Discrimination and Harassment Policy

Biola University is committed to the biblical truth that all persons are created in the image of God and should, therefore, be treated with dignity and respect. Biola seeks to emphasize the importance of being an authentically diverse community in pursuit of growth, awareness, and appreciation of our own diversity as well as that which exists in the broader world. As such, this Policy is intended to address conduct that undermines Biola’s foundational and biblical understanding of the importance of diversity and which causes harm to the Biola community.

Biola prohibits discrimination and harassment on the basis of race, color, national or ethnic origin, sex, age, disability, marital status, or military status in the administration of its educational policies, admissions, financial aid, employment, educational programs, or activities (“legally protected classes”). Biola acknowledges that religion is a legally protected class. As a religious institution, however, Biola is exempt from certain state and federal anti-discrimination laws and, therefore, has the legal right to act in accordance with its religious beliefs as stated in its Theological Positions and as demonstrated by creating and enforcing certain policies consistent with its beliefs such as the Sexuality & Relationships Policy. While Biola opposes discrimination, harassment and retaliation as stated in this Policy, nothing herein is intended, nor should it be construed to constitute a waiver of, applicable exemptions or legal defenses, such as its right to employ only those persons who believe in and seek to support Biola’s Christian mission and its Theological Positions.

Biola’s commitment to non-discrimination applies to conduct by all University community members, including students, faculty, and staff, when engaged in activities sponsored by Biola or otherwise related to Biola or its business.

In addition, visitors, volunteers, or any person who provides services to Biola are expected to not discriminate or harass Biola’s students or employees based on the legally protected categories above. If the discrimination or harassment is alleged against non-Biola students or employees, however, the process for handling such allegations or complaints may be different than the process stated in this Policy.

This Policy does not apply to sex discrimination or harassment if that discrimination or harassment is alleged to involve conduct prohibited under the Sexual Harassment/Title IX Policy. Reports of conduct that is prohibited under that policy should follow the procedures contained in that policy or a person may contact the Title IX office at titleix.coordinator@biola.edu.

The following terms, as used in this Policy, are defined as follows:

Complainant: The Complainant, is an individual or group of individuals who is alleged to have been subject to conduct prohibited under this Policy.

Respondent: The Respondent, is an individual or group of individuals against whom an allegation of conduct prohibited under this Policy is made.

Report: A report is an account of conduct that allegedly violates this Policy made to the University by the Complainant, a third party, or an anonymous source.

Complaint: A Complaint is an alleged Policy violation that begins a complaint resolution procedure as set forth in the Complaint Resolution Process section below.

Preponderance of the Evidence: The preponderance of the evidence standard is the standard used by University-appointed adjudicators to determine the outcome of a Complaint. The preponderance of the evidence standard is met if it is more likely than not that the Respondent violated this Policy.

The following conduct is prohibited under this Policy and, if alleged against Biola students or employees, will be handled in accordance with the procedures in this Policy.

“Discrimination” prohibited by this Policy occurs when a person is treated less favorably with respect to Biola’s educational programs, activities, admissions, financial aid, on-campus housing or employment, because of that person’s membership in a class protected by applicable law.

“Harassment” prohibited by this Policy is unwelcome conduct that is based on a legally protected class that is so severe or pervasive, and objectively offensive, that its effect impairs a person’s ability to participate in the University’s educational programs, activities, living environment or employment. “Objectively offensive” means that it must be offensive not only to the person receiving the conduct but also to a “reasonable person” in the recipient’s circumstances. Harassment, depending on the circumstances, can also be a type of prohibited discrimination. Examples of harassment include, but are not limited to: 

• Verbal assaults or comments that demean the color, culture, or ancestry of a person or which perpetuate stereotypical beliefs about and attitudes toward ethnic groups. Such behaviors may include name-calling, racial slurs, slang references, derogatory comments and jokes.
• Hanging a noose from the ceiling of an African-American student’s room
• Displaying a swastika to suggest white supremacy over the race or ethnicity of the student who occupies the room or owns the property where the swastika was displayed
• A verbal admonishment to avoid Asian students during the COVID-19 pandemic
• A student who has requested accommodations for a learning disability is called “retard”

