Implementation of the Student Integrity Code

• General Matters
• Categories of Violations
• Procedures for Adjudication of Integrity Code Cases
• Review
• Records Retention and Disclosure
• Hearing and Decision Procedures of Adjudication Venues

Introduction
The Principle and Standards of the Integrity Code are implemented in accordance with the following procedures, which serve as guidelines, not legal requirements, in the adjudication of violations. Flexibility of implementation is essential in order to respond to the unique circumstances of each case.  Fundamental fairness is also important and is assured by Standard Five of the Integrity Code.

I. General Matters
A. The Integrity Code applies to all students enrolled at the University of Puget Sound and to all student activities sponsored by the University or by any registered University organization on University property or elsewhere, or in vehicles owned or leased by the University.

B. These procedures shall be followed in all cases where a student or a student group has been charged with any violation of the Integrity Code and is faced with the possible imposition of any of the sanctions described in it. Nothing contained in the Integrity Code prohibits the University, or any member of the University community, from bringing civil or criminal charges against any person(s).

C.  These fact-finding, hearing, decision-making and appeal procedures are based upon the assumption that reason will prevail, that fundamental fairness will be honored, that confidentiality for both complainants and respondents will be honored to the maximum possible extent, and that timely resolution of cases will be sought.

D. The Dean of Students bears primary responsibility for the enforcement of the Integrity Code, and the Associate Dean of Students bears primary responsibility for implementation of these procedures.

E.  Changes in these procedures may be adopted following approval by the usual administrative procedures used by the University, so long as such changes conform to the Principle and Standards of the Integrity Code.

F.  A finding of a violation of this policy requires proof that the allegations are more likely true than not true (preponderance of the evidence).

^ top

II. Categories of Violations
A. Minor violations include those that pose no significant threat to property or individuals, but that indicate a lack of regard for the rights, property or personal privileges of individuals or groups within the University and neighboring community. Examples of minor violations include damaging University grounds or disturbing the peace.

B. Major violations include any acts that pose a significant threat to personal or University-owned property or to the physical safety or psychological security of individuals and/or groups within the University and neighboring community. Examples of major violations include causing physical harm or reasonable apprehension of harm to another individual or group, theft of individual or University-owned property, or substantial interference with the University’s responsibilities of protecting the health and safety of individuals and groups or ensuring the opportunity of all members to attain their educational goals.

C. Multiple minor violations may result in the determination of a major violation.

^ top

III.  Procedures for Adjudication of Integrity Code Cases
The primary purpose of these procedures is to provide a just, timely and effective mechanism for responding to alleged violations of the Integrity Code.  Allegations of violations are addressed as follows:

A. Filing of Complaint  
Any member of the University community may file with the Associate Dean of Students or with Security Services a complaint alleging a violation of the Integrity Code. A particular form for this complaint is not necessary, but the complaint must be in writing.  In instances of neighbor complaint about seriously offensive or chronically offensive student behavior, a complaint alleging a violation of the Integrity Code may be initiated on the complainant’s behalf by the Associate Dean of Students.

B. Investigation of Complaint

1.  Minor Violation 
The Associate Dean of Students, or his or her designee, will conduct an initial review of the complaint.  If the complaint appears to involve a minor violation of the Integrity Code the student will be informed in writing (see section III.C) and an administrative hearing with the Associate Dean of Students, or his or her designee, is scheduled.

2.  Major Violation 
The Associate Dean of Students or his or her designee will conduct an initial review of the complaint.  If the complaint appears to involve a major violation of the Integrity Code and charges are warranted, the student will be sent an investigation letter, requesting a meeting with the Associate Dean of Students or his or her designee. If, after the investigation meeting and all other evidence is considered, it is determined that there is sufficient evidence of a violation of a specific Standard, the student will be informed in writing (see section III.C) and an Integrity Code Board Hearing is scheduled.

