduct process.?2 SMU noted that it already has
implemented this recommendation. (Recommendation Item 16).

Student Conduct Process and the Student Code of Conduct

Revise the language in the preamble to the Student Code of Conduct to make it ?more
accessible to students and re?ect a more conversational tone? and add de?nitions and
speci?c examples to the Code ?that will facilitate students? understanding of the
terms used." SMU will consider ?whether changes should be made in the
organization and language of code to make it more readable and easier to
understand.? (Recommendation Item 

18) Organize the Code so that the SMU sexual misconduct policy constitutes a separate
section of the broader Student Code of Conduct. (Recommendation Item 18).

 

2 SMU acknowledges that this recommendation does not contravene the Title 1X Coordinator?s assigned
responsibilities to oversee the University?s compliance with Title IX.

Page 5 ??Southern Methodist University Voluntary Resolution Agreement

19) Take speci?c steps to ensure that students are informed about ?the difference between
pursuing a sexual misconduct case through the University conduct process and
pursuing a criminal process. and their option to pursue both or either process.?
(Recommendation Item 19).

20) Ensure that the Student Code of Conduct uses the appropriate definitions and
explanation of ?consent.? Note that the Took Force recommended that SMU review
the conduct codes of other specific universities. This Resolution Agreement does not
require SMU to review those codes. but does require that the Code include
appropriate de?nitions and an explanation of consent. (Recommendation Item 20).

2] Permit hearing boards to ?continue to be included in the student conduct process for
sexual misconduct cases where their use is appropriate andtor at the complainant?s
request.? (Recommendation Item 21).

22) Recommendation item 22 not included in Resotntion Agreement.
23) Recommendation Item 23 not incinded in Resolution Agreement.

24) Ensure that the SMU sexual misconduct policy ?forbid[s] retaliation against the
complainant and others involved in the reporting ofa sexual misconduct incident in
clear language and []inciude examples? and that this aspect of the policy ?be strongly
emphasized in training related to the sexual misconduct policy." (Recommendation
Item 24).

25) Ensure that when an incident of sexual misconduct is reported, SMU takes ?clear
steps to address the possibility of retaliation and adjudicate any retaliatory behavior
immediately. University personnel who meet with complainants, respondents, and
other members of the student community must underscore the Univelsity's policy of
not tolerating retaliation and make it clear to all that such instances will be grounds
for a separate adj udication.? (Recommendation Item 25).

26) Add ?language to the Student Conduct Code indicating that it may be possible to
extend the amnesty policy for alcohol and drug violations to students in sexual
misconduct cases." (Recommendation Item 26).

Ensure that the complainant and the respondent are ?treated fairly throughout the
process. Any campus of?ce involved in responding to sexual misconduct incidents or
providing support to students involved in such incidents must be equally available to
both students.? Additionally, SMU will provide both the complainant and the
respondent with a ?student conduct liaison and counselor from Counseling and
services; both students should be encouraged to utilize both of these
resources.? (Recommendation Item 27).

Page 6 ?Southern Methodist University Voluntary Resoiution Agreement

28) Under the direction of the Vice President of Student Affairs, the University will ?use
the muitidisciplinary teams currently in piace including representatives from
SMUPD, Counseling and Services, the Dean of Student Life Office, the
University Chaplain?s Of?ce, Legal Af?lirs, Risk Management, and the Of?ce of the
Vice President for Student Affairs to determine whether a respondent should be
removed from campus, and where any other temporary action should be taken to
protect the complainant prior to a formal disciplinary hearing. SMU [will] extend
accommodations for all reasonable requests for the complainant?s education, housing,
and well-being. The Student Code of Conduct clearly states the University?s right to
take such action.? (Recommendation Item 28).

29) ?[A]ffirm in the sexual misconduct policy that the University may serve as the
complainant in the student conduct process.? (Recommendation Item 29).

Marketing and Communication

30) ?[D]eveiop a comprehensive print and online publication that addresses sexual
misconduct prevention and the availability of support resources. This publication
shouid contain information about resources similar to that included in Health
and Safety website, smu.edu/liveresponsibly.? (Recommendation Item 30).

31) [D]evelop an outreachfadvertising/marketing team through the Health Education
Of?ce that coordinates social conning, manages web information, and reaches out to
residence halts and other pecr-focused programs. Materials about campus and
community resources (such as SANE, DARCC, etc.) [will be]available in all
residence halls as well as in campus libraries, the Health Center, the Dedman Center
for Lifetime Sports, the Hughes?Trigg Student Center, and other areas of the campus
frequented regularly by students. Such materials might include posters on each ?oor,
in the restrooms and in elevators. Materials should also be posted that let victims of
sexual misconduct know theyr are not alone and to encourage them to call Counseling
and Services and other campus resources for support and information.?
The Task Force recommended that ?a peer education and peer advocate team be
developed to support these efforts.? (Recommendation Item 31).

Accountability

32) ?[M]ohilize its internal auditing department or another appropriate department to
monitor Title IX compliance. in addition, the departments charged with administering
the Speci?c recommendations in this Task Force report [will] evaluate the status of
implementation of the recommendations each year, and provide a progress report to
the president or his designee.? (Recommendation Item 32).

33) ?Establish reguiarly scheduled communication between University representatives
and the District Attomey?s Of?ce, local law enforcement agencies and local service
providers.? {ReCOmmendation Item 33).

Page 7 ?Southern Methodist University 1Voluntary Resolution Agreement
Education and Training

34) Take steps to ensure that student leaders encourage the student body to develop,
adopt and disseminate a new SMU Values Statement, such as the following: as a
citizen of the SMU Community, commit myself to upholding the values of
intellectual integrity, academic honesty, personal responsibility and sincere regard
and reapect fer all SMU students, faculty, and stat" (Recommendation 34).

35) Request that ?the Residential Commons leadership (including staff, faculty-in-
residence, and student leaders) develop a mandatory citizenship program for ?rst?year
students as a component of new Residential Commons model. The citizenship
program whether a series of classes, seminars or other experiences would focus on
the variety of factors involved in being a responsible member of the SMU
community, including sexual misconduct issues.? SMU will administer ?within
individual Residential Commons to enhance the sense of community, but should be
consistent across the various residences. All ?rst-year members of the Residential
Commons (including commuting students assigned to that RC) required to
participate in the program. SecOnd-year and upper-level students in the RC could help
deliver the program, which may be investigated as a way to ful?ll the University
Curriculum Community Engagement requirement.? {Recommendation 35).

36) Review and evaluate all current sexual misconduct prevention education and training
programs with student leaders and deveIOp recommendations to improve these
programs. (Recommendation Item 36).

37) Ensure that the training of student leaders emphasizes ?their importance as role
models in fostering positive values for students and developing a culture where sexual
misconduct is not tolerated.? (Recommendation 

38) Carefully review the de?nitions of consent, sexual misconduct and sexual assault
?with incoming students during orientation and in other training programs focused on
sexual misconduct. SMU [will] continue its practice of a training program focused on
these issues for all first-year students within the ?rst week of classes each fall
semester. This training [will] continue to take place every year, and similar training
should occur for students of all academic standings. For upper?level students, this
training [will] be mandatory for key leadership groups including, and not limited to,
the Student Senate, resident assistants, Orientation leaders, student athletes, any
Greek organization seeking certi?cation to house second-year students, and other
student leadership groups. This training has already been implemented in the
Mandatory Organization Meetings (MOM) for leaders of all student organizations in
accordance with the Texas State law (Recommendation Item 33).

39) [l]nitiate an upper-level student and faculty and staff mentorship program. SMU
[will] also develop activities through the Residential Commons to foster respect for
others that include a focus on sexual misconduct (Recommendation item 39).

Page 8 ?Southern Methodist University Voluntary Resolution Agreement

40) Develop a bystander intervention program. (Recommendation Item 40).

Educate the parents of incoming students about its sexual misconduct policies and
de?nitions. (Recommendation item 41).

REPORTING No later than sixty (60) calendar days after January 1,
2015, and by no later than March 30, 2015, for the 2014-2015 academic year, and by
March 30 annually thereafter during the 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 academic years, SMU
will provide OCR with documentation of its efforts to implement the SMU Task Force
recommendations durin the preceding academic year. Documentation wiil include the
name and title of the individual(s) responsible for implementing the recommendation, a
narrative description of the steps taken to implement the recommendation, and any
documents, pamphlets, policies or procedures created during the implementation of the
recommendations. SMU will also provide OCR any progress reports or status updates
developed by the University?s internal auditing department, specific departments charged
with administering the Task Force recommendations, or another appropriate department
pursuant to Recommendation Item 32 concerning the implementation of the Task Force
recommendations.

in addition to the steps outiined above regarding the Task Force recommendations, SMU will take
the Following steps.

GRIEVANCE 1! Egg

1. No later than sixty (60) calendar days after January 1, 2015, SMU will revise its Interim
Title IX Harassment Policy 2.5.1 pursuant to the Task Force recommendations. The
policy will he redesignated as ?Title IX Harassment Policy deleting the word
?interim? from the title. SMU reserves the right to further revise Policy in a
different format or style, and consistent with the substantive requirements of this
Agreement. Any such revisions to Policy 2.5.1 not speci?cally covered by this
Agreement will be submitted to OCR for prior review and approval. SMU will also revise
the Policy to ensure that:

Section 3.2.8, Interim Protective Steps, provides that interim protective steps will be
taken as appropriate to protect the complainant as well as other members of the SMU
community; language that steps will be taken ?in its discretion? will be deleted;

03) all parties are advised in Section 8.3.3, Informal Resolution, that informal resolution may
be terminated at any time and the complaint may proceed to investigation;

the President?s discretion to review student conduct decisions in complaints involving
Title 1X allegations set forth in Section 8.5.7 complies with the statutory and regulatory
provisions of Title IX. Speci?cally, SMU will remove ?is not limited in any way? from
Section 8.5.7 and clarify that the President?s review will be in accordance with Title 

the grievance procedures include a statement that a typical investigation takes
approximately 60 calendar days following receipt of the complaint, that the 60 caiendar day
timeframe encompasses the fact-?nding investigation, holding a hearing or engaging in
another decision-making process to determine whether sexual violence occurred and created

Page 9 ~Southern Methodist University Voluntary Resolution Agreement

a hostile environment, determining what actions the school will take to eliminate the hostile
environment and prevent a recurrence, and the imposing of sanctions against the perpetrator
and providing remedies for the complainant and the school community as appropriate; the
timeframe does not include appeals.

the grievance procedures include a complaint resolution process that applies equally to
both parties to the complaint and a designated and reasonably prompt timeframe for the
University to process any appeals by either party to a complaint.

REPORTING REQUIREMENT: No later than sixty (60) calendar days after January 1, 2015,
SMU will provide to OCR a copy of its revised Title IX Harassment Policy 

2. Within forty-?ve (45) calendar days of written noti?cation from OCR that the
University?s Title IX Harassment Policy 2.5.1 complies with Title 1X, SMU will adopt
and implement the revised policy and will provide all students and employees with
written notice regarding the grievance procedures for resolving Title IX complaints
together with information on how to obtain a copy of the grievance procedures. SMU will
make this notification through the University?s publicly available website and electronic
mail messages to students and employees. At its discretion, SMU may also use additional
means of notification to ensure wide dissemination of the Grievance Procedures.