“Retaliation” includes any form of intimidation, threats, coercion, reprisal, harassment, or other conduct by a person directed at another because of that other’s participation in or contemplated participation in the process covered by this Policy. Retaliatory actions may include, but are not limited to:

• conduct intended to discourage a person from engaging the benefits or protection of this Policy or that would discourage a reasonable person from doing so;
• conduct intended to or that reasonably would influence or discourage the participation or statements of parties or witnesses;
• violation of a No Contact Order issued as a result of alleged conduct to which this Policy applies;
• adverse changes in employment status or opportunities;
• adverse academic action;
• adverse changes to academic, educational and extra-curricular opportunities.

Retaliatory conduct may be present against a person even when the person’s allegations of prohibited conduct are not substantiated.

“Bad Faith Complaint of Discrimination or Harassment”: Knowingly reporting a false allegation of any violation covered by this Policy, including one made as a counter-complaint, is prohibited. The fact that there has been a University determination that there was no violation of this Policy does not, by itself, mean that the complaint was made in bad faith.

Note: Discrimination, Harassment and Retaliation may be in person, through postings on social media, email, text, or other forms of communication, and it may be committed by parties to the complaint resolution procedure, their friends or representatives, or any other person.

A. Reports to the University

1. Responsible Officers

Biola encourages any member of the Biola community who has a concern or has become aware of an instance of possible discrimination, harassment, or retaliation described in this Policy, which involves a student, faculty or staff member, or any third party performing services on behalf of Biola, to immediately report the situation to one of the following Responsible Officers:

• University Anti-Discrimination Officer (“ADO”):
  Sandy Hough
  Student Services Building, Student Development
  13800 Biola Ave.
  La Mirada, CA 90639
  Telephone: (562) 944-0351, Ext. 5807
  Email: antidiscrimination.officer@biola.edu

• Susan Kaneshiro, Senior Director, Human Resources
  Biola University, Metzger Hall, Human Resources
  13800 Biola Ave., La Mirada, CA 90639
  Telephone: (562) 944-0351, Ext. 4579
  Email: susan.kaneshiro@biola.edu

• Nathanael Cook, Athletics Administrator for Facilities and Events
  Biola University
  Gymnasium
  13800 Biola Ave., La Mirada, CA 90639
  Telephone: (562) 944-0351, Ext. 3140
  Email: nathanael.d.cook@biola.edu

Reports can be made by telephone, email, or in person to any of the person(s) listed above. To enable the University to respond appropriately, reports to the University should include as much information as possible, including (1) the name of the person(s) alleged to have experienced the discrimination, harassment or retaliation, (2) the name of the person(s) who allegedly engaged in discrimination, harassment or retaliation, and (3) the date, time, place, and circumstances of the incident(s). Nonetheless, persons who believe there has been a violation of this Policy should report their concern even if not all of these specific details are known.

Not every behavior will violate this Policy and yet the behavior may be inconsistent with biblical and institutional values. The determination of whether an incident rises to a Policy violation is dependent upon the behavior and context in which it occurred. Regardless of whether the incident rises to the level of a Policy violation, Biola takes these concerns very seriously and is committed to evaluating reports of alleged conduct that may be prohibited under this Policy thoroughly, fairly, and promptly. The timing and manner in which the University addresses the report, however, will vary depending on the information provided and whether the reporting person wishes to remain anonymous.

2. Anonymous Reports

The University will accept anonymous reports of Discrimination and Harassment. However, the individual making the report is encouraged to provide as much detailed information as possible to allow the University to investigate the report and respond appropriately. Additionally, Biola maintains a hotline for its employees to report (anonymously if they wish) certain types of concerns as described in section 3.42 of the Employee Handbook should the employee believe the concern is one covered by that Policy. The University may be limited in its ability to investigate and respond to an anonymous report unless sufficient information is furnished to enable the University to conduct a prompt, meaningful and fair investigation.

3. Confidential Resources

The University recognizes that some individuals may wish to keep their concerns confidential. While confidentiality cannot be maintained in all circumstances, the University endeavors to do so unless there are legal or other compelling factors requiring some disclosure.

