Closure Following Initial Assessment

Not all reports the Title IX Officer receives are reports of Prohibited Conduct that can be resolved through a resolution process. This includes reports for which the Title IX Officer determines that:

  • even if true, the alleged conduct is not Prohibited Conduct as defined by University Policy  
  • the conduct is not covered by University Policy 
  • there is not enough information to carry out a Resolution Process (for example, the identities of the people involved);
  • a Complainant’s request that no investigation occur can be honored
  • there is not enough nexus between the conduct and the University to carry out a Resolution Process (for example, the conduct did not occur in the context of a University program or activity and involved only third parties). 

A single case can be closed at OPHD for one or more of the reasons listed.

Where OPHD did not have a basis for proceeding with a resolution, OPHD will do what they can to support impacted individuals; for example, connecting the Complainant with supportive resources, issuing no-contact directives, and/or providing targeted prevention education to individuals or groups. If appropriate, OPHD may refer cases to other appropriate offices. 

Understanding why a case was closed following initial assessment

Alleged conduct is not Prohibited Conduct

The case is closed because the conduct alleged does not meet the definition of Prohibited Conduct under UC policy. 

Examples: 

  • An incident that is reported as sexual harassment, such as a single incident, does not meet the definition of sexual harassment in the UC Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment (SVSH) Policy. 

  • An incident that the complainant found offensive, but does not rise to the level of a policy violation. 

  • Speech that is unwelcome, but does not meet the definition of harassment under the UC Anti-Discrimination Policy. 

Conduct is not covered by a policy OPHD oversees

The case is closed because the alleged conduct falls outside the scope of the policies OPHD oversees, such as the UC Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment (SVSH) Policy and the UC Anti-Discrimination Policy. 

Examples: 

  • Stalking that is not sex-based is not covered by the UC SVSH Policy. OPHD would refer cases to the appropriate office. 

  • A report alleging hazing that does not violate either the UC SVSH Policy or UC Anti-Discrimination Policy would be out of scope for OPHD, but would be referred to the appropriate office overseeing the policies prohibiting hazing. 

  • The UC SVSH Policy covers relationship violence that is perpetrated by a current former romantic/intimate/spousal partner of the Complainant or a person with whom the Complainant shares a child. Family violence, such as violence perpetrated by the Complainant’s parent or other relative, is not covered by the policy.

Insufficient nexus between the conduct and the University

The case is closed because the alleged OPHD did not have the authority or jurisdiction to carry out a resolution process.

Examples:

  • An alleged incident that occurred off campus and was unrelated to a UC Berkeley program or activity.

  • An alleged incident that only involved people unaffiliated with UC Berkeley. 

  • If a UC affiliate is the complainant, but the respondent is not affiliated with the UC, OPHD does not have the appropriate authority to resolve the complaint*. OPHD will still provide resources and supportive measures to the complainant if the complainant wishes. 

*OPHD may still conduct an “Other Inquiry" to try to determine what occurred, and take prompt steps reasonably calculated to stop any substantiated conduct, prevent its recurrence, and, as appropriate, remedy its effects. 

Insufficient information to carry out a resolution process

The case is closed because OPHD does not have enough information to take action. 

Examples: 

  • Important information, such as the complainant’s identity, is unknown to OPHD. 

  • OPHD sends multiple outreaches to the complainant, but the complainant does not respond. This is the most common reason for this type of closure. 

Complainant requested no investigation

Complainants may request that OPHD not investigate the allegations. A Complainant may decide they only want OPHD to help with them supportive measures, or they may want OPHD to conduct a targeted educational conversation. Others may choose to participate in an Alternative Resolution. 

Only in rare cases, OPHD may learn from assessing a report that there is a threat of danger to campus community members that must be acted upon immediately to keep people safe.