Dec. 8 2016
Stanford University Statement on Misrepresentations of Title IX Actions
Stanford has worked and continues to work diligently to ensure a safe campus environment in
which sexual assault and relationship violence have no place, and to treat all victims of such
violence with compassion and dignity.
Recent allegations fundamentally misrepresent what has occurred in discussions between
Stanford and complainants in Title IX cases, its commitment to continual assessment and
improvement of its sexual assault policies and practices, and its interactions with faculty.
Stanford continues to believe it is ethically bound to the confidentiality provisions of the
settlement discussion process. The university has asked Ms. Leah Francis' attorneys to allow it to
discuss what took place in settlement discussions, and they have not responded to that request.
However, because of the allegations that have been made against the university, we can clarify
the following:
Stanford does not have and has never had the intention of curtailing any federal Title IX
investigation, nor could it do so even if it desired to. Stanford has been fully cooperating with the
Office for Civil Rights and intends to continue doing so.
What Stanford has done in settlement discussions is respond to demands from lawyers that
Stanford pay money to their clients or be faced with costly and time-consuming litigation.
Opposing lawyers initiated these discussions. Generally, and as is customary in such situations,
when Stanford considers a financial settlement in response to a demand from a lawyer
threatening a lawsuit, the university requires that the party receiving the money withdraw any
personal claims under which they could receive more money for the same matter – in this case,
through the OCR process. But such a step would not curtail any investigation.
When even a single complaint is filed under Title IX, it is the practice of the Office for Civil
Rights to conduct an exhaustive review of all issues relating to the institution’s handling of issues
related to sexual assault. Like more than 200 other institutions, Stanford has an ongoing
investigation undertaken by OCR, and it covers these matters over a multiyear period. It is
incorrect that if a student withdraws his or her personal complaint, OCR will not continue
reviewing the issues raised by that complaint. What is true is only that the student cannot then
seek further financial payment from the university through OCR.
Again, Stanford is not seeking and has never sought in any way to end the Title IX investigations
and could not do so even if it reached a settlement forestalling potential litigation with an
individual party. We look forward to having all the facts in these cases come out publicly in
court, as privacy law precludes us from discussing the facts otherwise. The university has
nothing to hide about its handling of these cases and has no desire to keep any sexual assault
survivor from talking about any criticisms they may have of Stanford or its processes.
There also has been an incorrect suggestion that Stanford is resistant to reforms in its sexual

 assault policies and practices. Stanford has undertaken a wide range of efforts to strengthen the
prevention and response to sexual violence at the university, and these efforts are continuing,
including a major overhaul of policies and practices after a comprehensive review by the
Provost’s Task Force on Sexual Assault in 2014-2015. We look forward to continuing to work
with our campus community and the Office for Civil Rights to address our shared goal of
ensuring a safe campus environment free of sexual assault and relationship violence.
Finally, to clarify a related issue that been raised in recent days: While the university cannot
publicly discuss personnel matters or student complaints, it would never tell a faculty member
that they could not talk about instances of sexual assault or harassment at Stanford. Indeed, there
is a very robust discussion of these important issues on our campus from all perspectives.
Stanford may ask a faculty member to use good judgment, and not discuss confidential
information they may have obtained about a sexual assault survivor’s actual case in public or
with other students without the survivor’s permission, consistent with our stated policies. As
Stanford’s notalone.stanford.edu website states: "Assure survivors that you will keep the matter
private to the furthest extent possible (may vary depending on your role, i.e., friend, family
member, professional staff.) If it becomes public the survivor may feel re-victimized."
###