Confidential communications are those communications which cannot be disclosed to another person without the reporter’s consent, except under limited circumstances. The following are confidential resources who can provide advice and support to individuals who believe they are experiencing discrimination or harassment: 

• Counselors in the Biola Counseling Center (562-903-4800)
• Mike Ahn, Dean of Spiritual Development, and members of the Pastoral Care team in Spiritual Development (562-777-4041, spiritual.development@biola.edu, Student Services Building (south wing)).
• Employees may seek confidential services from the Employee Assistance and Wellness Support Program through New York Life (1 800 344-9752; guidanceresources.com).

Prior to or concurrent with reporting a potential violation of this Policy, individuals may find it helpful to consult with these designated confidential resources who are not obligated to report information that is provided to them. The confidential resources will not share communications or the fact that communication occurred without consent from the reporting person except in rare circumstances (e.g., compelled testimony from a court of law, cases of child or elder abuse, or where there is a reasonable threat of harm to self or a third person).

Confidential resources are especially valuable for someone who is unsure about whether a formal complaint should be filed or how to label or process what happened. A person who speaks to a confidential resource should understand, however, that if the person does not report the concern to a non-confidential person at the University, such as one of the Responsible Officers designated above, the University will be unable to provide certain interim actions or protective measures that require involvement from the University (such as issuing a no-contact directive), and hampered in its attempts to conduct an investigation into the particular incident or pursue disciplinary action.

B. Support Services/No Contact Order

The ADO will offer assistance to those complaining of alleged prohibited conduct under this Policy as well as those who are accused of the prohibited conduct. Those involved are encouraged to make their needs known so that the University can try to help as deemed appropriate. It is also important to note that the University may take reasonable steps to provide appropriate accommodations and restrictions during or following the investigation process to create a safe and productive environment.

There may also be times when a no-contact directive is necessary. This is a University-issued directive that prohibits one or both parties from communication or contact with another. In appropriate circumstances, the University may issue an institutional no-contact directive on its own initiative or at the request of the Complainant or the Respondent. To request a no-contact directive from the University, individuals should contact the ADOat (562) 944-0351, Ext. 5807 or antidiscrimination.officer@biola.edu.

If the University receives a report that an institutional no-contact directive has been violated, the University may initiate disciplinary proceedings and impose sanctions against the person who allegedly violated the directive.

A. Notice, Initial Meetings and Sufficiency Determination

Upon receiving a Complaint or a report of potential/alleged Discrimination or Harassment under this Policy, the Anti-Discrimination Officer (“ADO”) or designee (for purposes of the process described herein, both the ADO or a designee acting as the ADO in a particular case will be referred to as “ADO”) will initiate the process described below.

If the first report of discrimination is not directly to the ADO, the ADO will contact the Complainant (or reporter if different) to schedule a time to meet to discuss the concerns alleged. During the initial contact, the ADO will inform the Complainant of the right to have an Advisor present during the initial meeting and the role that person may play in the process.

The purpose of the initial meeting with the Complainant is to determine the bases for the concerns reported, how the ADO or others can best support the Complainant (i.e., offering supportive measures), obtain sufficient information to assess whether the facts, if true, could support a finding that there has been a potential violation of the Policy, and to explain the process under this Policy including options for pursuing the Informal Resolution Process (if both the Complainant and Respondent agree) or the Formal Adjudication Process (both are described below) and what is involved depending on which option is pursued. The ADO will also explain any other important information regarding confidentiality, no-contact orders, etc.

If, after this initial meeting with the Complainant, the ADO determines that there could not have been a violation of this Policy, even assuming the facts as presented by the Complainant are true, the ADO will inform the Complainant of this fact and the matter will be closed unless the Complainant wishes to file an appeal (see section V. E. Appeal below). While an appeal may be filed at this stage, the only grounds for an appeal based on this sufficiency determination are if the Complainant has reason to believe there is bias/conflict of interest on the part of the ADO or some procedural irregularity (nos. 1 and 2 of the enumerated bases for appeal described in section V. B. 4. Even if the matter is closed, the Complainant may still work with the ADO to receive appropriate supportive measures.