REPORTING REQUIREMENT: Within thirty (3 0) calendar days of the completion
of Action Item No. 2, SMU will provide to OCR the following: (1) a link to 
website page showing the location of the Grievance Procedures, and (2) a copy of the
noti?cation(s) that SMU provided to students and employees via electronic mail
concerning the publication of the Grievance Procedures. SMU will provide OCR the
names of the policy manuals and student or employee handbooks that include the
revised Grievance Procedures.

REPORTING REQUIREMENT: No later than sixty (60) calendar days after January
1, 2015, SMU will submit to OCR cepies of all Title IX grievances ?led under the
prior Title IX Harassment Policy 2.5 and Interim Title IX Harassment Policy 2.5.1,
by or on behalf of students, faculty or staff, alleging sexual harassment, gender
harassment, sexual assault, or sexual violence, during the 2012-2013 and 20132014
academic years. No later than June 30, 2015, of the 2014?2015 academic year, and by
the same date therea?er during the 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 academic years, SMU
will submit to OCR copies of all Title 1X grievances ?led under Title IX Harassment
Policy 2.5.1, by or on behalf of students, alleging sexual harassment, gender
harassment, sexual assault, or sexual violence, during the preceding academic year.
For both reporting dates, SMU will provide OCR with documentation related to the
investigation of each complaint, such as witness interviews, investigator notes,
evidence submitted by the parties, investigative reports and summaries, any final
disposition letters, disciplinary records, and documentation regarding any appeals.
Any copies of grievances or other SMU documents that come into the possession of
OCR shall be subject to the privacy and con?dentiality protections of the Freedqu of
Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, and other applicable laws. If no Title IX grievances
were ?led during the year in question, SMU will so notify OCR in writing.

Page i0 ?Southern Methodist University Voluntary Resolution Agreement.

SQ 1 ICE 0F I I?l? TITLE IX COORDINATOR

3. No later than thirty (30) calendar days after January l, 2015, SMU will draft and submit
to OCR for review and approval a notice of nondiscrimination pursuant to 34 C.F.R. 
106.9, which will notify students and employees that SMU does not discriminate on the
basis of sex in the education programs or activities that it operates and that SMU is
required by Title IX not to discriminate in such a manner. Additionally, the notice will
state that the requirement not to discriminate in the University?s education programs and
activities extends to employment with and admission to the University and that inquiries
concerning lite application of Title IX may be referred to the Title IX Coordinator, or to
the Assistant Secretary. The policy shall include the name or title, of?ce and email
addresses, and telephone number for the University?s Title IX Coordinator, as required by
34 CPR. 106.8. The University will publish this information consistent with the
requirements of Title IX at 34 CPR. 106.9.

REPORTING REQUIREMENT: No later than sixty (60) calendar days after January
1, 2015, the University will submit to OCR for its review and approval the
nondiscrimination notice referenced in Action Item No. 3.

4. Within forty~?ve (45) calendar days of written noti?cation from OCR 111at the
University?s notice of nondiscrimination complies with Title IX, SMU will ensure that, to
the extent required by Title IX at 34 C.F.R. 106.9, each of its electronic and printed
publications of general distribution that provide information to employees and students
about University services and policies contain the notice ol?nondiscrimination. Inserts
may be used pending reprinting of these publications.

REPORTING REQUIREMENT: Within thirty (30) calendar days of the completion
of Action Item No. 4, SMU will provide to OCR a link to SMU's website page
showing the location of the nondiscrimination notice revised pursuant to Action Item
Nos. 3 and No. 4.

TRAINIEQ

5. Following its implementation of the revised policies and procedures above and no later
than forty-?ve (45) calendar days after SMU receives written noti?cation from OCR of
approval of Title IX Harassment Policy 2.5.1, 1he University will develop, and submit to
OCR for review and approval, proposed training for its Title IX Coordinators and any
University officials, administratOrs, faculty, staff, and students directly engaged in
processing, investigating, resolving, andtor adjudicatng complaints of sex discrimination
(including sexf gender harassment and sexual assault), or who will otherwise coordinate
the University?s Title IX compliance. The training shall include, at a minimum, the
University?s revised Title IX grievance procedures; the University?s obligations
regarding the investigation of Title IX complaints ?led by students, staff, and faculty;
instruction on how to cond net and document adequate, reliable, and impartial Title 1X

Page I 1 -?Southern Methodist University Voluntary Resolution Agreement

investigations, inciuding the appropriate legal standards to apply in a Title IX
investigation; and confidentiality.

REPORTING REQUIREMENT: No later than forty-five (45) calendar days after
SMU receives written noti?cation from OCR of approval of Title IX Harassment
Policy 2.5.1, the University will provide OCR the proposed training materials to be
used or distributed during the training, including any speaker?s notes, and the name,
title, and qualifications of the trainer(s).

6. Within forty-five (45) caiendar days of written notification from OCR that the proposed
training complies with Title IX, the University will provide training to its Title IX
Coordinators and any University officials, administrators, faculty, staff, and students
directly engaged in processing, investigation, resolving, and/?or adj udicating complaints
of sex discrimination (including sexx?gender harassment and sexuai assault) or who will
otherwise coordinate the University?s Title IX. compliance.

REPORTING REQUIREMENT: Within thirty (30) calendar days of the completion of
the training in Action Item No. 6, SMU will provide to OCR documentation
demonstrating that it has provided appropriate University staff with the training
referenced in Action Item Nos. 5 and 6, including the dates of the training, the names,
titles, and qualifications of the trainer(s), a copy of any materials used or distributed
during the training, and the names and tities of University staff who attended the training.

7. No later than ten (10) calendar days after the date of execution of this Agreement, the
University will submit to OCR for review and approval its new, online sexual harassment
training currently in use for employees. The training provides essential guidance and
instruction on recognizing and appropriately addressing allegations and complaints of sex
discrimination, including differences between sexual harassment, gender harassment (not
of a sexual nature), and sexual assault. The University shall require all University
personnel who interact with students on a regular basis as part of their duties or
to complete the online training. Beginning June I, 2014, the University
required all new employees to complete the training. The online training will be updated
annually, if necessary, in order to reflect any changes to the law, to the Title IX
Harassment Policy 2.5.1, and to University practices with respect to Title IX compliance.

REPORTING REQUIREMENT: No later than ten (10) calendar days after the date of
execution of this Agreement, the University will provide OCR its new online training
materials.

8. Within forty-five {45) calendar days of written notification from OCR that the proposed
training complies with Title 1X, the University will provide the training referenced in
Action Item No. 7 to all administrators, professors, instructors, residential staff, coaches,
and other staff who interact with students on a regular basis as part of their duties or
responsibilities.

Page 12 ?Southern Methodist University Voluntary Resolution Agreement

TA MAINTENANCE AND RECORDKEEPING

 

9.

IO.

REPORTING REQUIREMENT: Within thirty (30) calendar days of the completion of
Action Item No. 8 above, the University will provide OCR with documentation
demonstrating that it has provided appropriate individuals with the training referenced in
Action Item No. 3, including the dates of the training, the names, titles, and quali?cations
of the trainer(s), a copy of any materials used or distributed during the training, and the
names and titles of those who attended the training.

 

No later than sixty (60) calendar days after January 1, 2015, SMU agrees to provide the
following checklist to its Title IX Coordinator, Deputy Title IX Coordinators, and anyone
designated responsible for Title IX complaint investigations so that they can make
reasonable efforts to include in their written reports of complaint investigations the
following information:
0 the name and sex of the alleged victim, and if different, the name and sex of the
person reporting the allegation;
I a statement of the allegation, a description of the and the date(s) and
time(s) (if known) of the alleged incidents;
the date that the complaint or other report was made;
the date the accused was interviewed;
the name and sex of all persons alleged to have committed the alleged
harassment;
1- the names and sex of all known witnesses to the alleged incident(s);
0 the dates that any relevant documentary evidence (including medical, cell phone
and other records as appropriate) was obtained;
I any written statements of the complainant (or victim, if different from the
complainant);
- the date on which SMU temporarily suspended the fact-finding aspect of its Title
IX investigation while the law enforcement agency was in the process of
gathering evidence, and as applicable, the date on which SMU resumed its
investigation process;
I the outcome of the investigation, and if any, the disciplinary process;
0 the response of SMU personnel, including any interim and permanent steps taken
with respect to the complainant and the accused; and
I a narrative of all action taken to prevent recurrence of any harassing incident(s)
including written documentation.

REPORTING REQUIREMENT: No later than sixty (60) calendar days after January I,
20 i 5, SMU will submit to OCR documentation con?rming completion of Action Item
No. 9.

No tater than sixty (60) calendar days after January I, 2015, SMU will develop and
implement a system for tracking and reviewing reports (including reports that do not
result in the ?ling of a complaint), investigations, interim measures, and resolutions that
may constitute sexual or gender-based harassment to ensure that such reports are
and impartially investigated and resolved. SMU shall designate an employee,

Page 13 ?--Southern Methodist University Voluntary Resolution Agreement

such as the Title IX Coordinator, to maintain records of all complaints, investigations,
interim meaSures, interview notes, ?ndings (including records of any corrective action
taken, including, disciplinary action) and the basis for those ?ndings.

REPORTING REQUIREMENT: No later than sixty (60) calendar days January 1, 2015,
SMU shall provide to OCR a description of the tracking and reviewing system and
con?rmation of the date that it became operative. By July 15, 2015, and by the same date
in 2016 and 2017, the University will provide OCR with documentation concerning its
reaponses and handling of all sexual harassment cases during the previous year, including
a summary of all sexual harassment, including sexual assaulti?violence, allegations
reported to the University and information about the outcome of the Title IX
investigations.

11. No later than sixty (60) calendar days after Januaiy 1, 2015, SMU will ensure that the
SMU Police Department and Title IX Coordinator develop and implement a procedure
whereby a summary of the SMU Police Department?s Criminal Offense Report from its
investigation of sexual assault andlor sexual violence incidents is provided to the Title IX
Coordinator in a timely manner, and as necessary for the Title IX investigation, and so
long as the sharing of information does not compromise the criminal investigation.

REPORTING REQUIREMENT: By no later than sixty (60) calendar days after January
1, 2015, the University will provide OCR documentation of the procedure developed in
accordance with Action Item No. 1 i.

$1 1,1123er 

12. No later than sixty [60) calendar days a?er SMU receives written noti?cation from OCR
of approval of Title IX Harassment Policy 2.5.1, SMU will develop and submit to OCR
or its review and approval a brochure explaining discrimination under Title IX for
distribution to ali SMU students. The brochure will contain: an explanation about what
constitutes sex discrimination and gender discrimination, including harassment, in
violation of Title and (ii) information regarding the Grievance Procedures. SMU will
post the brochure On its Office of Institutional Equity and Access website page, distribute
the brochure via electronic mail to all students, and make copies available to students in
the Office of institutional Equity and Access and the Of?ce of Student Life.

