Title IX Decision-Maker Training
Today's Training Covers
01
Role of the Decision-Maker
Who qualifies and what you decide
02
Receiving the Investigative Report
What arrives on your desk and when
03
Reviewing Evidence & Written Questions
How to assess and ask follow-up questions
04
Reaching a Determination
Preponderance standard & written decision elements
05
Sanctions & Remedies
Disciplinary options and restorative measures
06
Managing Appeals
Grounds, process, and Appeals Panel formation
07
Confidentiality & Recordkeeping
Legal obligations and 7-year retention
Regulations: Title IX (20 U.S.C. § 1681) · 34 C.F.R. § 106.45 · Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act
01 · Role of the Decision-Maker
Who Qualifies?
Designated school leaders authorized to determine responsibility
Cannot be the Title IX Coordinator or Investigator in the same case
Cannot be a Respondent or witness in the complaint
Must have received advanced Title IX training before serving
Must be free from conflicts of interest and bias
What Decision-Makers Decide
Question Relevance
Accept or exclude proposed written questions; explain exclusions to the Party
Responsibility
Whether Respondent violated the prohibition on sexual harassment (preponderance standard)
Sanctions
Discipline imposed on student or employee Respondents upon a finding of responsibility
Remedies
Measures to restore Complainant's equal access to KIPP programs and employment
Policy §18(e): Decision-Makers may not serve as Title IX Coordinator or Investigator in the same matter.
02 · Receiving the Investigative Report
What the Report Contains
Allegations Summary
A fair summary of all relevant evidence — both exonerating and incriminating — gathered during the investigation.
Witness Information
Interviews conducted, documents reviewed, site visits, and other evidence-gathering methods used.
Parties' Written Responses
Both the Complainant's and Respondent's written responses to evidence collected during the investigation.
Notice of Rights
Parties have 5 calendar days to submit written responses and proposed questions to Decision-Makers.
⏱ Decision may not be issued sooner than 10 days after the investigative report is distributed to Parties (Policy §7.14).
03 · Reviewing Evidence & Written Questions
⚠ KIPP does not conduct live hearings — all questioning is done in writing. (Policy §7.11)
Written Questioning Process
STEP 1
Receive Proposed Questions — Parties submit written, relevant questions they want asked of any other Party or witness within 5 calendar days of the investigative report.
STEP 2
Review for Relevance — Exclude irrelevant questions with a written explanation to the proposing Party. Accept and forward relevant questions for written answer.
STEP 3
Distribute Answers — Provide each Party with the written answers to questions submitted on their behalf. Maintain documentation of all Q&A exchanges.
STEP 4
Allow Limited Follow-Up — Permit a limited number of follow-up written questions from either Party as appropriate to the circumstances.
Policy §7.8: Evidence of sexual predisposition or prior sexual behavior is inadmissible except in very limited circumstances.
04 · Reaching a Determination
Standard of Proof
Preponderance of the Evidence
"More likely than not" — greater than 50% probability that the conduct occurred and constitutes sexual harassment as defined in Policy §18(j).
Presumption of Innocence
Respondent is presumed NOT responsible throughout the entire process. The burden of proof rests on overcoming this presumption. Both Parties must be treated with respect and equitably.
Required Elements of the Written Decision (Policy §7.14)
Statement of the allegations that may constitute sexual harassment
Summary of process followed: notices, interviews, site visits, evidence methods
Findings of fact based on all evidence gathered
Conclusions regarding applicable code of conduct or employment policy
Rationale for each allegation conclusion, sanctions (if any), and remedies (if any)
Statement of the appeal process and grounds (Policy §8)
Decision no sooner than 10 days after distributing the report. Target: full resolution within 120 days of notice (Policy §10).
05 · Sanctions & Remedies
Available Upon Determination of Responsibility (Policy §9)
Complainant Remedies
Supportive Measures (counseling, schedule changes, no-contact orders)
Restorative-justice activities with a disciplinary component
Other measures restoring equal access to KIPP programs & employment
Remedies may be kept confidential as needed
Student Respondent Sanctions
Mandatory participation in counseling services
Revocation of extra-curricular privileges (including sports)
No-contact orders; schedule changes
Short-term or long-term suspension
Expulsion or change of placement
Employee Respondent Sanctions
Mandatory participation in counseling services
No-contact orders
Reassignment
Suspension without pay
Termination of employment
IEP/504 Note: Removal of a student on an IEP or Section 504 plan must comply with IDEA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.
Both Parties treated equitably. Separate disciplinary action may still apply under Code of Conduct/employment policy (Policy §16).