After meeting with the Complainant, and assuming the ADO determines a potential violation of the Policy exists, the ADO will notify the Respondent in writing of the Complaint and sufficient facts to inform the Respondent of the nature of the allegations against him or her. This written notice will also include a request for an initial meeting, the right to have an Advisor present and the role that person may play in the process.

The purpose of the initial meeting with the Respondent is make sure she or he understands what is being alleged, any response the Respondent wishes to make at that time, how the ADO or others can best support the Respondent (i.e., offering supportive measures), and to explain the process under this Policy including options for pursuing the Informal Resolution Process (if both the Complainant and Respondent agree) or the Formal Adjudication Process (both are described below) and what is involved depending on which option is pursued. The ADO will also explain any other important information regarding confidentiality, no-contact orders, etc.

Both the Complainant and the Respondent will also be told by the ADO the importance of reviewing this Policy and fully understanding their rights, obligations and general principles that are explained below.

B. Rights, Obligations and General Principles

1. Advisors

The parties will be entitled to an Advisor during the complaint resolution process. The role and restrictions relating to Advisors are:

• The Advisor may not appear in lieu of the parties or speak on their behalf, whether in-person or in written communications to the University.

• Advisors may be lawyers but they need not be. Should a party choose a lawyer to be an advisor, that party is responsible for payment of legal fees or costs if any are incurred. All Advisors will be instructed that this process is not a legal one and the legal rules of evidence do not apply.

• The Advisor may not communicate directly with the investigator(s), decision makers, appeal officer(s), the ADO or any other school official involved in the Complaint Resolution process and may not interrupt or otherwise delay the process.

• Advisors may have access to information concerning a case when a party has given permission for his or her Advisor to receive information. An Advisor’s access to case information is subject to the same limitations as those placed upon the parties and conditioned upon the Advisor’s agreement to maintain the confidentiality of any student educational records, employment records, or other confidential information.

• Parties must provide the name of the person they have selected as their Advisor to the ADO. Advisors will be required to sign an Advisor Agreement acknowledging receipt and understanding of the requirements described herein. Failure to comply with these requirements, including violations of confidentiality or other forms of interference with the complaint resolution procedure by the Advisor, may result in the disqualification of an Advisor.

• Each of the parties will be notified by the ADO of the other’s decision to have an Advisor, and the identity of that person.

• Choosing an Advisor who is also a witness may create a potential for bias and conflict of interest, issues that the party should anticipate being raised and explored during the investigation or adjudication phases.

• The Parties are required to inform the investigator(s) or other University employee or agent involved in this resolution process of the identity of their Advisor, if any, at least two business days before any scheduled meeting that is part of this process. The University expects Advisors will clear their calendars to accommodate scheduled meetings, but the University has the discretion to change dates so long as it does not result in an unreasonable delay or in an unfair process.

• The ADO must be promptly notified of any change in Advisor.

• Communications between the Parties and their Advisors will remain confidential throughout the Complaint Resolution process even if the Advisor is not an attorney.

2. Non-Participation and Silence

Either party may decline, at any time, to provide information or participate further in the Complaint Resolution process. If, at any time during the process, a party decides not to participate, the University will proceed with the process and make a determination based upon the information available. The University also reserves the right to close a case if the Complainant abandons the process and a determination is made that no further action cannot or should not be taken without further cooperation from the Complainant.

A Respondent’s silence in response to a Complainant’s allegation will not necessarily be viewed as an admission of the allegation, but may leave the Complainant’s allegations undisputed. Similarly, a Complainant’s silence in response to a Respondent’s denials or defenses will not necessarily be viewed as an admission of the denials or defenses, but may leave the Respondent’s denials or defenses undisputed. Even if a party decides not to participate or chooses to stop participating during a particular phase of the process, the party will still be given the option to participate during later phases of the process so long as it does not create undue hardship or an unfair process to the other party.

3. Obligation to Act in Good Faith

Reports and Complaints of alleged Discrimination and Harassment should be made only in good faith. Complaints that are not made in good faith may be a form of retaliation under this Policy and/or may violate other University policies. All parties and witnesses have an obligation to be truthful in the Complaint Resolution process.