C. Written Notice of Charges

1.  The student receives written notice of the charges in a timely manner.  This notice is mailed to the student’s campus mailbox and includes (to the extent possible at the time of the notice):

a.  a statement of the charged violations, citing the specific Standard and giving a summary account of the acts that form the basis for the supposition that violations have been committed; and

b.  a scheduled date, time and venue for a hearing.  If the student wishes to request a change of venue or a change in the scheduled date and time for the hearing, he/she may do so in his/her response outlined below (see section III.D).

c. in the case of a major violation, the possible option of conditional suspension or voluntary withdrawal (see section III.F.5 below).

2.  The length of time between notice of the charges and the hearing must be sufficient to allow the student a reasonable opportunity to prepare to respond to the charges but no more than 10 working days.

D. Student Response 
The student must respond in writing to the notice of charges, which indicates the date, time and venue of the hearing.  If the student does not respond within the time allotted, this indicates agreement with the hearing as scheduled in the notice of charges.   In his or her response, the student, depending on whether the charge is major or minor (see sections III.E and III.F below):

1.  can choose an alternate venue for a hearing (see section VI for detailed descriptions of adjudication venues);

2.  may request a change in the hearing date or time.  This request must be received at least one working day before the scheduled hearing begins.

The Associate Dean or his or her designee responds to such requests and makes appropriate notification of a change and the reasons for the change.

When selecting a change in venue or requesting a change in hearing schedule, students should be aware that pending conduct cases may restrict their abilities to obtain transcripts, complete registration for classes, apply for study abroad, or be eligible for certain University honors.

E.  Adjudication of Minor Charges
Minor Violations may be adjudicated in one of the following way:

1. Administrative Hearing with the Associate Dean of Students or his or her designee is the primary venue for adjudication of minor violations (see section VI.A below for a detailed explanation of hearing procedure).
2. A mediated solution acceptable by mutual consent of the parties involved and acceptable to the Associate Dean of Students is also available as an option.

F.  Adjudication of Major Charges
Major Violations may be adjudicated in one of the following ways:

1. Administrative Hearing with the Associate Dean of Students is available as an alternate venue (see section III.D for an explanation of Student Response; see Section VI.A below for a detailed explanation of hearing procedure).
2. The Integrity Code Board is the primary venue for adjudication of major violations (see Section VI.B below for a detailed explanation of hearing procedure).  When the student accepts full responsibility or when neither the Student Honor Court nor the Integrity Code Board is available, the Associate Dean of Students has the option of referring cases directly to an administrative hearing.
3. Honor Court is available as an alternate venue (see section III.D for an explanation of Student Response; see Section VI.A below for a detailed explanation of hearing procedure).  The Honor Court does not ordinarily meet when classes are not in session.  When the Honor Court is not available, the Associate Dean of Students has the option of referring cases to an administrative hearing.
4. A mediated solution acceptable by mutual consent of the parties involved and acceptable to the Associate Dean of Students and to the Dean of Students is also available as an option.
5. Other Options: The student may also exercise one of the following options:
   
   a.    Voluntary Withdrawal:  A request for a permanent voluntary withdrawal from the University, if exercised, must be made in writing before any disciplinary hearing is begun. Voluntary withdrawal may be allowed by the Dean of Students.
   b.    Conditional Suspension:  If a student who is charged with a violation of the Integrity Code reasonably believes that either civil or criminal charges may be or have been filed concerning the alleged violation, the student may make a written request before any disciplinary hearing is begun that he or she be granted a sanction of suspension as set out in the Integrity Code.  Conditional suspension may be allowed by the Dean of Students.

G. Determination  
Following the hearing, and when all relevant information has been collected and reviewed, a determination of responsibility for any violations of University policy is made and, if the student is found responsible, appropriate sanctions are imposed. The student is notified, in writing, in a decision letter.  In situations where a complaint involves request for restitution of property damage, monetary sanction will be limited to reasonable and verifiable out-of-pocket expenses for repair and/or an insurance deductible.  Costs for improvement or upgrade of facilities, property, etc. will not be levied in judicial sanctions.  Other financial arrangements can be made in mediated settlements provided that all parties involved are in agreement.