06 · Managing Appeals
Three Permissible Grounds for Appeal (Policy §8)
A
Procedural Irregularity — A procedural irregularity that affected the outcome of the matter
B
New Evidence — New evidence not reasonably available at the time of determination that could affect the outcome
C
Conflict of Interest / Bias — The Investigator or Decision-Makers had a conflict of interest or was biased against a Party or all complainants/respondents
Appeal Process Timeline
Day 0
Party files notice of appeal within 5 calendar days of determination or dismissal
Days 0–5
Both Parties notified; each has 5 days to submit brief statement supporting or challenging the outcome
Days 1–21
Appeals Panel reviews notice, statements, formal complaint, report, and determination
Day 21
Panel issues written decision simultaneously to both Parties; tie vote upholds original
If Appeals Panel is evenly divided, the original determination or summary dismissal is upheld (Policy §8.1).
07 · Confidentiality & Recordkeeping
Confidentiality (Policy §11)
Identity of reporting persons must not be made public
Identity of Complainant, Respondent, and witnesses must not be disclosed
Exceptions: FERPA, other applicable law, or as needed for a formal investigation or judicial proceeding
No retaliation against anyone who reports, participates, or declines to participate
7-Year Record Retention (Policy §13)
Training materials
Investigative records (reports, evidence, written responses)
Informal resolution records
Disciplinary records
Supportive measures documentation
Decisions, remedies, and appeals
Retaliation & Intimidation Strictly Prohibited (Policy §12)
No person may intimidate, threaten, coerce, or discriminate against an individual who exercised rights under this policy — including reporting, participating in, or declining to participate in a proceeding.
False Evidence Is Prohibited (Policy §7.6)
Knowingly false statements or false evidence by any Party or witness may result in discipline. Note: Mere inconsistencies in evidence do not prove a 'knowing' use of false evidence.
KIPP will pursue appropriate corrective action for retaliation regardless of the outcome of the underlying complaint.
Decision-Maker Checklist
Decision-Maker Checklist
Cannot serve if you are the Coordinator, Investigator, Respondent, or witness
No determination sooner than 10 days after distributing investigative report
Exclude irrelevant questions with written explanation; allow limited follow-up
Apply preponderance of evidence standard; document rationale thoroughly
Written decision must contain all 6 required elements (Policy §7.14 a-f)
Process appeals promptly; form Appeals Panel if filed within 5 days
Maintain all records for 7 years; preserve confidentiality at all stages
2020 Title IX Regulations · Required Training Topics
Under 34 C.F.R. § 106.45(b)(1)(iii), Decision-Makers must receive training on all of the following topics before serving in this role. Training materials must be publicly posted and may not rely on sex stereotypes.
Current Status: The 2024 Title IX Final Rule was vacated in its entirety by federal court on January 9, 2025. The 2020 regulations (effective August 14, 2020) are fully in effect for all schools.
Topic A
Definition of Sexual Harassment
§106.30 — three-part definition including quid pro quo, hostile environment, and sexual violence
Topic B
Scope of the Education Program
What locations and contexts trigger KIPP's Title IX obligations
Topic C
Grievance Process
Full process: investigation, written questions, determination, appeals, informal resolution
Topic D
How to Serve Impartially
Avoiding prejudgment, conflicts of interest, bias, and reliance on sex stereotypes
Topic E
Issues of Relevance
Evaluating relevance of questions and evidence; excluding irrelevant questions with explanation
Topic F
Rape Shield Protections
When prior sexual behavior/predisposition is not relevant — and the two narrow exceptions
Topic G
Objective Evidence Evaluation
Evaluating all evidence — inculpatory AND exculpatory — without credibility bias by party status
Topic H
Written Determination Requirements
All six required elements of the written decision and simultaneous notice to both parties
34 C.F.R. § 106.45(b)(1)(iii): Training must not rely on sex stereotypes and must promote impartial investigations and adjudications.
Topic A · Definition of Sexual Harassment (§106.30)
Decision-Makers must know and correctly apply the regulatory definition. KIPP's definition aligns with 34 C.F.R. § 106.30.
1
Quid Pro Quo (Employee/Board Member)
Conduct by a KIPP employee or board member that conditions an aid, benefit, or service of the school — including employment — on participation in unwelcome sexual conduct.
Policy §18(j)(i)
2
Sexual Misconduct Involving a Student
Conduct by a KIPP team member that constitutes sexual misconduct involving a student, regardless of severity or pervasiveness.
Policy §18(j)(ii)
3
Hostile Environment
Unwelcome conduct by anyone that a reasonable person would determine is so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it effectively denies a person equal access to employment or KIPP's education program and activities.
Policy §18(j)(iii) · 34 C.F.R. § 106.30
4
Sexual Violence / Relationship Violence
Conduct by anyone that constitutes sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, or stalking toward a KIPP employee or student.