REPORTING REQUIREMENT: Within thirty (30) calendar days of the completion
of Action Item No. 12, the University will provide OCR with: a copy of the
brochure; (ii) the link to website page where SMU posted the brochure; and
written continuation that SMU has distributed the brochure to all students via
electronic mail.

13. By January 31, 2015, the University will submit for OCR review and approval a
description and copy of its tooi for conducting a climate check or series of climate checks
with students on campus to assess the effectiveness of steps taken by the University
toward ensuring a campus free of sexual harassment, in particular sexual assaults and

Page 14 ?-Southern Methodist University Voluntary Resolution Agreement

i4.

15.

sexual violence. The description will also include the University?s strategy for
implementing the climate checids) and analyzing the results. The University?s existing
committee on climate checks shali consider whether to add additional students and staff
for the purpose of helping gather and provide feedback on how the climate check or
checks are conducted, and how to respond to its results. A climate check can be
conducted in many ways, including, but not limited to, a survey distributed in?person or
online, or a poll conducted or online. In addition, the University may organize
an open forum information session for students and employees, and designated,
publicized walk-in hours for campus community input. Information gathered during these
climate checks will he used to inferm future proactive steps taken by the University to
provide a safe and supportive environment.

REPORTING REQUIREMENT: By January 3 i 2015, the University will submit to
OCR the description and copy of the climate check tool outlined in Action Item No. 13.

Within forty-?ve (45) caiendar days of approval of the climate clteclc{s) tool in
Action Item Nothe academic years 2014-2015, 2015-2016, and
2016-2017, the University will conduct periodic assessments of campus climate to assess
the effectiveness of steps taken pursuant to this Agreement and the Task Force
recommendations, to provide for a safe and supportive campus. The University will use
the information gathered during these climate checks to inform future proactive steps
taken by the University to provide for a safe and supportive educational environment.

REPORTING REQUIREMENT: By June 30, 2015, and by the same date in 2016 and
2017, the University will provide documentation to OCR demonstrating its
implementatitm of Action Item No. 13.

The University will use the Task Force Implementation Group, which is a group
consisting of (and will continue to consist oi) representative leaders from the student
community (cg, women?s groups, athletes, residential assistants, student government
leaders, fraternity and sorority leaders, etc.) and University of?cials to provide input
regarding strategies for ensuring that students understand their rights under Title IX, how
to report possible violations of Title IX, and the University?s obligation to and
equitably reapond to Title IX complaints.

REPORTING REQUIREMENT: By June 30, 2015, and by the same date in 2016 and
2017, the University will provide documentation to OCR demonstrating its
implementation of Action Item No. 15, including any resulting summaries of the
information obtained and any proposed andfor completed actions based on that
information.

. No later than sixty (60) calendar days after SMU receives written noti?cation from OCR

of approval of Title IX Harassment Policy 2.5.1, in accordance with its revised policy and
grievance procedures, the University will review the sexual harassmentfviolence
complaints filed and reports made of sexual harassmentfviolence during and since
academic year 2012-2013 to determine whether the University investigated each

Page IS ?Southern Methodist University Voluntary Resolution Agreement

complaint or report and equitably, including but not limited to, Specifically
determining whether the University used the appropriate de?nitions and analyses oi"
sexual harassment and hostile environment under Title used the preponderance of the
evidence standard in investigating allegations of sexual harassment; provided interim
relief to protect the complainant during the pendency of the investigation; provided
written notice of the outcome (including any appeal) and appeal rights to the complainant
and the accused; and took steps to prevent the recurrence of harassment and to address
any hostile environment created by the harassment. The University will take appropriate
action to address any problems identi?ed in the manner in which these complaints were
handled; including providing appropriate remedies that may still be available for the
complainants in these cases, such as counseling or academic adjustments, though the
University is not expected to reinvestigate or rehear matters that have been finally
resolved under University policy.

REPORTING REQUIREMENT: No later than sixty (60) calendar days after SMU
receives written noti?cation from OCR of approval of Title IX Harassment Policy 2.5.1,
the University will submit to OCR for review and approval the results of its review
conducted pursuant to Action Item No. 16, speci?cally identifying any complaints or
reports that were not handled and equitably, all supporting materials relating to
the University?s review, and the University?s planned actionts) to address any problems
identi?ed in the review. Within thirty (30) calendar days of approval, the
University wiil take appropriate action to address any problems identi?ed in its review.

REMEDIES

17. No later than sixty (60) calendar days after January 1, 2015, the University shall provide
to the Complainant in Case No. 06132088 reimbursement, upon presentation of
appropriate documentation, for all university-related expenses (tuition/fees,
housingrr food, and books) incurred for the semester minus any scholarship and
grant assistance received, and all counseling expenses incurred from mimic)
Itbltilicl 

 

 

 

 

 

REPORTING REQUIREMENT: No later than sixty (60) calendar days after January 1,
2015, the University will provide to OCR evidence of the payment referenced in item
17.

If OCR has any objections to the documents, recommendations or other items required to be
submitted for review and approval by OCR under this Agreement, OCR will notify the
University of its objections no later than sixty (60) calendar days after receiving the
draft documents.

The University understands that by signing this Agreement, it agrees to provide data and other
information in a timely manner. Further, the University understands that during the monitoring
of this Agreement, OCR may visit the University, interview staff and students and request
additional reports or data as are necessary for OCR to determine whether the University has
fulfiiled the terms of this Agreement and is in compliance with the regulations implementing
Title 1X, which were at issue in these complaints.

Page 16 ?-Sonthern Methodist University Voluntary Resolution Agreement

The University understands that OCR will not close the monitoring of this Agreement until OCR
determines that the University has ful?lled the terms of this Agreement and is in compliance
with the regulations implementing Titie IX.

The University understands and acknowiedges that OCR may initiate administrative enforcement
or judicial proceedings to enforce the speci?c terms and obligations of this Agreement. Before
initiating administrative enforcement (34 CPR. 100.9, 100.10) or judicial proceedings to
enforce this Agreement, OCR shall give the University written notice of the alleged breach and a
minimum of sixty (60) calendar days to cure the alleged breach.

gm 

Paul J. Ward Date
Vice President for Legal Affairs, General

Counsel, and Secretary to the Board of Trustees

Southern Methodist University

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF REGION v1

 

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS 
Lountawa
1999 BRYAN ST, SUITE tr?u 
DALLAS, TX 25201?0810 Texas
March 26, 2015

 



 

 

 

Title IX Coordinator

Southern Methodist University
PO. Box 750100

Dallas, TX 752730100

Re OCR Cass NDS- 064 19126. 06-13~2081. and 06-13-2088
Southern Methodist University

Dear Ms. Thomas:

The US. Department of Education (Department), Of?ce for Civil Rights (OCR), Dallas
Office has completed its review of the progress reports submitted by Southern Methodist
University (SMU or University), Dallas, Texas on January 30, 2015, February 17, 2015,
and March 13. 2015. SMU submitted a Resolution Agreement (Agreement), which was
accepted by OCR on November 16. 20h1 to ensure compliance with Title IX of the
Education Amendments of19?12 (Title IX), 20 U.S.C. 1681, and its implementing
regulation at 34 C.F.R. Part 106.

Pursuant to Item three ot?the Agreement, on January 30, 2015, SMU submitted to OCR a
reviSed notice of nondiscrimination. which includes the title, address, telephone number,
and email address for the Title IX Coordinatm'. OCR reviewed the notice of
nondiscrimination and determined that the notice complies with Titie IX. As such, SMU
has Fulfilled Item three and its reporting requirement and the University may proceed
with publishing the notice pursuant to Item four oi?the Agreement.

Pursuant to Item thirteen of the Agreement, on January 30, 2015, SMU submitted to OCR
a draft climate survey. OCR reviewed the climate survey and determined that the climate
survey is designed to assess the effectiveness of steps taken by the University toward
ensuring a campus free of sexual harassment. As such, SMU has ful?lled Item thirteen
and its reporting requirement and the University may proceed with conducting the
climate survey pursuant to Item fourteen of the Agreement.

Pursuant to Item seven-teen of the Agreement. on February 27', 2015 and March 13, 2015,
the University provided monetary compensation to Complainant 3 in the amount of
(bx?rm} Iconstituting "university-related espenses (tuition/fees, housingffood, and
books) incurred by Complainant 3 for the Itbliillcl I semester minus any scholarship and
grant assistance received? and Ifor ?counseling eXpenses incurred by
Complainant 3 from 1blmicl Ithroughliblmicl OCR reviewed

 

 

 

 

The Dtgoartmwit t'JI'ErIumIion is Illi??'lt?? is to sloth-vat at and Itirghn?m.? titritperiti'vaness
it!? a at: Win; with an: ma! 1 tut rI and ensuring noun a: (has.

wed .gov

 



 

 

Page 2 

 

the documentation and determined that SMU has Ful?lled Item seventeen and its
reporting requirement.

OCR received additional monitoring reports and correspondence concerning the
implementation ofthe Agreement from the University on March 2, 2015. OCR has not
completed its review ofthe documentation and will respond to the March 2'1d report in
future correspondence.

This letter is not intended nor shouicl it be construed to cover any other matters that may
exist and are not speci?cally discussed herein.

Under the Freedom of Information Act, it may be necessary to release this document and
related correspondence and records upon request. in the event that OCR receives such a
request, it will seek to protect, to the extent provided by law, personally identi?able
information. which, if released, could reasonably be expected to constitute an
Unvvarranted invasion of personal privacy.

We appreciate your cooperation and that of your staff. If you have any questions
regarding this letter, you may contact me at (Willie)

Sincerely,

Emily Babb
General Attorney

 

 

{bilillCl

 

 



 

 

{bilillcl

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 20, 2013

Via Email (OCRDaiiasFaledgov)

Of?ce for Civil Rights, Dallas Of?ce
U. S. Department of Education

1999 Bryan Street, Suite 1620
Dallas, Texas 75201-6810

Re: ormai Complaint under Title IX against Southern Methodist University

 

 

 

 

Dear SirlMaclame:
. . . . .
Our law ?rm represents 1n connection With a sexual assault 1nc1dent that
occurred on I on the campus of Southern Methodist University (SMU), in

 

Dallas, Texas. We are sending you this letter, on behalf of our client, requesting your immediate
attention due to the reckless manner in which SMU handled the subject incident. For the reasons
set forth below, we respectfully request that the Of?ce for Civil Rights accept this letter as a
formal complaint under Title IX against Southern Methodist University.