^ top

IV.  Appeal for Review
A decision of an administrative hearing, the Integrity Code Board or of the Honor Court may only be reviewed by the Dean of Students, or his or her designee, on request of any party to the hearing, or on the Dean's initiative, subject to the following guidelines:

A.  The appeal for review must be in writing and must be filed with the Dean within seven working days after the date shown on the sanction letter.  An appeal for review filed later than seven working days after this date is untimely and is not heard unless it is based on new evidence unobtainable at the time of the original hearing. Time for appeal may be increased at the discretion of the Dean if such request is made within the seven day period.   There is no prescribed form for an appeal for review, but it must be sufficiently lucid and detailed to allow the Dean to understand the nature of the petition and, without a hearing or oral argument, to act upon it.

B.  The only grounds for consideration of appeal for review are:

1. procedural error that unfairly and/or materially affected the outcome of the case;
2. action has been taken that is arbitrary, unreasonable or unsupported by substantial evidence;
3. newly discovered evidence emerges that was not obtainable at the time of the original hearing; or
4. severity of the sanction is disproportionate to the sanctions given for comparable offenses.

C.  The Dean may, at his or her discretion, hold an informal review conference. He or she determines the form or procedure for such a review conference.

D. The review process is not a new hearing. It is limited to a review of the record and decision, and new evidence is considered only if it is relevant and only if it was unobtainable at the time of the original hearing.

E.  If, in the Dean’s judgment, a decision is based in procedural error; is unreasonable, arbitrary or not supported by substantial evidence; or there exists significant, newly discovered evidence that was unobtainable at the time of the hearing, then the appeal is sustained.

F.  In cases where the appeal for review is sustained, the Dean may:

1. dismiss the charges.
2. reduce or modify, but not increase the severity of the sanction.
3. return the case to the Integrity Code Board, the Honor Court or the appropriate Associate Dean for further directed consideration.

G.  The Dean will send a copy of the appeal for review and of the outcome of the appeal to all persons who heard the case.

^ top

V. Records Retention and Disclosure
The Associate Dean of Students will retain a confidential record of any disciplinary proceeding against a student and its final disposition.  This record is kept separate from records retained by the Registrar’s Office. Records of a minor incident shall be retained until the student graduates or has been separated from the University. Records of a major incident shall be retained for five years after the student graduates or has been separated from the University. Records of a severe nature (examples might include, but are not limited to, findings of responsibility for threatening behaviors, causing physical harm, malicious endangerment, sexual assault, etc.) shall be retained in perpetuity, or until such a time that the Dean of Students determines they are no longer relevant for University purposes.

The record may not be disclosed by the University without the written consent of the student(s) to whom the requested information pertains, unless otherwise permitted or required by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974, the Student Right-to-Know and Campus Security Act of 1990 or the Clery Act of 1998.  The alleged victim of a violent crime or a harassment offence will be informed of the decision and any sanction resulting from any proceeding against the alleged perpetrator with respect to that offense.

^ top

VI.  Hearing and Decision Procedures of Adjudication Venues
A.  Administrative Hearing
The administrative hearing is an informal meeting to establish the facts of the case.  No witnesses may be called (it is a closed hearing), but the student may submit written character references or other written materials pertaining to the circumstances relevant to the incident and/or charges. Both the student and the hearing officer may have an advisor, who is not an attorney, present during the hearing.  The student is responsible for presenting his or her own case, and therefore, the advisor is not permitted to prepare or submit documents, present arguments or participate actively in the hearing; his or her sole role is to advise the student.  Following the administrative hearing, and when all relevant information has been collected and reviewed, the Associate Dean, or his or her designee, makes a determination of responsibly for any violations of University policy and, if the student is found responsible, of sanctions to be imposed.  The student is notified in a decision letter.

