Improved Title IX processes at UNC Chapel Hill (opinion)

It’s incredibly gratifying when we can see those very changes that we once fought for—and never expected to be implemented. Almost 12 years ago, I was a college administrator who filed both Title IX and Clery Act complaints with the Department of Education against the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the university that was both my employer and my beloved alma mater.

Over the years, UNC repeatedly denied any wrongdoing, even after being placed under federal monitoring and having to pay a hefty fine. I seriously doubted that their systems for conducting Title IX investigations would ever improve in any meaningful ways. I am happy to say that I was wrong.

I recently had the opportunity to see the new processes firsthand as a volunteer advocate for a survivor of sexual misconduct who took her case through the Title IX investigation/disciplinary process. I was incredibly impressed with all the things that were done right. The investigation and hearing were handled with integrity and thoughtfulness, and an outstanding victim advocate was available for support throughout the process. Kindness was a key factor in every step.

While it’s true that UNC Chapel Hill is larger and has more resources than many other colleges and universities, many of the basic practices that I observed are simple and fairly low-cost and can be employed not just in Title IX processes, but in many other types of disciplinary and conduct proceedings. Some of my main takeaways were:

1. Thoroughness matters. While the investigation period took longer than expected, the two staff members assigned to the case were extremely thorough in locating and assembling all the relevant evidence. Numerous students were interviewed at length, text messages were combed through, pictures were obtained and follow-up questions were asked. A detailed final report was completed for the hearing. While such comprehensive information gathering can be time- and resource-consuming and result in longer wait times, it seems worth it if both the accusers and the accused can see that a full picture of the event(s) is presented to the decision-makers and that all parties have the opportunity to participate and feel heard. A thorough, complete investigation is important both in terms of enabling decision-makers to make the best possible decisions and ensuring that all stakeholders have trust in the process.
2. Kindness matters even more. It is incredibly difficult for any student to report or be accused of sexual misconduct. The emotional toll is intense, and many students have very little support as they go through the processes because they may not feel comfortable telling their family and friends. All the staff members we worked with were unfailingly kind and respectful. They checked in with the student and they were patient with her questions and concerns.
3. Prompt responses and timely notices matter, too. Almost every time we submitted a question or request, we received an answer within one business day, often within a matter of hours. We were notified of every new step in the process, every deadline and every delay. This is not only good business practice, but this type of transparency is particularly important for those who may have experienced trauma. It was another practice that helps establish trust.

4. The human touch is still vital. Several years ago, a UNC undergrad told me that even with an ever-increasing amount of their time spent online, students still need to be able to connect with “wise adults, preferably in person.” This is absolutely true when dealing with Title IX and related matters. I understand the desire to use artificial intelligence and other technologies in the name of efficiency, but when dealing with sensitive subject matters such as sexual assault, students often need to connect with an actual human, instead of a no-reply bot. The student in my case had access to a victim advocate throughout the process and had meetings with Title IX investigators as well as a pre-hearing meeting with the hearing officer, which enabled us to discuss final questions and helped ease many of our concerns.
5. Well-trained hearing officers are invaluable. I had been somewhat skeptical of the move by many colleges to stop using panels of faculty and staff members and to employ single hearing officer models. But after experiencing a finely tuned hearing run by a professional decision-maker, I’m officially a fan. The ongoing problems with faculty/staff panels aren’t just due to lack of training: It’s the lack of experience that leads to inconsistencies and inefficiencies. The officer in our case was fair and impartial and was willing to use his authority to strike problematic questions and ensure that we all conducted ourselves with the utmost decorum. We had an unexpected development in our hearing, but having an experienced staff member conducting the proceedings ensured that we didn’t lose valuable time and were able to continue after only a short delay.

There were still areas that clearly needed improvement. For example, the reporting party was initially given very limited information about what to expect in the investigation/hearing process and felt very unsure with the initial steps. A simple one-page document or slide deck that provided guidance on what to expect could have helped her better understand the process. Here are a few other suggestions.

1. Consider doing exit interviews of the student parties. Both the reporting and responding parties may have valuable insights and suggestions for improvement. While it is true that their observations may be colored by anger or disappointment over the final decisions, they still can pinpoint problem areas or offer recommendations from a student perspective. Processes that seem so well designed from an administrator’s viewpoint may come off as overly burdensome or confusing from a student’s perspective.
2. Be mindful of the relative speed of the process. While I completely endorse the need to conduct thorough investigations, keep in mind that most students are only in college for two to four years. Any administrative investigation that drags out can have dire effects on the academic progress of the students involved. All deadlines should be clearly articulated and enforced. And please refrain from scheduling hearings, important meetings or interviews during finals weeks!

3. Reduce the legalese. I think many colleges are fearful to use plain language in their policies and communications with students. This is a mistake. Legalese keeps many students, their parents, faculty and staff from fully understanding various processes. Remember that most of those who are reading the policies don’t have law degrees. In our case, the overly formal text of the emails sent by the Title IX office scared off some of the student witnesses from agreeing to interviews with the investigators, as they mistakenly believed that they would have to obtain legal representation. Policies should be written by nonlawyers first, and colleges should consider including students in policy development and communication plans.
4. Account for the role of outside attorneys. Whether or not attorneys can directly participate in your Title IX processes, many students will hire them to help with evidence collection and overall preparation. Overzealous attorneys may try to improperly influence the process. Consider offering volunteer advocates for both reporting and responding parties to even the playing field. Law students or retired attorneys may be willing to take on this role. And work to educate any attorneys that are retained by students so that they understand your processes, particularly the differences between educational and Title IX processes and the criminal justice system.

The gold standard for this work is creating a humane process in which all involved students feel that they have been treated respectfully and fairly. Mere compliance and checking the boxes are simply not enough. While highly structured processes and policies are required to meet federal mandates and to ensure consistency, human connection and compassion for all parties should be absolutes.