'lur was mimic) dless to say, he was extremely
excited about his future. All of that changed on was sexually assaulted
on campus by another student identi?ed as Following reporting
the incident to SMU of?cials the next day, SMU engaged in a course of conduct that violated
various provisions of Title IX. I have attached several news arrieies reporting the subject
incident for your re?rence.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

{bliillcl 

 

 

The ?rst action by SMU that violated Title IX concerned the manner in which SMU
reported the incident via their Crime Alert. The initial draft of the alert contained several

speci?c facts that would clearly advise (?mm (the assailant) that (Willie) had reported the
assault. For example, it revealed that the incident involved a (WW0) assault, that the two

 

knew each other and the exact addresses where the attacks occurred 

 

Page 1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(DRYING)
Wit?When the draft of the alert was shown to he was
terri?ed and feared thatf would retaliate against him] After discussing these concerns
with (mle the Assocra invest for SMU, mimic) was assured that the alert would be

 

 

 

 

 

 

revis so so urese speci?c facts would not be revealed. the actual alert that was issued, however,
contained all of the speci?c facts. of the SMU Crime Alert is attached. Within two
minutes of the alert being issued, received a phone call and a text message from
mimic) This obviously terri?c Ithat retaliation was an imminent threat. The

speci?city of the alert was not access iven the fact that SMU knew {Willie} identity.


  
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Associate Provost {mm apologized to . stated that the campus police chief was going to

be in trouble for issuing the alert and furl er com rgented that it was obvious to her that SMU had
(bilillcl 

 

 

 

put its public relations interests ahead of

 

While response to the incident appears to have been prompt, it certainly was not
equitable. own admission, SMU made a conscious decision to put their own interests
ahead of to simply avoid more bad press about all the sexual assaults that were
occurring on their campus. I have attached several press articles that shed some light of the
environment at SMU during the relevant time period. Because of the seci?city of the alert,
SMU created an immediate dangerous and hostile environment for SMU failed to offer
any interim safety measures to protect/insulate him from any retaliatory actions. Soon
after the alert was issued and was left without any safety measures, he began

 

 

 

 

 

experiencing bullying and harassment from (bill) (bililiC) intimidating stare donuts from
libiliilci ?(minim and mysterious phone calls and knocks on his door. When

 

he complained to SMU about the harassment from his Itbliiltcl I SMU moved {biliilcl to
another dorm. However, the libillilci 
 ? ibirnici Wrote) (bliiliC) F'rbiinici consequently, 

continued to be fear?ll of retaliatory action.

 

 

 

 

Additionally, within two days of the incident, the Associate Provost tried to
discourage and dissuade from cooperating with law enforcement authorities. She told
that she was I, and that cases like this one would never result in an
indictment. She told that pursuing a case like this would be more trouble than it was
worth. She suggested to that it would better to just let SMU handle the situationinvolved in several student affairs such as {mimic} 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

of mimic) of the Item?) an {?Irbiinici
{Willie} land a libil? During the sexual assault, in addition to using physical force,

 

 

Itblii?HCl Ithreatened libliilic I that if he told anyone about the incident, would use power and in?uence to
destroy {bliilicl life around campus (Le. blackballing him from being able to join a (mi?lilo} jeopardize his {mm
etc.). Given perceived power, was fearful that 

I ould retaliate against him.

 

2 There had been several prior sexual assaults on campus and SMU was being criticized for not timely
reportinnr these incidents. There had bean a lot of local press about that, and given this new assault, Associate
Provost lam hpeculated that if a more general alert was issued, the toss would likely ask a lot of questions as to
whether this incident was related. Therefore, the Associate Provost believed that SMU had made a choice to
di?use the public scrutth of this new incident by being more speci?c about it to show it was not related to any of
the prior incidents.

 

Page 2

that she could bring {Willie} into her of?ce and read the riot act. She suggested to {Willie}
that action would be suf?cient enough to ensure that would not retaliate.

Of particular note, this is not the ?rst time has engaged in this egg essive
behavior. Our investigation has revealed that rim to the incident involvin our client,
was on a school sponsored trip with the to I During the trip,
the students (underaged) were allowed to ring a co 0 . became intoxicated and tried
to sexually assault another student. Fortunately, other students intervened and prevented
the attack. Interestingly, used the same threatening tactics with the potential victim by
asserting perceived power and in?uence over student life. We believe this incident was

known by SMU personnel, and therefore, put them on notice of violent propensities.
De5pitc having this knowledge, SMU did nothing.

 

Final] in the aftermath of the incident involving our client, and during the time eriod
of indictment, our client received an email on behalf of Associate Provost that
was sent to all of the expressing concerns about indictment. The
email was outrageously inappropriate and further exempli?es the insensitive attitude that SMU
had towards our client. A capy ofthe email is attached.

Given these facts, we strongly believe that SMU has violated Title IX
protections. Pursuant to the Dear Colleague Letter dated April 2011, ?[ijfa school knows or
reasonably should know about a sludent?on?student harassment that creates a hostile
environment, title IX requires the school to take immediate action to eliminate the harassment,
prevent its recurrence and address its ejects. The Dear Colleague Letter further provides
"[tjiile IX requires a school to take steps to protect the complainant as necessary, including
taking interim steps before the final outcome of the investigation. The school should undertake
these steps once it has notice of a sexual harassment or violence allegation. Finally,
the Dear Colleague Letter provides that ?[s]chools should be aware that complaints of sexual
harassment or violence may be followed by retaliation by the alleged perpetrator or his or her
?iends, and ?schools must have policies and procedures in place to protect against retaliatory
harassment. 

Further, the Dear Colleague Letter states that a ?school should noti?z a complainant of
the right to file a criminal complaint, and should not dissuade a victim ?'om doing do either
during or a?er the school?s internal Title IX investigation. As described above, Associate
Provost clearly violated this provision.

 

As of mimic) I, SMU had actual knowledge of the existence of a complaint
about a sexua assault between two of their students. This single event is suf?cient to create a
hostile environment and trigger responsibilities under Title IX. reckless issuance
of the campus crime alert created an immediate, hostile environment, which in turn, resulted in
immediate retaliatory actions towards Due to the ongoing hostile environment created
by SMU, was unable to concentrate on his studies, and he never felt safe on campus. As
such, he had no choice but to withdraw from SMU. As a result, has been deprived of
the opportunity to bene?t fully from the educational programs and activities offered at SMU.

 

 

Page 3

Based on the above, we request the Of?ce of Civil Rights begin an
investigation of the Title IX violations listed above. This Complaint is not exhaustive in any
way and our client is available for further discussion of the events above. We have attached a
signed copy of our client?s Consent Form-For Use of Personal Infonnation.

Please feel free to contact me regarding this matter at your earliest convenience.

Sincerelv, .
(WUHC)

 

 

 

 

Page 4

 

A.

 

'Jaee 6 of i L18. Department of Education- Of?ce for ivil Rights
'Tliserimination Comolaint Form. Consent Form. and Complaint Processing Procedures

CONSENT FORM: FOR USE OF PERSONAL INFORMATION
(bililicl

 

 

 

Complainant's Name {print or type]:

instituan Against Which Complaintis Filed: 5min! JMEHDMT (lowest:ny C3110)

 

Please sign and date section A, section or section (I and return to the address below:

I have read the section, ?investigatory Uses of Personal Information" in the OCR document ?information
about OCR's Complaint Processing Procedures.? which explains 0138's use of personal information. I
understand that the Privacy Act of 1974. 5 U.S.C. 552a, and the Freedom of Information Act 5
552, govern the use of personal information submitted to all Federal agencies and their
individual componenm, including OCR. i will cooperate with OCR's investigation and complaint
resolution activities undertaken on my behalf. i understand that my failure to cooperate with OCR's
investigation may result In the closure of my complaint

I also OCR my consent to reveal my identity [and/or that of my minor child jward on whose
behalf the complaint is ?led) to the institution alleged to have discriminated, as well as other
persons and entities, if OCR, in the course of its investigation or for enforcement activities, ?nds

2 .

Date

than an

 

it
(bllT?liC)

 

 

Signature 1'
0R

give OCR my consent to reveal my identity [and/or that or my minor child/ward on whose
hehalt?the complaint is ?led}. i understand that OCR may have to close this complaint if OCR is unable
to proceed with an investigation without releasing my identity [andfor that of my minor child/ward on
whose behalf the complaint is ?led}.

 

Signature Date
Alternatively, if you are not ?ling this complaint on your own behalf or on behalf of your owe
n?nurchild/ward, you are responsible for obtaining written cause-m from the person on whose
behalf the complaint is ?led or. ifhe or she is a minor, that persnn's parent/guardian.

have read this document and I agree with the person who ?led this complaint. I wish you to proceed
with OCR's investigation and resolution process. 1 give my consent for OCR to reveal my identity
{antlfor that of my minor child {ward on whose behalf the complaint is ?led] to other persons to
the extent necessary for the purpose of resolution or investigation of has complaint.

Name (print or type]:

 

 

Signature Date

CAMPUS CRIME ALERT

 

 

(MUHC)

 

 

 

If you

are sexually assaulted:

Call the police and seek medical attention immediately. Time is critical in such cases.
(214??63-3338 or 911).

Have a Sexual Assault Exam performed at Presbyterian Hospital. SMU Police are
available to take you to the hospital, but you can go without the police and you do
not have to make a police report.

A representative from SMU Counseling and Services will be available to
accompany you (214468-4795).

Don't bathe or shower. A physician will need to gather forensic evidence from you.

Save your clothing, bed sheets, pillow covers, etc. Do not wash them. Police will
need these items, too. Do not drink any liquids if you were assaulted orally.

Seek counseling from SMU Counseling and Services at 

Personal Safety Tips:

Always be aware of your surroundings, especially after dark.

If you need a ride on campus in the evening or early morning hours, call Giddy-Up at
214-?68-1111 or the SMU Police Department at 214-768-3333. If you are off
campus, SMU Rides will provide transportation to campus on Thursdays, Fridays or
Saturdays between 10:30 p.m. to 3:00 a.m. by calling Cowboy Cab at 214-763-RIDE
or 214-768-743.

Sign Up for a self-defense course by calling 214-768-2601 Such courses teach
valuable techniques a person can use to get away from an attacker.

Exercise caution when you are with people you do not know.

W13 PrminentSMU 

?Menu:

HOME NEWS LOCAL

Prominent SMU Student Charged With

Sex Assault

Weekend attack was subject of campus crime alert

Gordon 212312 I Undaied 11:55 

 

Luen?

John Dawd Mahatiay. 19. was arrested on charges he semailyaasautied another male siudent on the campus of

Southern mmodist University.

adveriicmant

PHOTOS AND VIDEOS

width??px; height:324pl; 

 

div.le width7575px; heigmazdpx; 
. I  
i m. 

 

 

More Photos and Videos

  

A With-generation Southern Methodst Unitersity
student was attested on charges he sexually
assautted another male student on campus late
aatmuay night.

John David Mahai?sy. 19. a sophmrore ?nance major.
has been suspended from his iatemity and banned
from campus We the investigation continues.

According to police. the alleged Iitctirn said he was
attacked twice ?once in a campus parking garage and
again near the Sigma Phi Epsiion fraternity, where
Maha?ey is a member.

SMU administrators issued a campus crime alert after
the alleged attacks.

Maha?ey, of Sphg?eid. Missouri, is 3 Hunt scholar. a
student senator. a scholarship committee chaimian.
and an oiitcer on inter-tratemiiy mmdi,
accurth to the Wily website.

kneading to an article last year in student
newspaper. the Deity Campus. tie great-great
grandth was a member at taunting
committee and one oi its ?rst professors and his
father and two auras nice new students.