4. Bias and Conflicts of Interest

If a Complainant or Respondent has any concern that any individual acting for the University under this Policy, including investigators, adjudicators, the ADO, an Advisor or an appellate officer, and any witnesses that may be part of the process, has a conflict of interest or bias, such concern should be reported in writing to the ADO immediately, but no later than two calendar days after learning of the potential bias/conflict. Bias in the context of this Policy refers to the person’s potential inability to be fair and impartial and is usually based on stereotypes related to a person's race, sex, economic status/social standing, etc. or may even be a bias for or against accusers or those accused generally, or the Complainant or Respondent in the case specifically. A conflict of interest may exist when personal or private interests prevent people from being impartial in their work on a case brought under this Policy. This can happen when their interests compromise their judgment, decisions, or actions. For example, the ADO may be a supervisor or close friend of a person who supervises an employee who files a complaint under this Policy; an investigator may be a relative of a party or witness involved in a case, or a University employee participating in the resolution process may be a close friend of someone accused of a violation under this Policy.

A report of bias or conflict of interest will not necessarily disqualify a person from being part of the process under this Policy. An independent determination of bias or conflict of interest will be made by the ADO (or other University official if the ADO is the subject of the bias/conflict assertion).

5. Disability Accommodations

The University is committed to full access and inclusion of students with disabilities in its processes and services. Students with disabilities involved in the process under this Policy should notify the ADO if he or she needs assistance during the process. The ADO, who may consult with the University’s Director of Student Accessibility and 504 Compliance Officer, will determine and arrange for providing any necessary and appropriate assistance.

6. Time Frames for Resolution

Complainants are encouraged to begin the Complaint Resolution process as soon as possible following an alleged incident of discrimination or harassment. While there is no deadline for reporting prohibited conduct to the University under this Policy, the University’s ability to investigate may diminish over time, and the Respondent may no longer be affiliated with the University. If a Complaint is brought forward more than four calendar years after an alleged incident or if the Complainant and Respondent are no longer Biola students or employees, the University, in its discretion, may decline to process the Complaint under this Policy.

Upon receiving a report of a violation under this Police, the University is committed to the prompt and equitable resolution, and generally seeks to conclude its process under this Policy within 60 days and its appeal process within 20 days. Circumstances may arise that require the extension of time frames based on various factors including the complexity of the allegations, the number of witnesses involved, the availability of the parties and witnesses involved, witnesses being absent from campus, unsuccessful attempts at informal resolution, any intervening school break or vacation, or other unforeseen circumstances. When these circumstances warrant additional time, the ADO will notify the parties in writing of the anticipated extended time frame.

7. Applicable Policy

When the University receives a Report or a Complaint of a violation of this Policy, the University will generally apply the Complaint Resolution process from the policy that is in effect at the time that the Report or Complaint is made and generally will apply the definitions from the policy that were in effect at the time the alleged conduct occurred.

8. Reservation of Flexibility

The procedures set forth in this Policy reflect the University’s desire to respond to Complaints in good faith and in a manner that promotes fairness to all parties. The University recognizes that each case is unique and that circumstances may arise which require that it reserve some flexibility in responding to the particular circumstances of the matter. Where it is not possible or practical to follow the process outlined in this Policy, the University reserves the right to modify the process or to take other administrative action as appropriate under the circumstances. The parties will be timely notified of any such modifications.

C. Informal Resolution

Informal resolution is a voluntary process for timely and corrective action through the imposition of individual and/or community-focused remedies designed to maintain the Complainant's access to the educational, extracurricular, and employment activities at the University and to eliminate a potential hostile environment. The option to pursue informal resolution will be presented to the parties only after the University has sufficient information about the nature and scope of the conduct at issue.

If the Complainant, the Respondent, and the ADO all agree to pursue an informal resolution, the ADO will attempt to facilitate a resolution that is agreeable to all parties. The role of the ADO is not to be an advocate for either party, but rather, to aid in the resolution of issues in a non-adversarial manner. Under the Informal Resolution process, the University will only conduct such fact-finding as is useful to resolve the conflict and as is necessary to protect the interests of the parties, the University, and the University community.

