V. Jurisdiction Over Reports of Prohibited Conduct
As defined by the Department of Education, the University must respond promptly and appropriately in a manner that is not deliberately indifferent when it receives notice of alleged facts that, if true, could be considered sexual harassment (actual knowledge) that occurs in any education program or activity of the University against a person in the United States. This includes responding to reports of sexual harassment in education programs and activities in the United States in the following settings:
- An education program or activity means locations, events, or circumstances over which the recipient exercises substantial control over both the Respondent and the context in which the sexual harassment occurs;
- Buildings or other locations that are part of the University’s operations, including remote learning platforms.
- Off-campus settings if the University exercises substantial control over the Respondent and the context in which the alleged sexual harassment occurred (e.g., a field trip for an off-site educational experience).
- Also includes any building owned or controlled by a student organization that is officially recognized by the University.
- Such as a building owned by a recognized fraternity or sorority, (of which the University currently does not have.)
In order for the University to determine whether it had substantial control over the Respondent and context in an off-campus setting, it must make a fact-specific determination and may consider factors such as whether the University funded, promoted, or sponsored the event where the alleged harassment occurred. However, no single factor is determinative in concluding whether the University had substantial control over the Respondent and the context in which the reported harassment occurred.
Allegations of misconduct that do not meet the jurisdictional requirements outlined above may be referred for review and possible resolution under other University policies.