SMU released a short statement. con?rming the arrest,
and saying Mahaifey is 1mporartty bamedirom
campue pending mitt-er investigation."

The local fraternity says it?s suapended Mahai'iey and is cooperating with patina.



I. p41-

ILimMtih 

1R

320MB Pton'inent SMU Student Charged With SaxAssaultl NBC 5 Danae-Fort Worth

"This alleged behavior is not tolerated and not consistent with the ii-atemity?s mission.? fraternity president Luke
Friedman said In a written statement. "This is a disturbing situation and the chapter?s thoughts and concerns go
out to everyone affected."

Friedman declined further comment.

Debbie Denman, a spokeswoman for the Dallas District Attomey's critics, said late Thursday that EMU
police had not yet ?led the case with prosecutors.

Maha??ey was released from the Dallas County jail on bond. He did not return a phone call seeking
comment and it was not immediater clear if he has an attorney.

Find this artida at:
.oom'new 
Chad: the box to inchde the llstof links referenced in theardote.

:3 NBC Universat. Inc. 1 All Flights Reserved.

EMU .. 21?2

3201'13 SMU Hunt Scholar arrested for alleged semal assault- New - SMU DailyCan'pus - Sumern Metl'roc?st Unlyersity

SMU Hunt Scholar arrested for alleged
sexualassau?

By Julie Fancher, Haleyr Thayer
jfancher@smu.edu, hthayer@smu.edu

Published: Thursday, September 27, 2012
Updated: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 17:11

John David Mahaffey, a 19-year-old sophomore ?nance
major from Rogersville, Mo., was arrested Tuesday in
connection with a Sept. 23 sexual assault of a fellow
SMU student, according to Dallas County court records.

Mahaffey, a current Hunt Scholar, was arrested by
SMU police and taken to the Dallas County Sheriffs?
department and subsequently booked into Dallas
County Jail, according to Dallas County court records.

He was released on Sept. 26 after posting a $25,000
bond.

The alleged incident took place in the early hours of
Sept. 23. SMU released a crime alert that Monday
afternoon that stated:

 

A male SMU student reported being sexually assaulted dallascounty.org
by a male SMU student acquaintance at two different John David Mahaffey

campus locations about 3 am. and again shortly

thereafter, on Sunday, September 23, 2012. The victim said he ?rst was sexually assaulted on
the west side of 3050 SMU Boulevard and then in the Airline Parking Garage at Airline Road
and Daniel Avenue.

Kent Best, executive director of SMU news and communications, released a statement
regarding Mahaffey?s arrest Wednesday night on behalf of the university. It stated:
1/2

W13 SMU Hunt Scholar arrested for alleged sexual assault? News SMU Daily Campus - Southern Methodist Uniusrsity

On Tuesday, Sept. 25, 2012, SMU Police arrested an SMU student for an alleged sexual
assault that occurred Sept. 23, 2012, on the SMU campus. SMU Police will present the ?ndings
of its mvestigation to the Dallas County District Attorney?s Of?ce. The student is temporarily
banned from campus pending further investigation.

Best con?rmed the statement, saying that the arrest on Tuesday was in connection with the
crime alert issued Monday.

Best did not have any information on where or what time the arrest took place.

The Dallas County District Attorney Director of Communications Debbie Demnou said that the
case has not been forwarded to their of?ce yet and therefore there has been no grand jury
referral.

An article from the Sept. 16, 2011 issue of The Daily Campus referenced his long family history
at SMU. Mahaffey is a fourth- generation SMU student. His great-great grandfather was a
member of the founding committee for SMU, and served as an interim professor when the
university opened.

His grandmother attended the university, along with his father and two of his aunts.

Mahaffey is the assistant vice president of recruitment for Interfraternity Council (IFC)
and a member of Student Senate, according to his Hunt Leadership Scholars Program page.

According to Mahaffey?s Facebook page, he is a member of Sigma Phi Epsilon.
Sigma Phi Epsilon?s president Luke Friedman gave the following statment:

The Sigma Phi Epsilon Chapter at Southern Methodist has learned that one of its members
was taken into custody by the Dallas Police Department as part of an investigation into an
alleged sexual assault. The chapter has suspended this member from the Fraternity pending
the outcome of this investigation. Sigma Phi Epsilon?s mission is to build balanced men, and its
leadership programs and educational efforts are based on the value of respect for self and
others. Members are expected to act in accordance with Sing?s values, and clearly, this
alleged behavior is not tolerated and not consistent with the Fraternity?s mission. The chapter
continues to cooperate fully with campus and Dallas police. This is a disturbing situation and
the chapter's thoughts and concerns go out to everyone affected.

The Daily Campus attempted to call Mahaffey?s home phone number, but received no answer.

There will be updates provided on this story as more information is provided.



31?203'13 Af?da?t retools me details In alleged SMU sax assaults wfaacnm Dallas - Fort Wrath

     

'FORT WORTH WFAA-TV

Affidavit reveals more details in alleged SMU sex assaults

by MARCUS MOORE WJORIE OWENS
?9 1 Email
WAA

Posted on September L3. 2012 at 8:52 AM

unfilled Sunday. 5: 23 at 1" l9!? 

DALLAS - An af?davit released Friday by SMU police alleges a student charged with sexually assaulting a classmate acknowledged it
wasn't consensual and threatened the victim during a recorded phone call.

Investigators say John David Maha?ey, 19, sexually assaulted a male student twice Sunday. The ?rst assault took place at the Sigma
Phi Epsilon house and another at the Airline Parking Garage, police say.

The victim told police Maha?'ey forced him to perform oral sex despite his pleas of "no" and to "stop," according to the second-degree
felony warrant issued for Mahaffey's arrest. The warrant also says that Maha?ey told the victim "you better not tell a soul" after the
assault.

After meeting with a Dallas of?cer, the victim agreed to a recorded phone call with Mahaffey. During that call, the victim asked
Maha?cy, "You know I did not want to do that?" the af?davit read.

know you didn't," Mahaffey allegedly replied. "But we have to say it was consensual 01' lawyers, parents and the school will he
involved."

Mahaffey, who has strong ties to SMU, was hooked into the Dallas County Jail and released Wednesday after posting a
$25,000 hand. His great?great grandfather was on the school's founding committee. He is also a member of the student senate.

Luke Friedman, preaideot of the local Signs Phi Epsilon chapter, said Maha?'ey was suspended as police investigate the case.

"This is a disturbing situation and the chapter's thoughts and concerns go out to Everyone affected," read a statement released by
Friedman.

Mahaffey has also been banned from campus until the end of the case.

1:1

M13 Anette-r SMU Student Has Been Arrested for Assam - Dallas - News - Unfair Park- Print Version

20B DALLAS FILM l3

INTERNATIONAL 

FILM FESTIVAL menu M4

 
     

PASSES Atlanta
0
ON SALE i Volkswagen



Dallas - McKinney

 

Another SMU Student Has Been Arrested

for Sexual Assault

By Eric Nicholson
Published Thu, Sep. 27 2012 at 8:12 PM

 

SMU has traditionally handled cases of alleged sexual assault
involving students through closed, "non- adversarial" hearings in
which a panel of faculty and students, rather than, say, a grand
jury, weigh evidence and testirnony and render a con?dential
verdict. That was how the school handled more than 1 no such cases
over a quarter century.

 

 

There are signs the practice may be changing. The Daily Campus
broke the news that John David Mahaffey, a 19?year? old
SOphomore whose great?great grandfather was a member SMU's
founding committee, was arrested Tuesday in connection with a
pair of on?campus sexual assaults reported over the weekend.

 

Mahaffey, who was released from Dallas County Jail on a $25,000 John David Mahaffey
bond, has not yet been indicted, so details are limited to a crime
alert issued by the university on Monday. According to the alert, a
male student reported being assaulted twice by another student at 3 am. the day before, once on the
west side of 3050 SMU Boulevard, and again in a parking garage at Daniel Road and Airline Drive.

 

 

 

 

SMU spokesman Kent Best issued a statement to The Daily Campus con?rming the arrest.

Police will present the ?ndings of its investigation to the Dallas County District Attorney's
Of?ce," he wrote. "The student is temporarily banned from campus pending further hivestigation."

Update at 5:10 Melissa Repko at the Morning news got a conv of the arrest af?davit, which
provided more details about the alleged sexual assault.

Repko reports that the ?rst incident occurred at the Sigma Phi Epsilon fraternity house, where
Mahaffeyr allegedly forced the other student to perform oral sex.

The next day, the student agreed to have SMU police record a phone conversation with Mahaffey.
"You know I did not want to do that," the student said, according to the af?davit. know you didn't,"
Mahaffey replied, "but we have to say it was consensual or lawyers, parents, and the school will be
involved."

1.12

3f?l1l13 SMU Faces Scrutinyon Responseto Sexual Assaults Inside Higher Ed

(WW)

1: ROM EN TO PARJ  

must Nil-V5. mi. lIUI'l'i'Sl Hitxis. INSIDE HIGHLH Li.) has the world
i-NttitNAlinNM jUti of higher education comma. 

SMU Faces Scrutiny on Response to Sexual Assaults

Submitted by Scott Jaschik on October 1, 2012 4:25am

Southem Methodist University - facing criticism over its handling of sexual assault reports has
announced a new task force to study the issue, The gaffes Morning News reported. In the iast month,
taro SMU students have been arrested on sexual assault charges. In one of the cases, the district
attorney's of?ce was not informed of the allegations until eight months after they had been made. In that
case, a campus disciplinary body found the accused guilty of misconduct over an allegation that he
raped another student. An appeals panel overtude that nJling and it was only then that information was
sent to the district attorney, who convened a grand jury, which indicted the accused. "We want to make
sure victims get their day in court. And eight months is too long. Eight months is way too long,? said a
spokeswoman for the district attorney.

Ad keywords:
Administrators 

Source URL: 

 

Links:






1i1

 3

SMU's sews! assault taskforce seating for ?rsttime  Maaomn Dallas - FortWorth

    

. I .4 

FORT WFAA-TV

SMU's sexual assault task force meeting for
first time

by MARCUS MOORE
as; 1 Email
WFAA

Posted on October 11, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Updated Thursday, Oct 11 at 3:42 PM

DALLAS SMU's sexual assault task force will meet Thursday afternoon for the ?rst
time. The 20-member group will examine the university '5 response to sexual assault

cases.

On Wednesday, police issued a ?fth crime alert for sexual assault, the third in
the past six weeks. A student reported she was sexually assaulted by an acquaintance

in the 3400 block of Asbury, off campus. The acquaintance was a SMU student.

"It's very, very scary," said student Kristin Leffeingwell, responding to the string of

alleged sexual assaults this year.

ocalidallasJ'SM 173733071 +h'ln1

113

W13

SMU's sauna! assaulttaskforoe meating for ?rstlin'El ufaaeom Dallas- FortWortl'i

Last month, John David Mahaffey, 19, was indict ed for forcing a male
student to perform oral sex despite his pleas of "no" and "stop."