The University will not compel a Complainant or Respondent to engage in mediation, to directly confront the other party, or to participate in any particular form of informal resolution. If at any point during the Informal Resolution process, the Complainant, the Respondent, or the University wishes to cease the process and to proceed with the formal process, the Informal Resolution process will stop and the Formal Adjudication process described below will begin. The student may be encouraged to return to an informal resolution at any time during the Formal Adjudication process.

Any informal resolution must adequately address the concerns of the Complainant, the rights of the Respondent, and the overall intent of the University to stop, remedy, and prevent Policy violations. The University will take appropriate actions as necessary and use its best efforts to remedy any harm that occurred and to prevent any further incidents of Discrimination or Harassment.

There is no right to appeal a resolution agreement once all Parties agree in writing to the resolution. Once there is an agreement in writing, the Formal Adjudication process is unavailable to resolve the allegations raised in the initial report or Complaint. The ADO will maintain records of all reports and conduct referred for informal resolution.

D. Formal Adjudication Process

A formal adjudication process will be followed when the Informal Resolution process is not deemed to be appropriate or the parties do not agree to the Informal Process. That formal process will proceed as follows:

(1) If one has not already been submitted, a Complaint shall be submitted by the Complainant. The Complaint does not need to be in any particular format but it should contain as many details as possible regarding the conduct that the Complainant believes constitutes Discrimination or Harassment as defined in this Policy. These details, if available, should include a description of the conduct, who engaged in the conduct, when it occurred, where it occurred, and any other details the Complainant thinks are relevant. Supporting documentation and a list of witnesses, with contact information, if any is also helpful and may be provided at this stage. Although the Complaint may be withdrawn at any time, the University reserves the right to investigate all complaints where necessary to protect the interests of the University community. The Complaint must be signed, dated and submitted to the ADO as soon as possible after the conduct occurs. While the University will do its best to investigate all allegations of a violation under this Policy, the more time that passes from when the alleged conduct occurred to the time of submission of the Complaint could make it harder for accurate information to be obtained and to impose corrective action on the Respondent if appropriate.

(2) The ADO will perform the Initial Intake and give the notice and information to the parties as stated in section V.A. above. The Respondent will be provided with a copy of the Complaint (or a summary if deemed appropriate by the ADO) during the initial meeting with the Respondent.

(3) The Respondent will prepare a response to the Complaint within seven (7) calendar days after the initial meeting with the ADO unless the ADO grants a request for additional time.

(4) After receiving the Respondent’s response and assuming there is a need for an investigation, the ADO will appoint a trained investigator(s) to gather all necessary information , and notify the parties of the investigator(s) assigned.

(5) The assigned investigator(s) shall thoroughly investigate the Complaint and prepare a written report. The ADO will review the report and decide if any additional information is needed before the matter gets submitted for adjudication.The final entire investigative report (with redactions, if appropriate to protect privacy rights), that also contains the Complaint and Respondent’s Response, will be provided to the parties via a secured file to the involved parties' Biola email accounts. The documents provided shall not be shared by the parties with anyone other than the approved Advisor, if any.

(7) The parties shall have seven calendar days to present any further statements, suggested corrections to the report, or additional information to the ADO based on their review of the investigation report. Any additional information submitted by the parties will be part of a Supplement to the Final Investigation Report and shared with the parties in accordance with how the initial report was shared (step 6 above) and shall be submitted to the appointed adjudicators (see step 8 below) for review and adjudication of the matter.

(8) The ADO will appoint at least two trained adjudication officers to adjudicate the matter and will notify the parties of their identity and their role at the University. The parties will have three (3) calendar days to ask that an adjudicator be disqualified due to a demonstrated conflict of interest or bias (see section V.B.4. above). Being a member of the same protected class as one of the parties, in and of itself, is not a sufficient basis for disqualification.

