Allegations of sex discrimination and sex-based harassment, as defined in policy H:110 - Equal Opportunity, Civil Rights and Sexual Harassment, are resolved using the Equity Resolution Procedure (policy H-120).

Important definitions

Complainant: (1) A student or employee who is alleged to have been subjected to conduct that could constitute sex discrimination under Title IX or this part; or (2) A person other than a student or employee who is alleged to have been subjected to conduct that could constitute sex discrimination under Title IX or this part and who was participating or attempting to participate in the recipient’s education program or activity at the time of the alleged sex discrimination.

Report: An oral or written disclosure to the Director of Compliance of prohibited conduct. Any person may report an allegation of prohibited conduct defined by this policy. Reports may be made by the person who experienced the behavior or by a third-party, including, but not limited to, a friend, family member, attorney, staff member, or professor.

Respondent: A person who is alleged to have violated the recipient’s prohibition on sex discrimination and sex-based harassment.

Complaint: An oral or written request to the recipient that objectively can be understood as a request for the recipient to investigate and make a determination about alleged discrimination under Title IX or this part.

Student: An individual who has gained admission to Gateway.

Brief Overview of the Title IX Resolution Process

Initial Assessment Process

Review of the Allegations

Upon receipt of a complaint of any alleged violation of Policy H:110: Equal Opportunity, Civil Rights, and Sexual Harassment, the Office for Equal Opportunity and Civil Rights conducts an initial assessment to determine if the conduct, as alleged and if proven, would reasonably constitute a violation of Gateway’s policy. Stated another way, the initial assessment determines if there’s reasonable cause to believe that the conduct, as alleged and taken as accurate, would be a violation of Gateway’s nondiscrimination policy. Reasonable cause means a state of facts found to exist that would warrant a reasonably intelligent and prudent person to believe that the policy was violated. This process generally takes less than seven (7) business days.

When a Complaint Can Be Dismissed

Complaints may be dismissed if the respondent cannot be identified, the respondent is not participating in the college’s educational program or is no longer employed by the college, the complainant voluntarily withdraws the complaint, or the conduct, if proven, would not constitute discrimination. Dismissals can be appealed.

When the Title Ix Coordinator Must File The Complaint

The Title IX Coordinator must initiate a Title IX complaint, even against the wishes of the complainant, when there is an imminent and serious threat to the health or safety of the complainant or other person or there is conduct that would prevent Gateway from ensuring equal access to its education program or activity on the basis of sex. In such cases, the complainant will first be notified. In cases where the Title IX Coordinator doesn’t initiate a complaint (and the complainant doesn’t wish to proceed), the Title IX Coordinator must take other appropriate prompt and effective steps to ensure that sex discrimination does not continue or recur within the recipient’s education program or activity.

Should a complainant wish to not initiate the grievance procedure and there are no grounds for the college to do so, under §106.44(f)(1)(vii), the Title IX Coordinator’s actions are limited to non-disciplinary action, including for example providing additional training for employees, educational programming aimed at the prevention of sex discrimination, or remedies such as permitting a complainant to retake a class..

No Contact Orders

At this time and anytime during a grievance process, the Title IX Coordinator may determine that a no contact order be issued, based on the following criteria:

• the need expressed by the complainant or respondent
• the ages of the parties involved;
• the nature of the allegations and their continued effects on the complainant or respondent;
  whether the parties continue to interact directly in the recipient’s education program or activity, including through student employment, shared residence or dining facilities, class, or campus transportation; and
• whether steps have already been taken to mitigate the harm from the parties’ interactions, such as implementation of a civil protective order.

Emergency Removals

In addition, an emergency removal is considered at the time of the complaint and initial assessment when warranted, and after the college undertakes an individualized safety and risk analysis to determine whether there is an “imminent and serious threat to the health or safety of a complainant or any students, employees, or other persons arising from the allegations of sex discrimination” justifying emergency removal. Non-physical threats, such as stalking, may justify an emergency removal. Immediately following the removal, Gateway must provide the respondent with notice and an opportunity to challenge the removal decision which is reviewed by a different Title IX investigator not involved in the case.

Managing Complaints

If an initial assessment results in a resolution option, the Title IX Coordinator will offer resolution options to the complainant.

Notice

Upon initiation of a resolution process, all parties receive a notice of the allegations and information on the process, including an explanation of rights and a list of resources and support measures. The notice to the respondent includes sufficient details of the allegations, including the name of the complainant, among other important details as required by law. This notice also informs the respondent that they are presumed innocent until the completion of the Equity Resolution Procedure.

Resolution Options

Federal regulations provide for two resolution options: §106.45 for sex discrimination and §106.46 for sex-based harassment. These grievance procedures focus on reaching fair, transparent, and reliable determinations so that Gateway can address sex discrimination in its education program or activity and ensure that a complainant receives remedies designed to restore or preserve equal access to Gateway’s education program or activity. Both processes allow for informal resolution, but only sex-based harassment involving at least one student party requires heightened requirements. Gateway has elected to have such cases resolved through a live hearing process conducted by the Wisconsin Division of Hearings and Appeals (DHA).