Following recent cases such as these, the university has faced criticism among some
who say previous cases weren't handled swiftly enough. The university?s student
newspaper The Daily Campus published an investigation into how SMU
handled alleged sexual assaults.

The newspaper reported that the school employs an internal system of hearings and
issues its own punishment without forwarding the case to the Dallas County District
Attorney?s Of?ce. The most severe punishment is expulsion, the paper reported.

The university defended its policy, but last week announced the creation of the Task
Force on Sexual Misconduct Policies and Procedures ?to re?examine how the
University handles allegations of sexual misconduct among students.?

While the vast majority of individuals on the task force are associated with the
university, there is a representative from the of?ce present. In announcing its
creation, SMU President Gerald R. Turner said its ?ndings will be ?nished ?on or
before March 1, 2013.?

think people have high hopes for what's going to happen,? said student Jack Murphy
about the task force.

The initial meeting is not open to the media, nor will administrators reveal where it
will be held.

It is made up of current and former students and staff along with a representative
from the Dallas County DA's of?ce. Here's the full list:

Kelly Compton, executive director of the Hoglund Foundation and SMU trustee

I Jim Burnham, attorney and former Dallas County assistant district attorney

I Martin Camp, assistant dean for Student Affairs, SMU Dedman School of Law

I Karen Click, director of the SMU Women?s Center

Dennis Cordell, associate dean of general education and professor of history,
SMU Dedman College of Humanities and Sciences

Jeanne Tower Cox, Dallas civic leader, SMU trustee and parent

0 Momque Holland, SMU senior associate director of Athletics

0 Anita Ingram, SMU associate vice president and chief risk of?cer

It Monika Korra, SMU student

- Ellyce Lindberg, chief prosecutor of grand jury intake, of?ce of Dallas County
District Attorney

0 Steve Logan, senior executive director of SMU Residence Life and Student

ooalldallasl'SMUs-smud -assault?tasl<?foroe?meeti n9 ~for~? .hh'rl

scams SMU's sews] essadttaskforce meeting for ?rst?me] macom Datias Fort Worm
Housing
I Alex Mace, president of the SMU student body
0 Courtney Underwood Newsorne, executive director, the SANE Initiative
I Rick Shafer, SMU Chief of Police
- Rachany Thi Son, SMU law student
I Cathey Soutter, director of SMU Counseling and Services
Tom Tanks, SMU professor and former University associate provost
Vanessa Uzoh, SMU student and residence hall assistant
Lori White, SMU vice president for Student Affairs
Beth SMU associate vice president for Institutional Access and Equity
and executive assistant to the SMU president

Email mmoore?ufaa.com

wwmfaacom?nem? 

3:20:13 Southern Methodist University Launches Task Force After String Of Semal Assaults Reported 

 

 

Mart-it an. wit-3

 COLLEGE

 

Southern Methodist University Launches Task Force After
String Of Sexual Assaults Reported By Students

The Post 
Posted: 0112:2012 3:53 pm Updated: 52012 12:33 pm

Southern Methodist Uru'uersity is taking heat over how it has handled a string of sexual assaults involving students atlhe Texas school.

Two students in somati?cases were or patio last month on sexual assadt charges. However, it raised eyebrows as people noted it took
eight months to bring charges in one case while only a few date in the other. in response to the conh'o?uersy, SMU announced a special task
force to review how the school handles reports of sen-rue! dolence.

Administrative action aside, problems persist on the Texas campus. On Wednesday, just a day before the ?rst task farce meeting. students
received a crime alert wanting of another sexual assault", this one allegedly targeting a 1nunrzwornan ll?l her aoartment west of campus by an
acquaintance and fellow SMU student. The incident became the ?lth sexual assault reported this year and the third in the past six weeks to
go under investi gation by University Park police.

At least 40 sexual assaults were reported since 2006, according to the SMU Daily Campus, and almost all of them from SMU students-
Over the past 25 years, more than mu women at SMU reported being senelly assaulted. But the Daily Campus notes up until Inlayl 2012,
only one case was successfullv when three men were contacted and sentenced for raping a 20-year?old student at gunpoint.

SMU's policy is to treat semal assaults between students primarily as violations of the student code of conduct. Ame Medan at the Dallas
Observer notes "allegations of sexual assault wl'iere both parties are students in a system of con?dential ctr-campus hearings, in which the
maximum possible penalty is expulsion." lithey're interested in ?ling a criminal charge, students are told SMU police and 55thth Life will
assistthern.

 

The university defends the approach.
"it's very effective," SMU Police Chief Richard Shafer told the ?ail}:r Campus. ?it has helped people heal."
Even as SMU President Ft Gerald Tumer announced the task force. he 

?Alb-rough our procedures are examined regularly, and mirror those of many other institutions. the Task Force will be a timely opportunity to
broaden deliberations and conversation on this critical matter,? Turner said in a statement to the Daiias Mooring NEHS. "its focus will include
not only how sexual misconduct allegations are addressed at SMU but also how the mine-rally can strengthen prevention and education on
this important topic."

The Eutember task force includes students, attomeys. trustees and facility members.
?the task force held?its ?rst mell ngTbursc? ay. They?re due to release a report with recommendations for improvement in March 2013.
Ali Williams, a 21-year-old SMU junior. told CBS Dallas-Fort Worth part of the problem is a lack of education aboutthe issue.

?When I was a frost-man, I don?t remember there being any talk about sexual assault.? Williams said. ?So, that de?nitely needs to be brought
up and the seriousness needs to be known."

?li1

M13 BREAKING NEWS: Student reports sexual asault- News - SMU DailyCan?pus- SouthernMelhodistUniiersity

BREAKING NEWS: Student reports sexual
assau?

By Julie Fancher
Email: jfancher@smu.edu

Published: Tuesday, January 22, 2013
Updated: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 00:01

An SMU student reported an on? campus sexual assault to the SMU police according to a crime
alert issued to the cainpus Tuesday afternoon.

The student told SMU police that she was sexually assaulted by an acquaintance who has also
been identi?ed as a SMU student at the Perkins residence hall early Monday morning.

Kent Best, the Executive Director of News and Media Relations said in a statement:

takes all allegations of sexual assault seriously and its police department vigorously
investigates all such complaints. The alleged sexual assault reported to SMU police on Jan. 21
is under police investigation. Anyone with information about this matter is asked to contact
SMU Police at 214-768-3388.?

This is the sixth reported sexual assault on campus since the beginning of the school year.

This past September junior Donald Cuba was indicted by a grand jury for sexual assault that
allegedly occurred in March 2012.

His trial is set to begin on March 25.

Sophomore John David Mahaffey was arrested in late September 2012 after allegedly sexually
assaulting another male student. He was indicted in November and as of now there is no trial
date set for that case.

Dr. Lori White recently sent out an email to students, staff and faculty in regards to the sexual
assault task force. The email said the task force has created an email address to "obtain
feedback from the SMU community on current sexual misconduct policies and practices."

112

W13 BREAKENG NEWS: Student reports Gena] assamv News SMU DailyCarrpus Smhern Methodist Unixeraity

The task force will accept any feedback or comments sent to taskforce@sn1u.edu until Jan. 28.



21"2

W13 Sweeping rape under the rug - News - SMU DailyCarmus - Smnhern Methot?st Uritersity

Sweeping rape under the rug

By Patricia 8011, Brooks Igo, Natalie Posgate
Email: pboh@smu.edu, bigo @smu.edu, nposgate@smu.edu

Published: Tuesday, May 1, 2012
Updated: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 17:11

This interactive map shows the locations of 24 sexual assaults reported to campus police
since 2006. Entries without speci?c locations appear at the SM UPD station, because this is
where these attacks were reported. Locations with multiple entries are grouped together;
these are represented with blue markers.

Rape and Its Consequences: Second in a series

Over the past 25 years, more than 1 00 SMU students reported they were sexually assaulted.

msnudai rug 1l5

W13 Sweeping rape under the rug - - SMU Daiinarmus - Su?hern Methodist University
Yet, in only one case the three men who raped Monika Korra in 2009 were the suspects
successfully prosecuted.

They were not SMU students. For every suspect who is, SMU relies on a system of secret
hearings using rules not found in any courtroom, and the maximum penalty is expulsion.

don?t think there should be a carte blanche for a man or a woman to commit a violation of
the state?s laws on campus and therefore have one free pass,? Erin Hendricks, the lead
prosecutor in Korra?s case, said. ?Why are we going to short-circuit the process and avoid
consequences for a person who has potentially committed such a serious crime??

SMU of?cials say the internal system works well, though they refused to provide any statistics
or other documented information to support their claim.

?It?s very effective,? SMU Police Chief Richard Shafer said. ?It has helped people heal.?

However, the only tw0 cases that have come to light over the past 25 years suggest otherwise.
The most recent one a 2006 rape case prompted a multi?million dollar lawsuit against
SMU. University of?cials agreed to a settlement that they refuse to discuss.

The other one ignited a ?restorm of controversy, not only in Dallas but nationally. A secret
panel found a SMU student guilty of sexually assaulting another student in 1990 only to have a
second judicial panel and the president of SMU ?overrule that decision in 1991.

Attorney Reed Prospere, who represented the victim and has almost four decades of
experience as a prosecutor and criminal defense attorney, remains deeply troubled by the
outcome of the 1990 case.

?It?s as big an injustice institutionally as I?ve seen,? Prospere said. ?How it?s a system to get to
the truth is beyond me.?

According to the SMU Student Handbook, sexual assault charges are best handled by secret
judicial panels whose goal is educational ?not an adversarial process of antagonists striving to
best one another.?

Dr. Evelyn Ashley, the SMU of?cial responsible for overseeing these panels, said it?s dif?cult to
explain how a non? adversarial approach is realistic in handling rape cases.

?The system is not designed to be adversarial,? Ashley said. ?That?s hard for me to speak to
because every two students are going to be different.?

Hendricks, who spent eight years in the Dallas County District Attorney?s of?ce prosecuting
rape cases, sees ?aws in system.

?Tell me what part of sexual assault is non-adversarial,? Hendricks, a graduate of SMU's
Dedman School of Law, said. ?Tell me what part of a woman being subjected to a
nonconsensual sexual encounter is not in and of itself adversarial. And then I might be able to
better understand why the non- adversarial nature of the judicial council bene?ts a victim.?



3r'20l13 Snooping rape under the rug - News SMU DailyCarrWS - Smithern Methodist Unimrsity

What SMU rape reports show

On Dec. 5, 2009, three men kidnapped Korra as she was leaving an East Dallas party and
gang?raped her. Because it occurred off-campus, the Dallas Police Department conducted the
investigation. Its efforts, Korra?s determination to press charges and the work of Hendricks
and other prosecutors provided Korra with justice unknown to other SM rape victims: She
got to see the men who raped her go to prison. She later told The Daily Campus this was
central to her healing process.

?That was my goal: to ?nd them, to make sure they would be locked up and never would be
able to do that to anyone ever again,? Korra said.