Policy §18(j)(iv) · 20 U.S.C. § 1092(f)(6)(A)(v)
Key: A person may be harassed by members of their own sex. Non-sexual conduct does not constitute harassment unless it takes on sexual connotations. (Policy §18(j))
Topics B & C · Scope of Program · Grievance Process
Topic B: Scope of Education Program or Activity
KIPP campuses and the KIPP Home Office
All locations where KIPP exercises substantial control over a Respondent
All contexts in which the alleged harassment occurs
Events and activities run by or for KIPP, regardless of physical location
Off-campus conduct if KIPP exercises substantial control over both the Respondent and the context
KIPP's obligation is triggered any time the Title IX Coordinator, any official with authority to institute corrective measures, or any employee has actual knowledge of sexual harassment or allegations thereof.
Topic C: Grievance Process at a Glance
Report
Actual knowledge triggers obligation; Title IX Coordinator contacts Complainant within 7 school days
Supportive Measures
Non-disciplinary services offered to both parties; documented if not offered
Formal Complaint
Filed by Complainant, parent/guardian, or Title IX Coordinator; written notice issued to both parties
Investigation
Investigator collects evidence; parties review all evidence; written responses submitted
Written Questions
Decision-Maker reviews report, proposed questions, excludes irrelevant ones, distributes answers
Determination
Decision-Maker issues written determination no sooner than 10 days after report distribution
Appeal
Either party may appeal within 5 calendar days on one of three permitted grounds
Policy §3 (scope) & §§6–8 (grievance process). KIPP aims to resolve all matters within 120 days of receiving notice (Policy §10).
Topic D · How to Serve Impartially (§106.45(b)(1)(iii))
This is one of the most critical regulatory requirements. Bias — even unconscious — can invalidate a determination and expose KIPP to liability.
No Prejudgment
Do not reach conclusions about facts or responsibility before the process is complete. Begin every case with a genuinely open mind. The Respondent is presumed not responsible until a determination is made.
DO: Review all evidence before forming any view
DON'T: Begin with an assumption about what 'probably happened'
No Conflict of Interest
Disclose and recuse yourself from any matter in which you have a personal, professional, or financial interest in the outcome, or a relationship with any party or witness.
DO: Promptly disclose any potential conflict to the Title IX Coordinator
DON'T: Participate in a case involving someone you supervise, mentor, or have a personal relationship with
No Bias
Treat Complainants and Respondents with equal respect and procedural fairness. Do not give one party more deference, patience, or benefit of the doubt than the other based on their role.
DO: Apply the same scrutiny to all parties' evidence and statements
DON'T: Automatically 'believe the victim' or assume the accused is lying
No Sex Stereotypes
Training materials and decision-making must not rely on stereotyped notions about how victims or perpetrators behave. Base credibility on objective factors, not on whether a party's behavior conforms to expectations.
DO: Evaluate credibility based on corroboration, consistency, and specificity
DON'T: Discount a Complainant's account because they 'didn't act like a victim'
34 C.F.R. § 106.45(b)(1)(iii): Training materials must not rely on sex stereotypes and must promote impartial investigations and adjudications.
Topic E · Issues of Relevance (§106.45(b)(1)(iii))
Decision-Makers must evaluate the relevance of every proposed question and piece of evidence. This is one of two training topics unique to Decision-Makers (not required for all Title IX personnel).
What Makes Evidence or a Question RELEVANT?
Tends to prove or disprove a fact that matters to the determination of responsibility
Relates to the alleged conduct, the context in which it occurred, or the parties involved
Helps assess credibility based on objective, non-status-based factors (e.g., corroboration, consistency, specificity)
Concerns the timeline, location, or circumstances of the alleged incident(s)
Decision-Maker's Process for Handling Proposed Questions
Step 1
Receive written proposed questions from each party within 5 calendar days of the investigative report
Step 2
Review each question: is it relevant to the determination of responsibility?
Step 3
Exclude irrelevant questions — provide a written explanation of the reason for each exclusion to the proposing party
Step 4
Submit relevant questions for written answer; distribute answers to both parties; allow limited follow-up
Policy §7.13: Decision-Makers shall exclude questions as irrelevant with explanation, or submit questions for answer, and allow limited follow-up.
Topic F · Rape Shield Protections (§106.45(b)(6))
The 2020 regulations import 'rape shield' protections from criminal law into the Title IX context. Decision-Makers must know both the general rule and the two narrow exceptions.
GENERAL RULE — Evidence and Questions That Are NEVER Relevant
Questions and evidence about a Complainant's sexual predisposition or prior sexual behavior are not relevant and must be excluded. This applies regardless of who proposes the question or submits the evidence.