(9) Within 14 calendar days of receiving the Investigation Report and any Supplement, the adjudicators will meet and reach a decision as to whether there has been a violation of this Policy. In doing so, the adjudicators may decide it is necessary to meet with the parties and/or any pertinent witnesses or request additional documentation prior to reaching a decision. They are not obligated to do so but should in the event they determine, in their sole discretion, that any of these measures are likely to lead to a better understanding of the facts and allow for a more informed evaluation of the information presented.

(10) If the adjudicators determine a policy violation occurred, they will also make a recommendation as to what sanctions, corrective action or consequences should be imposed. If the Respondent is an employee, when determining the corrective action or consequences, the adjudicators may consult with the employee’s direct supervisor, or, in the case of faculty, with the Dean of the School in which the faculty member is assigned. If the Respondent is a student, the adjudicators may consult with Student Development personnel or other employees who can provide input as to appropriate corrective action or sanctions for students.

Guidance regarding Potential Sanctions/Corrective Action: Any corrective action that is needed will vary depending on circumstances and the severity of the conduct. Resolution steps could include, but are not limited to, one or more of the following for students: training, advising or coaching from Student Development, reflection paper, behavioral probation, mandatory corrective action, revocation of privileges, suspension, or dismissal. For employees resolution could include, but are not limited to, one or more of the following: training, advising or coaching from Human Resources or other appropriate professional, verbal or written warning, probation, reassignment, suspension with or without pay, or termination. Depending on the circumstances and the impact on the Biola community, and considering the privacy issues that may be involved, resolution steps could include a campus-wide email, public announcement/statement, or developmental/educational programming for a broader group of campus employees.

Similar potential sanctions may also be imposed on an individual who knowingly provided false information or initiated in bad faith a claim of discrimination or harassment.

(11) Once the adjudicators complete the process of reaching their decisions as described in steps 9 and 10 above, they will provide a letter stating their decision as to whether there has been a Policy violation, what information was reviewed, and the rationale for their decision. The letter will also contain their recommendations for sanctions/corrective action, if any were made. This letter will then be sent to the ADO to review to make sure it is complete and clear. If sanctions/corrective action are to be imposed, the ADO will decide whether to accept the adjudicators’ recommendations or impose different ones. In the case of employees who are Respondents, however, the ADO must make this decision in consultation with the Senior Director of Human Resources.

(12) The ADO will send the adjudicators’ decision letter (without the section regarding recommended sanctions/corrective action) to the parties via a secure file as described in step 6 above, along with information about the right to an appeal. In cases where both the Complainant and the Respondent are students, any sanctions imposed will also be stated. In cases where the Respondent is an employee, unless necessary to ensure implementation or completion of corrective action, only a general statement that corrective action or consequences will be imposed, and not the specific action taken, will be provided to the Complainant.

E. Appeal

The parties have an opportunity to appeal the decision as to whether there has been a violation of this Policy and, if the Complainant and Respondent are both students, the decision to impose certain sanctions. To do so, a written appeal must be submitted to the ADO who will refer the appeal to the Appellate Officer(s) as follows:

• If both parties are students, the Vice President of Student Development.
• If both parties are employees, Susan Ishii, Interim Vice President of University Operations. If any of the parties reports directly to this individual, then Dr. Tamara Anderson, Senior Associate Provost.
• In all other cases, the appeal will be considered jointly by the Vice President of Student Development and the Vice President of University Operations/Senior Associate Provost. If there is no agreement on the outcome of the appeal, the ADO shall appoint another Vice President to serve as the deciding vote.

Alternative Appellate Process for Faculty Respondents: In the case where the Respondent is a Full- time faculty member, and the discipline imposed is included with those employment actions stated as within the “Scope” of Section 8.7 (Grievance Process) of the Employee Handbook, he or she may choose to forego the process below and proceed under the process described in section 8.7. This election by the faculty member must be made to the ADO within three (3) business days of being notified of the decision by the ADO. If this option is chosen, this is only right to appeal and no further appeals may be filed.

The appeal must be submitted within seven calendar days of the date the notice of decision is sent to the Complainant and Respondent. The length of appeal must not exceed seven pages (double-spaced, 12-pt. font) unless prior approval is sought from and obtained by the Appellate Officer(s).