• Informal resolution: This resolution option is available by the voluntary consent and agreement of all parties. The informal resolution facilitator cannot be the same person as the investigator or decision-maker, cannot have a conflict of interest, and must be properly trained. Restrictions on contact and restrictions on participation in programs, activities, or events are two possible outcomes of an informal resolution process, depending on the circumstances. Informal resolution requirements are found in 34 CFR §106.44(k) of the 2024 Title IX regulations and include things such as the agreement is only binding on the parties involved in the informal resolution. Potential terms of an informal resolution agreement may include, but are not limited to, restrictions on contact and restrictions on the respondent's participation in one or more of the recipient's programs or activities or attendance at specific events, including restrictions the recipient could have imposed as remedies or disciplinary sanctions had the recipient determined that sex discrimination occurred under the recipient's grievance procedure. Oftentimes, individuals choose informal resolution options because it is a more restorative resolution that can be completed and implemented more timely, though with no less significant, than a formal grievance process.
• Formal Resolution/Investigation: This process involves a formal investigation, but looks different for situations that involve students and those that do not involve any students. Regardless, all investigations involve a trained investigator or a team of two investigators that conducts an investigation into the allegations. The investigation includes interviews with witnesses, including those proffered by the parties, as well as those determined by the investigator(s). Evidence is also collected and may include social media posts, messages and other forms of physical evidence.
  • §106.45: In all cases of sex discrimination and cases of sex-based harassment that do not involve students, the investigator completes a written report that includes an analysis of the allegations, finding of facts, and sanction recommendation, if applicable. The parties have an opportunity to review and respond to the draft report before it is finalized. The Title IX Coordinator (or EEO Officer if the Title IX Coordinator conducts the investigation), reviews and approves any sanctions.
  • §106.46: In cases of sex-based discrimination that involve a student party, upon completion of the written investigation report (which does not include an analysis of the allegations or finding of facts), the Wisconsin Division of Hearings and Appeals is assigned the case and a decision maker, who is an administrative law judge (ALJ), is assigned. The ALJ will conduct a live hearing that includes reviewing the investigation report and evidence, approving and asking questions of each party and witness, and issuing a decision and recommendation for sanctions, if applicable.

Bias And Conflict Of Interest

The Title IX Coordinator, investigator, informal resolution facilitator, and decision maker must not have a conflict of interest or bias against complainants or respondents generally or an individual complainant or respondent. The complainant and respondent can make a request to remove the Title IX Coordinator, investigator, or decision maker by submitting this request to the Title IX Coordinator should there be a demonstrated bias or conflict of interest that could materially impact the fair investigation or resolution of the allegations.

Basic elements of the Title IX resolution process include that the college:

• treat complainants and respondents equitably,
• be free of bias and conflict of interest,
• presume that the respondent is not responsible before a finding has been made,
• take reasonable steps to protect privacy,
• objectively evaluate all relevant evidence,
• exclude certain evidence that is impermissible, and
• consistently apply principles of the grievance procedures.

As noted, in cases of sex-based harassment involving at least one student party, there are heightened requirements under Title IX, §106.46. This includes written notices, time to prepare for meetings, an advisor of the party’s choice, a support person as needed, allowance of expert witnesses, reasonable time to respond, and access to relevant evidence by the parties and their advisors. While these elements are only required under §106.46, the college has adopted many of these requirements for cases involving sex discrimination, other protected characteristic discrimination, and non-sex-based harassment.

Cross Examination

In cases of sex discrimination, when credibility is in dispute and relevant in a case, the college must provide a method for the parties to “examine” the accounts of the other parties. This is accomplished through the submission and answer of questions, which may include the sharing of the interviews with the parties. In cases of sex-based harassment involving at least one student party, this is accomplished during the live hearing when parties submit their questions to the ALJ to ask the other party, subject to certain restrictions.

Hearing, In Select Cases

There are two situations that provide for a live hearing:

• When the allegations involve sex-based discrimination and at least one student party
• When a respondent is a student and is facing expulsion

Appeal and Challenges

Any party can appeal a dismissal of a complaint or any allegation contained in a complaint (if multiple allegations are included in a complaint) and the final determination (including any sanctions) if it meets the requirement for an appeal and the appeal is filed timely. An appeal is not a rehearing of the case or a disagreement with an outcome, but involves specific technical issues in how the case was managed, investigated or resolved. The grounds for an appeal include 1) a procedural irregularity that would change the determination, 2) new evidence that would change the outcome of the matter and that was not reasonably available at the time of the investigation and resolution, and 3) the Title IX Coordinator, investigator, or decision-maker had a bias or conflict of interest that would have changed the outcome. When an appeal is filed, the other party must also be notified and provided an opportunity to respond to the appeal as well.

Parties may challenge the denial or provision of support measures. Gateway provides a complainant or respondent with a timely opportunity to seek, from an appropriate and impartial employee, modification or reversal of the recipient’s decision to provide, deny, modify, or terminate supportive measures applicable to them. The impartial employee must be someone other than the employee who made the challenged decision and must have authority to modify or reverse the decision, if the impartial employee determines that the decision to provide, deny, modify, or terminate the supportive measure was inconsistent with the definition of supportive measures. Gateway must also provide a party with the opportunity to seek additional modification or termination of a supportive measure applicable to them if circumstances change materially. Challenges and requests to change supportive measures should be made to the Director of Compliance (compliance@gtc.edu) who will assign a trained individual, consistent with this section, to evaluate and render a decision regarding the challenges supportive measure.

Retaliation is Prohibited

Federal law and Gateway’s policy strongly prohibit all forms of retaliation for anyone who files a complaint, participates in a resolution process, or generally opposes discrimination. Retaliation under Title IX is defined as intimidation, threats, coercion, or discrimination against any person by the recipient, a student, or an employee or other person authorized by the recipient to provide aid, benefit, or service under the recipient’s education program or activity, for the purpose of interfering with any right or privilege secured by Title IX.

While this is a broad overview of the current process, it lacks many important details and is not official college policy, is not binding on the college, and should not be relied upon. View the current and official policy under the Forms and Resources tab.