Two Narrow Exceptions — When Prior Sexual Behavior MAY Be Relevant
Exception 1
Identifying a Different Perpetrator
Evidence of prior sexual behavior may be offered to prove that someone other than the Respondent committed the alleged conduct. Example: evidence that a third party, not the Respondent, was the source of physical injury.
Policy §7.8 · 34 C.F.R. § 106.45(b)(6)
Exception 2
Prior Specific Incidents with the Respondent to Prove Consent
Evidence of specific prior sexual behavior between the Complainant and the Respondent may be offered to prove consent to the alleged conduct. This exception is narrow — general history of a relationship is not sufficient.
Policy §7.8 · 34 C.F.R. § 106.45(b)(6)
Also excluded: any evidence protected by a legally recognized privilege (medical, psychological, treatment records) unless the party expressly waives that privilege.
Topic G · Objective Evaluation of All Evidence
34 C.F.R. § 106.45(b)(1)(ii) requires an objective evaluation of ALL relevant evidence — both inculpatory (supports responsibility) and exculpatory (undermines responsibility).
Inculpatory Evidence (supports responsibility)
Witness accounts corroborating the Complainant's version
Physical evidence, digital records, or communications consistent with the allegations
Prior similar conduct by the Respondent (if properly admitted)
Admissions or statements by the Respondent
Exculpatory Evidence (undermines responsibility)
Witness accounts supporting the Respondent's account
Physical or digital evidence inconsistent with the allegations
Evidence of motive to fabricate by the Complainant
Documented alibi or timeline evidence for the Respondent
Credibility Determinations — What the Regulations Require
REQUIRED
Base credibility on objective factors: internal consistency, corroboration by independent evidence, specificity of detail, and plausibility given other known facts
REQUIRED
Evaluate Complainant and Respondent credibility with equal rigor — neither party's account receives a presumption of credibility based on their role
PROHIBITED
Credibility determinations may NOT be based on a person's status as a Complainant, Respondent, or witness (34 C.F.R. § 106.45(b)(1)(ii))
PROHIBITED
Do not discount inconsistencies solely because they are consistent with 'trauma responses' — this creates a bias in favor of complainants
34 C.F.R. § 106.45(b)(1)(ii): Credibility determinations may not be based on a person's status as complainant, respondent, or witness.
Topic H · Written Determination · Training Materials Rule
Written Determination Requirements (§106.45(b)(7))
A
Identification of the allegations potentially constituting sexual harassment under §106.30
B
Description of all procedural steps taken from receipt of formal complaint through determination
C
Findings of fact supporting the determination, based on the preponderance of evidence standard
D
Conclusions regarding application of KIPP's code of conduct or employment policy to the facts
E
Statement of, and rationale for: determination on each allegation; any disciplinary sanctions; any remedies
F
Statement of the process and bases for appeal (the three permissible grounds)
Timing: No sooner than 10 days after the investigative report is distributed. Must be sent simultaneously to both parties.
Training Materials Rule (§106.45(b)(10))
Must Not Rely on Sex Stereotypes
Training content cannot be based on stereotyped assumptions about how complainants or respondents behave
Must Promote Impartiality
Training must actively promote objective, unbiased investigation and adjudication of every formal complaint
Publicly Available
All training materials must be posted on KIPP's website or made available upon public request
Retained for 7 Years
All training materials must be maintained in KIPP's records for a minimum of 7 years (Policy §13)
Trauma-Informed Training
Permitted IF it does not create a bias in favor of complainants or against respondents
34 C.F.R. § 106.45(b)(10)(i)(D): KIPP must make all Decision-Maker training materials publicly available on its website.
Regulatory Quick Reference · Decision-Maker Compliance
Use this checklist to verify compliance with the 2020 Title IX regulations at every stage of the grievance process.
Before the Process
Confirmed no conflict of interest or bias; disclosed and recused if any relationship with a party
Completed all required training topics (A–H) prior to serving
Confirmed you are not the Title IX Coordinator or the Investigator in this matter
During Evidence Review
Evaluated all evidence — both inculpatory and exculpatory — with equal rigor
Excluded questions/evidence about sexual predisposition unless a narrow exception applies
Excluded legally privileged records unless waived by the party
Based credibility on objective factors only — not on party status or role
Written Questions (K-12 process)
Received proposed questions within 5 calendar days of report distribution
Excluded irrelevant questions with written explanation to the proposing party
Submitted relevant questions; distributed answers; allowed limited follow-up
Written Determination
Issued determination no sooner than 10 days after distributing the investigative report
Included all 6 required elements (allegations, procedure, facts, conclusions, rationale, appeal info)
Applied preponderance of evidence standard; documented rationale for each allegation
Notified both parties simultaneously in writing
34 C.F.R. § 106.45 (2020) · Policy effective August 14, 2020 · 2024 Final Rule vacated January 9, 2025 — 2020 regulations fully in effect.