B.  Integrity Code Board
The Integrity Code Board is a three-person panel (one student, one faculty member, and one staff member) with members drawn from the membership of the Student Honor Court.  The Integrity Code Board provides an informal setting to hear and establish the facts of the case, determine responsibility for alleged violations, and recommend sanctions, if appropriate, to the Associate Dean of Students.  Following the conference, the Associate Dean of Students imposes an appropriate sanction for the violation of the Integrity Code if the student is found responsible.  No witnesses may be called at the conference (it is a closed meeting), but the student may submit written character references or other written materials pertaining to the circumstances relevant to the incident and/or charges.

1. The student may have an advisor, who is not an attorney, present during the Integrity Code Board conference.  The student is responsible for presenting his or her own case, and therefore the advisor is not permitted to prepare or submit documents, present arguments or participate actively in the hearing; his or her sole role is to advise the student.
2. The conference is tape recorded for the protection of all parties and the tape becomes part of the record.  The tape is confidential and is used only for the purpose of this conference and any resulting appeal.  No copies of this tape may be made.  If the student wishes to listen to the tape for an appeal, he or she must do so in a setting arranged by the Associate Dean of Students.
3. The tape is destroyed immediately after an appeal has been exercised or within 30 days, whichever is sooner.

C.  Honor Court
An orderly hearing is essential to ensure fairness to all parties. The following procedural guidelines govern Court hearings:

1. The Honor Court shall consist of five students, one faculty member, one staff member and an advisor to the Court. There shall also be three student alternates, one faculty alternate and one staff alternate.
2. The Honor Court meets on a regularly scheduled basis; a student who chooses the Honor Court as a venue for adjudication of a conduct case is expected to make arrangements to attend at a regularly scheduled time (see section III.D).
3. Notice to Court: The Chairperson of the Court shall receive a copy of the charges if the student has elected a hearing by the Court.
4. The Chairperson of the Honor Court shall exercise control over the hearing. Any person, including the student charged, who disrupts a hearing or who fails to adhere to the rulings of the Court may be excluded from the proceedings.
5. Hearings may be tape recorded or transcribed at the discretion of the Court. The decision of the Court must include a summary of the testimony and shall be sufficiently detailed to permit review by the Dean.
6. The hearing shall ordinarily be closed. The Court shall determine the persons
   allowed at a closed hearing. All testimony heard and sanctions determined in a closed hearing shall be kept in strict confidence by all parties and by the members of the Court. An open hearing may be held, at the discretion of the Court, if
   requested by the student charged and if acceptable to the complainant.
7. Where multiple parties are being charged, the Court has the authority to conduct separate hearings.
8. Adherence to legalistic court procedures, advocacy techniques and formal rules of evidence are not applicable in Honor Court hearings. Both the student charged and the Associate Dean of Students may have an advisor, who is not an attorney, present. The student’s advisor is not permitted to prepare or submit documents, present arguments, or participate actively in the hearing; his or her sole role is to advise the student.
9. The purpose of the hearing is to arrive at the truth.  Statements to the Court are to be candid, cogent and objective.
10. Any party may challenge a member of the Court on the grounds of personal bias, conflict of interest, or prejudgment on the merits of the case. A member of the Court may recuse him- or herself for any of the above reasons. Members may be disqualified from participation in a hearing by a vote of the remaining members of the Court.  If the Court members are disqualified, the hearing must be rescheduled.
11. If the student does not appear at the hearing, the hearing proceeds.  If the student appears, but decides to leave the hearing without having requested and received permission from the Court to do so, the hearing continues. In any case of absence of the charged student from the hearing, no inference of guilt or innocence is drawn from such absence.
12. The members of the Court play an active role at the hearing, asking questions of witnesses, seeking clarification of issues that are unclear, and participating in deliberations on all matters of procedure and substance at both open and closed portions of any hearing.
13. The Court determines how the hearing will proceed in order to fulfill its purpose most fairly and expeditiously.  Hearings normally proceed as follows:
    