General dissatisfaction with the outcome of the decision or an appeal for mercy is not an appropriate basis for an appeal. The written appeal must specify on which of the following four acceptable grounds grounds the appeal is based: 

1. Bias or conflict of interest by any of those involved in the investigation or decision-making process.
2. Procedural irregularity in the process that undermined the appellant's ability to present relevant supporting information.
3. New relevant information, sufficient to alter the decision reached, but only if that information and/or facts were not known to the appellant at the time of the original adjudication proceeding.
4. Inappropriateness of the sanction for the conduct involved (only available where the Complainant and Respondent are both students).

The non-appealing party will be notified within two business days after the time for filing an appeal has lapsed of the fact that the other party has filed an appeal. The non-appealing party may request to review the written appeal and may submit a written response within five (5) business days after being notified. The length of the response must not exceed seven (7) pages (double-spaced, 12-pt. font) unless prior approval is sought from and obtained by the Appellate Officer(s).

Generally, the appellate process does not require a hearing, nor does it require the Appellate Officer to make personal contact with any of the parties. Appellate Officers may, however, request that one or both of the parties meet with them, and may consult with others (e.g., an investigator(s), the adjudicators, an employee’s supervisor, a student development employee, etc.) if they deem such a meeting or consultation is needed to determine the issues raised in the appeal.

Within twenty (15) business days from the date of receipt of the written appeal, the Appellate Officer(s) will notify the parties of the decision. The Appellate Officer(s) may affirm, reverse, or modify the sanction. The Appellate Officer(s) may also return the case to the decision makers for further consideration. The Appellate Officers’ decision shall be final and effective immediately unless otherwise specified. The notification to the parties will be by e-mail to the parties’ Biola accounts.

F. Retention of Records

Other than University dismissal or permanent withholding of a degree, disciplinary sanctions will not be made part of the student's permanent academic record, but will become part of the student's disciplinary record. Cases involving the imposition of sanctions other than University expulsion or dismissal or withholding of a degree will be expunged from the student's disciplinary record seven years after graduation.

Disciplinary or corrective action taken with regard to an employee who is a Respondent in a case processed under this Policy will be noted in the employee’s personnel file. All other case details, however, will be kept in a separate file maintained by the Office of Human Resources relating to discrimination and harassment cases filed against University employees.

Any complaint relating to retaliation in violation of this Policy, violations of interim measures imposed during the resolution process, or violations of sanctions should be reported promptly to the ADO.  The University will take appropriate action against any individual who retaliates against another person in violation of this Policy or who violates interim measures or sanctions.   

When the University receives a complaint of retaliation or of violations of interim measures or sanctions, the ADO may exercise discretion to determine an appropriate responsive process based on the facts and circumstances. Options for resolution include but are not limited to: informal discussions and resolution facilitated by the ADO or designee, or assignment of a designated individual to investigate the complaint and determine an appropriate response. This process will be separate and from the complaint resolution procedures outlined above for addressing Discrimination or Harassment Complaints. The ADO will document the complaint received, the process used, and the outcome. Persons found responsible for any of these violations may appeal the decision in accordance with the Appeal process stated in section V. E. above.

Individuals are encouraged to use the complaint resolution process in this Policy to resolve a Complaint of Discrimination or Harassment. However, nothing in this Policy is intended to interfere with the right of any individual to pursue other avenues of recourse which may include, but are not limited to, filing a complaint (at the beginning, during, or after use of the complaint resolution procedure) with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) or with the U.S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission:

U.S. Department of Education
Office for Civil Rights
San Francisco Office
50 United Nations Plaza
San Francisco, CA 94102
Telephone: (415) 486-5555
Fax: (415) 486-5570
Email: OCR.SanFrancisco@ed.gov

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Los Angeles District Office
Roybal Federal Building
255 East Temple St., 4th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Telephone: (800) 669-4000
Fax: (213) 894-1118

In addition, for complaints regarding the University, including complaints related to institutional policies or procedures, an individual may contact the California Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education for review of a complaint:

Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education
1474 North Market Blvd., Suite 225
Sacramento, CA 95834
www.bppe.ca.gov
Telephone: (888) 370-7589
Fax: (916) 263-1897