Hendricks said SMU ?supported Monika from start to ?nis 

Shafer said that since he joined the force in 1999, Korra?s was the only sexual assault case
where suspects were successfully prosecuted that he could recall.

It?s also one of the few where the suspects were not students.

Rape on college campuses is a national problem. A study funded by the U.S. Justice
Department found that one in ?ve women will be sexually assaulted in college.

Cathey Soutter, director of counseling and services, has been counseling
sexual assault victims on campus for more than two decades.

?On any given year I may have seven in a semester, I might have 15,? she said.

Over the past six years, at least 40 sexual assaults were reported to SMU of?cials including 13
in 2006.

SMU released little or no information about these cases. Using crime alerts, lawsuits, and crime
logs, The Daily Campus assembled information about 24 of these reported rapes, all of which
were reported to police:

1? Seventeen ?_or two-thirds were committed by SMU students.

- Seventeen took place on campus 10 in dormitories and seven in fraternity houses
including three at the Kappa Sigma fraternity house (August 2008, October 2008 and
January 2011).

SMU police did not provide a description of the student suspect in 13 of 17 cases.

If SMU arrests a student for violating drug, alcohol or weapons laws, the university puts these
?gures on its website along with the number of cases referred to judicial panels. Yet of?cials
refuse to do the same for sexual assault cases. When asked why, Ashley, assistant dean
of student life and director of student conduct and community standards, said, ?There could be
a panel, but some of that is handled administratively so there?s a difference between an

.EEBMWGIFNS 3'5

some Sweeping rape under the rug - News SMU DailyCan'pus? Earthen University
administrative hearing and a hearing where there is a panel.?

Records show SMU routinely publicizes descriptions of non?student suspects in sexual assault
cases but seldom does so when the suspect is a student.

Shafer said no description is necessary in an ?acquaintance rape? because the victim and police
know the identity of the alleged rapist.

?We want to tell you where it happened, when it happened not everything about it,? he said.
?We?re not trying to put a picture out there.?

How SMU secret panels handled two cases

On April 30, 1991, The Daily Campus published two stories that broke the iron secrecy of
judicial system. One said a panel of three students, one faculty member and one
administrator found a student guilty of rape in 1990. The other questioned the effectiveness of
using secret panels to decide rape cases. The Dallas Morning News, the Houston Chronicle and
The New York Times followed with their own stories.

Meanwhile, the student appealed to a second panel (three SMU students, two administrators,
two faculty members). They refused to allow the victim to testify at the appeals hearing,
according to Prospere, her attorney. They found the student not guilty, a decision upheld by
the late A. Kenneth Pye, the SMU president.

The decision left Norm Kinne, then the No. 2 of?cial in the Dallas County District Attorney?s
of?ce, dumbfounded. As he told The Daily Campus in 1991, ?Universities are not in a position
to deal with crime. It is a matter to be dealt with by the courts. It is totally outside their
jurisdiction.?

Then, as now, SMU of?cials said their system represents a win-win situation for both sides.
Shafer said victims ?are able to tell what happened to them, voice what happened to them.?

Prospere, a SMU Law School graduate who spent eight years as a prosecutor in the Dallas
district attorney?s of?ce, said the outcome of the 1990 case left his client feeling deSpondent
particularly since she was not even allowed to testify at the appeals hearing.

?You?re shocked, surprised, and hurt if you participated, but compound that if you weren?t
allowed to participate in the process,? Prospere said. ?How can that be fair??

It would be 15 years before another rape case in SMU's secret judicial system came to light.

This time, a former student sued SMU after a panel found him guilty of sexually assaulting a
student in January 2006. The lawsuit said university officials failed to provide him with a fair
and impartial hearing as required by the SMU Student Handbook?because they:

0 Gave him just eight days to prepare for an April 28 hearing on three-month?old sexual



W13 Bumping rape under the rug - News - SMU Dailycm - Southern Methodist Unhersity
assault charges.

0 Allowed Soutter to testify the accuser had been ?dmgged? though Soutter was not placed
under oath, no medical evidence supported the claim and the panel chair had ruled drugs
could not be discussed. (Soutter told The Dain Campus she cannot comment on the

heating.)
- Permitted SMU Judicial Affairs Coordinator Susan Rat-Thomas, who was supposed to
act as a mediator, to deliver a closing argument in which she said believe" the accuser

and called the defendant a "rapist." (Ratz-Thomas, who no longer works at SMU, told The
Daily Campus she could not comment on the hearing.

The lawsuit said the panel found the student guilty of sexual assault and expelled him. He
appealed. A few weeks later, the student received a letter from Dean of Student Life Dee
Siscoe?s of?ce that was signed by Rate?Thomas. It said there were ?signi?cant procedural
irregularities that denied the accused a fair hearing? and that the evidence presented at the
hearing ?was clearly insuf?cient to support the charge,? according to the lawsuit. Instead of
expulsion, the student was suspended.

The former student sued SMU in June 2007. That same month, Rats-Thomas left SMU. The
case was settled in September 2008. That same month, Lisa Webb replaced Siscoe as dean of
student life.

John McElhaney, who represented SMU in the case, said he was not at Hberty to discuss the
lawsuit or the settlement.

Michael P. Kelly, who represented the former student, told The Daily Campus his client felt
very good about the lawsuit because it ?nally allowed his voice to be heard regarding the
fundamental lack of fairness in handling of the judicial hearing.

Map sources: SM crime alerts, SM PD crane logs and related lawsuits

unda-the?rug- 1 5'5

 

 

From: 
Date: I
TO: 

 

I
Subject: On Behalf of Associate Provostlii?m (W
libililicl

Dear (bit?) 

. . . .
mow the ndictrnent has caused you anguish?anguish for some of you because you are

friend and for all of you because this tragedy has been tied to the 0330310} I or. I
(moire) (mm

 

 

regret deeply that this has happened to us. I have been in contact with
and they remain very supportive of the (W) (WW0)

 

I have refrained from sending a general email to all {mm ntil now because I did not want to
speculate on what would happen next. We now know that is facing some type of resolution
of these criminal charges, either a plea agreement or a trial.

I realize that you may have questions or a need to express your reaction to this event. I propose
that we meet as a group. This meeting can occur this semester, but I hesitate to do this because I
do not want to add another burden to your life during finals. 1 suggest that we meet at the
beginning of next semester to have a group dis about this. However, the decision of
when we meet should be yours, so I will Isend you an email asking when you want

to meet?this semester or next.

 

If we do not meet until next semester, but you want to discuss this before next semester, please
come see me. My door is always open to you.

b?
{it}

Associate Provost

Of?ce of the Provost

Southern Methodist University
I Dallas, Texas 7527545221

 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION nacronvr

 

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS ARKANSAS

LUDHIANA

1999 BRYAN SUITE 1521] MESSIFPI
DALLAS, TX 75201-6810 TEXAS

APR192013

 

{were}

 

 

 

Reference: 06-13 ?2088

 

llbl?liC}

The U.S. Department of Education (Department), Office for Civil Rights (OCR), Dallas
of?ce, has completed its evaluation of the above-referenced complaint against Southern
Methodist University (SMU or University), Dallas, Texas, which was received in our
office on March 20, 2013. You alleged that SMU discriminated against your client
(Student) on the basis of sex when the University failed to appropriately respond when
the Student noti?ed the University that he had been sexually assaulted.

OCR is reaponsible for determining whether organizations or entities that receive or
bene?t from Federal ?nancial assistance, either ?-om the Department or an agency that
has delegated investigative authority to the Department, are in compliance with Title IX
of the Education Amendments of 1972 {Title IX), 20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., and its
implementing regulations at 34 C.F.R. Part 106, which prohibit discrimination on the
basis of sex.

SMU is a recipient of Federal ?nancial assistance from the Department. Therefore, OCR
has jurisdiction to process this complaint for resolution under Title IX.

Because OCR has determined that it has jurisdiction and that the complaint was ?led
timely, it is opening the allegation. Please note that opening an investigation pertaining to
this allegation in no way implies that OCR has made a determination with regard to its
merit. During the investigation, OCR is a neutral fact-?nder, collecting and analyzing
relevant evidence from the complainant, the recipient, and other sources, as appropriate.
OCR will ensure that its investigation is legally suf?cient and is dispositive of the
allegation, in accordance with the provisions of Article of Case Processing
Manual.

OCR will investigate whether during the school year, SMU discriminated
against the Student on the basis of sex by failing to take prompt and effective action to
address the sexually harassing conduct directed toward him, which was sufficient to
constitute a hostile environment, of which SMU had or should have had notice, in
violation of Title IX, at 34 C.F.R. 106.31.

The Department ofEducah?m ?s is to proximit- strident ochre vet-nan! andprefamation for global mmpett?tt wnass
by fostering educa?'ttnal entails-an and ensuring aqua amass.



 

(C)
Page 2 a [06-13-2038)

 

 

 

Please note that OCR's case resolution processes include Early Complaint Resolution
(ECR). ECR allows the parties (the complainant and the institution that is the subject of
the complaint) an opportunity to resolve the complaint allegations quickly; generally,
soon after the complaint has been opened for investigation, although ECR may take place
at any time during the investigative process. If both parties are willing to try this
approach, and if OCR determines that ECR is appropriate, OCR will facilitate settlement
discussions between the parties and work with the parties to help them understand the
legal standards and possible remedies. You will be contacted in the near ?iture, usually
within ten days from the date of this letter, to discuss this case. Enclosed with this letter is
a brochure explaining the ECR process. Please let OCR know if you are interested in the
ECR process.

Under OCR procedures, OCR is obligated to advise the complainant and the institution
against which a complaint is ?led that intimidation or retaliation against any individual is
prohibited by regulations enforced by this agency. Speci?cally, the regulations enforced
by OCR, directly or by reference, state that no recipient or other person shall intimidate,
threaten, coerce, or discriminate against any individual for the purpose of interfering with
any right or privilege secured by regulations enforced by OCR or because one has made a
complaint, testi?ed, assisted or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding
or hearing held in connection with a complaint.

Under the Freedom of Information Act, it may be necessary to release this document and
related correspondence and records upon request. In the event that OCR receives such a
request, we will seek to protect, to the extent provided by law, personally identi?able
information, which, if released, could reasonably be expected to constitute an
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

If you have any questions regarding this investigation, please feel free to contact me at
(214) 661-9677.

Sincerely,

be.? an 
Emily C. Babb
Civil Rights Attorney

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION tractors vr

 

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS nastiness

momma

1999 BRYAN 5'12, SUITE 1620 
DALLAS, 'Dt 5201-6810 TEXAS

APR192M3

Dr. R. Gerald Turner, President
Southern Methodist University
6425 Boaz Lane

Dallas, TX 75205
Reference: 06-13-2088

Dear Dr. Turner:

The US. Department of Education (Deparnnent), Of?ce for Civil Rights (OCR), Dallas
of?ce, has completed its evaluation of the above-referenced complaint against Southern
Methodist University (SMU of University), Dallas, Texas, which was received in our
o?ice on March 20, 2013. The complainant alleged that SMU discriminated against his
client (Student) on the basis of sex when the University failed to appropriately respond
when the Student noti?ed the University that he had been sexually assaulted.