    a.    Ruling by the Court on preliminary matters as set forth above (see sections IX.A. 5, 6, and 9).
    b.    Opening statement by the Associate Dean of Students and presentation of evidence in support of the statement of charges.
    c.    Student’s opening statement and evidence in answer.
    d.    Associate Dean’s response.
    e.    Student’s response.
    f.    Closing summaries of all parties.
    
    With multiple parties, the Court determines necessary modifications to the above.
14. The guidelines as to witnesses are:
    
    a.  The Court admonishes all witnesses that their testimony is to be truthful, specifically indicating that false testimony is a violation of the Integrity Code.  Nonmembers of the campus community who provide false or inaccurate information will have such findings filed with the Community Relations Coordinator.  This information of past abuse will be taken into account if any future information is provided by that witness and the University may consider in its discretion appropriate legal and other actions.
    b.  Parties to the case and the Court may request witnesses to testify at the hearing.
    c.  At the discretion of the Court, prospective witnesses may be excluded from the hearing during the testimony of other witnesses.
    d.  Parties are accorded an opportunity to question witnesses.
    e.  If necessary, in order to ensure relevance or to avoid harassment or intimidation of a witness, the chairperson of the hearing may intervene in any questioning.
    f.   In instances where a University neighbor is a witness, information regarding previous complaints from this individual will be included in the preliminary report, solely for the purpose of judging witness credibility.
    g.  The Associate Dean of Students will make all reasonable efforts to obtain relevant reports from the police or other community agencies.
15. If a hearing is disrupted or, at the discretion of the Court, entails sensitive matters, the Court may close a hearing and shall determine those persons who may be present.
16. Details concerning the Honor Court’s operation are contained in the Honor Court Guide, available from the Office of the Dean of Students.
17. Decision Process: After all evidence has been presented by all parties and closing summaries have been given, the chairperson recesses the hearing and the members of the Court meet privately to determine whether or not the student has violated the Integrity Code and to decide on the appropriate sanction.  This process is subject to the following guidelines:
    
    a.  All parties, the witnesses and the public are excluded during the decision process.
    b.  Five voting members of the Court must be present to constitute a quorum necessary to render a decision, at least one of whom must be the University faculty member. All five members must have been present throughout the hearing. A simple majority of those not abstaining must concur in order for the Court to render a decision.
    c.  A finding that the student has violated the Integrity Code must be supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
    d.  When individuals are collectively charged, or when individuals charged separately are collectively heard, determinations of the guilt or innocence of each individual must be separately made.
    e.  If the Court finds a student responsible for the charges, it shall undertake the following actions:
    
    (1)    First, the Court must review those sanctions that have been imposed by the Court in the past for violations similar to the present one.  (This review emphasizes the importance of consistency in decision-making.)
    (2)    Second, the Court must obtain information about the student’s past disciplinary record of proven violations and any sanctions imposed (The Court takes into account the severity of any prior violation in determining the proper sanction to impose in any present case.)
    (3)    Third, in situations where a complaint involves request for restitution of property damage, monetary sanction will be limited to reasonable and verifiable out-of-pocket expenses for repair and/or an insurance deductible.  Costs for improvement or upgrade of facilities, property, etc. will not be levied in judicial sanctions.  Other financial arrangements can be made in mediated settlements provided that all parties involved are in agreement.
    
    f.   The chairperson prepares a statement of specific findings of fact supporting its decision on each of the stated charges. This statement is sent to all parties and to the Dean of Students and the file is retained in the Associate Dean of Students Office.
    g.  Any student who is declared innocent of charges may have a statement describing this decision printed in the University student newspaper, if he or she requests it and the editor concurs in the request.

^ top