OCR is responsible for determining whether organizations or entities that receive or
bene?t from Federal ?nancial assistance, either from the Department or an agency that
has delegated investigative authority to the Department, are in compliance with Title IX
of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX), 20 U.S.C. 168] et seq., and its
implementing regulations at 34 C.F.R. Part 106, which prohibit discrimination on the
basis of sex.

SMU is a recipient of Federal ?nancial assistance from the Department. Therefore, OCR
has jurisdiction to process this complaint for resolution under Title IX.

Because OCR has determined that it has jurisdiction and that the complaint was ?led
timely, it is opening an investigation regarding the aforementioned allegation. Please note
that opening an investigation pertaining to this allegation in no way implies that OCR has
made a determination with regard to its merit. During the investigation, OCR is a neutral
fact??nder, collecting and analyzing relevant evidence from the complainant, the
recipient, and other sources, as appropriate. OCR will ensure that its investigation is
legally suf?cient and is dispositive of the allegation, in accordance with the provisions of
Article of Case Processing Manual.

- I on the complainant?s allegation, OCR will investigate whether during the
school year, SMU discriminated against the Student on the basis of sex by failing to
take prompt and effective action to address the sexually harassing conduct directed
toward him, which was suf?cient to constitute a hostile environment, of which SMU had
or should have had notice, in violation of Title TX, at 34 C.F.R. 106.31.

The Separation! ofEdura?nn ?5 nussmn is to promote student ?fhlEVE?lir??I and pre- ratr?an for-glottal mmpeul?r'veness
by fmteraig educarima! arena-me and ensuring aqua airless.

ww wedgov

Page 2 Dr. R. Gerald Tamer, President (06-13-2083)

For your information, we have enclosed Complaint Processing Procedures to
provide you with an overview of our complaint evaluation and resolution process. Please
note that case resolution processes include Early Complaint Resolution (ECR).
ECR allows the parties (the complainant and the institution that is the subject of the
complaint) an opportunity to resolve the complaint allegations quickly; generally, soon
after the complaint has been opened for investigation, although ECR may take place at
any time during the investigative process. If both parties are willing to try this approach,
and if OCR determines that ECR is OCR will facilitate settlement
discussions between the parties and work with the parties to help them understand the
legal standards and possible remedies. You will be contacted in the near future, usually
within ten days ?'om the date of this letter, to discuss this case. Enclosed with this letter is
a brochure explaining the ECR process. Please let OCR know if you are interested in the
ECR process.

Section 100.6(c) of Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations stipulates that each
recipient of Federal ?nancial assistance shall permit access to pertinent sources of
information to reSponsible Department of?cials or designees. Enclosed is an initial data
request, which is required in assisting our efforts to ascertain compliance with the
regulations enforced by OCR. Please provide the muested information to OCR within
15 calendar davs of the date of this letter. This request may be supplemented through
interviews with SMU personnel or any witnesses who may have knowledge of the issue,
and if necessary, additional data requests from SMU as the complaint investigation
progresses. After reviewing this information or any additional information, OCR will
determine whether an on-site investigation is warranted. If so, you will be contacted to
arrange a mutually convenient date.

Under OCR procedures, OCR is obligated to advise the complainant and the institution
against which a complaint is ?led that intimidation or retaliation against any individual is
prohibited by regulations enforced by this agency. Speci?cally, the regulations enforced
by OCR, directly or by reference, state that no recipient or other person shall intimidate,
threaten, coerce, or discriminate against any individual for the purpose of interfeng with
any right or privilege secured by regulations enforced by OCR or because one has made a
complaint, testi?ed, assisted or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding
or hearing held in connection with a complaint.

Under the Freedom of Information Act, it may be necessary to release this document and
related correspondence and records upon request. In the event that OCR receives such a
request, we will seek to protect, to the extent provided by law, personally identifiable
information, which, if released, could reasonably be expected to constitute an
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

Page 3 Dr. R. Gerald Tumer, President (06-13-2038)

If you have any questions concerning this investigation, please contact me at (214) 661?

9677 or 

Sincerely,

Emily C. Babb
Civil Rights Attorney

Page 4 Dr. R. Gerald Turner, President (06-13-2033)

Southern Methodist University
OCR Complaint 06-13-2088

Please provide the following information within 15 calendar days of the date of this
letter. You may mail information to the address in the enclosed letter, fax information to
(214) 661-9587, or email information to Attorney Emily Babb at EmilyBabnged. gov.

l.

The names and contact information for any and all individuals designated as the

University?s Title IX Coordinator(s) for the school year. Please

indicate the time period(s) such individuals serve as itle IX Coordinator, and
for which pepulation(s) within the University they were reaponsible.

 

A copy of all Title IX policies and procedures, including but not limited to
grievance rocedures, complaint processing procedures, and hearing procedures,
for the school year. Please include any and all procedures for
investigating or otherwise responding to complaints of sexual harassment, sexual
assault, andJ'or sexual violence and indicate how these policies or procedures
arefwere disseminated to students, faculty, staff and employees.

A cepy of all complaints or grievances, or any other notice to SMU or the SMU

police department, formal or informal, ?led by or on behalf of
(hereinafter referred to as Student 1) during the school year alleging
sexual harassment, sexual assault, sex discrimination, andfor sexual violence,
including but not limited to aliblmicl Ialleged sexual assault involving
Student 1 and Ili?micl I(Student 2). Please include any inquiries or
investigations conducted by SMU or the SMU police department and conclusions
or determinations reached, including evidence gathered or relied upon in the
determination (including but not limited to handwritten notes, witness statements,
taped telephone conversations), appeals and responses, hearing transcripts, andfor
sanctions imposed.

A list of all SMU faculty, staff, andfor employees, including SMU police
personnel, who were involved in the investigation of or any response, formal or
informal, to the [incident involving Student 1 and Student 2.
Please include the name and title for each individual.

 

A copy of all correspondence, including but not limited to e-mails or any written
documentation re?ecting conversations had meeting notes, records of

tele hone conversations, etc.), written to, by, or about Student 1 from
including but not limited to correspondence concerning
the campus crime alert, modi?cations to Student l?s
or honsin, Student 1?s participation in the rogram or
receipt of the complaints of harassing conduct involving
Student 1 or Student 2 individuals knocking on Student 1?s door, calling

Student 1?s telephone and hanging up, yelling at Student 1, glaring or at
Student 1, sending Student I unwelcome text messages), ?no contact? letters

 

Page 5 Dr. R. Gerald Turner, President (06-13-2088)

concerning Student 1, andfor Student 1?s request for and receipt of a
withdrawal from SMU.

6. A copy of any documents or tape recordin submitted to the Dallas County
District Attorney?s office concerning the (?mm incident involving
Student I and Student 2.

 

 

7. A copy of any correspondence, complaints, or grievances or any other notice
given to SMU or the SMU police department referencing Student 2 and involving
allegations of sexual harassment, sexual assault, sexual violence, sex
discrimination, gender discrimination, gender harassment, andfor inappropriate
sexual conduct involving any current or former student other than Student 1.
Please include any inquiries or investigations conducted by SMU or the SMU
police depamnent and conclusions or determinations reached, including evidence
gathered or relied upon in the determination (including but not limited to
handwritten notes, witness statements, taped telephone conversations), appeals
and responses, hearing transcripts, andfor sanctions imposed.

 

 

 

3. A copy of any correspondence, including e-mails, ?-om to the
present to current or former SMU students or current or former I?l IMI
concerning Student 1, Student 2, the Iincident involving
Student 1 and Student 2, Student 2?s criminal charges or indictment, or Student
l?s withdrawing from SMU.

 

 

 STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION utmost v!

 

OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS anxmsas

routslatva

raw BRYAN ST.. SUITE loll] 
DALLAS, TX woe;

December 1 l. 2014

 

(DTUHC)

 

 

 

RE: OCR Complaint 06-13-2088
Southern Methodist University

 


Dearl?ltl

 

 

 

Enclosed please find the disposition of the complaint you ?led on beltall?ol' your client on
March 20. 2013. against Southern Methodist University or the University} with the
US. Department ot'Edueation?s Office for Civil Rights (OCR). alleging discrimination
on the basis ot?sex. OCR received three complaints between June 201 and March 2013
alleging gender harassment. sexual harassment. andfor sexual assault. The complainants
alleged that the University failed to and equitably respond to complaints of
gender harassment. sexual harassment. and sexual violence of which it had notice.
including the students' reports of gender harassment and sexual assault: and. as a result.
students. including your client and another student who tiled one ofthe three complaints,
were subjected to a hostile environment.

We explain the basis for OCR's ?ndings concerning all three complaints in the enclosed
letter to the University. In the letter. your client is referred to as ?Complainant The
names of students and other parties also were not used in the letter in order to protect
individuals? privacy.

On November 16. 2014. OCR entered into a resolution agreement (Agreement) with the
University to resolve the identified compliance concerns in all three complaints. Enclosed
is a copy for your information. OCR will monitor the implementation ofthc Agreement.
11? the University fails to implement the Agreement. OCR may initiate administrative
entorcentent orjudieial proceedings to enforce the specilic terms and obligations of the
Agreement. Before initiating administrative enforcement {34 CPR. 100.9. 100.10). or
judicial proceedings to enforce- the Agreement, 0C shall give the University written
notice of the alleged breach and a minimum ot?sixty (60} calendar days to cure the
alleged breach.

This concludes OCR's investigation of your complaint and should not be interpreted to
address the niversity's compliance with any other regulatory provision or to address any

The Department tu'EtluutUon  an is I pr: vuott shutter! mun-vein: wt and Iiu'gfohuf unp: =trtt'veuess
by hmh?nng :Iu'u: ensuring; {you a: H's-v.

tv tv tvaul . pr: uv

 

Page 2 (mum) 

 

 

 

issues other than those addressed in this or enclosed letter. You may file a private suit
in Federal court whether or not 0C ?nds a violation.

This letter sets forth determination in an individual OCR case. This letter is not a
formal statement of OCR policy and should not be relied upon. cited. or censtrued as
such. formal policy statements are approved by a duly authorized OCR of?cial
and made available to the public.

Please be advised that the University may not ltarass. coerce. intimidate, or discrintinate
against any individual because he or she has tiled a complaint or participated in the
complaint resolution process. Ifthis happens. the harmed individual may tile a complaint
alleging such treatment.

Under the Freedom olilnt'ormation Act. it may be necessary to release this document and
related correspondence and records upon request. In the event that OCR receives such a
request. we will seek to protect. to the extent provided by law. personally identi?able
information. which. i released. could reasonably be expected to constitute an
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

If you have any questions about this letter or OCR's resolution ofthis case. please contact
me at (214) 661?9600 or Emily Babb. the attorney assigned to the complaint. at (214)
661-9677.

Sincerely.

 
 

.l tstinnfl . :vans
Supervisory Attorneyi?Team Leader

Enclosure