Interim PACAOS Appendix H: Student Conduct Investigation and Resolution Framework (with UC Davis Local Implementation Details)

Policy Summary

The following describes the University’s procedures for alleged student misconduct as defined in the Policies Applying to Campus Activities, Organizations and Students (PACAOS) 100.00 Policy on Student Conduct and Discipline.

I. Definitions

Definitions for the PACAOS, and the campus implementing regulations adopted, are in PACAOS 14.00.

Definitions for the Grounds for Discipline and Types of Student Disciplinary Action are in PACAOS 100.00.

II. Policy Text

A. Student Conduct Investigation and Resolution Framework

Each campus shall adopt and publish procedures consistent with these procedures to ensure the fair and timely resolution of alleged violations of University policies or campus regulations. These procedures must afford students due process, ensure impartiality, and maintain the integrity of the educational environment.

Procedural due process is essential to the proper enforcement of University policies and campus regulations. Chancellors must establish and publish campus regulations for handling student conduct cases in accordance with basic standards of procedural due process. These procedures must be appropriate to the nature of the case and the severity of potential discipline.

B. Scope and Applicability

These procedures apply to all students as defined in Section 14.40 of PACAOS and student organizations as defined in Section 70.10 of PACAOS.

These procedures apply to all alleged violations of the University’s student conduct policies, excluding:

1. Cases involving allegations of conduct prohibited by the Sexual Violence Sexual Harassment Policy, adjudicated under PACAOS Appendix E and Appendix F, and
2. Cases involving allegations of discrimination, or harassment, and related retaliation prohibited under the Anti-Discrimination Policy, adjudicated under PACAOS Appendix G, and
3. Cases involving academic misconduct, as defined in Section 102.02, when campuses have adopted campus specific procedures to adjudicate academic misconduct, and
4. Cases involving registered student organizations, as defined in campus implementing regulations, when campuses have adopted specific procedures to adjudicate student organization misconduct. See Appendix B – Interim UCD Policy on Student Conduct and Discipline.

When a formal investigation is deemed appropriate for cases involving reports of Sexual Violence, Sexual Harassment or other prohibited conduct by the UC Policy on Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment, campuses shall implement the procedures set forth in PACAOS Appendix E: Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment Student Adjudication Framework for Non-DOE-Covered Conduct or PACAOS Appendix F: Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment Student Adjudication for DOE-Covered Conduct. Campuses may also apply PACAOS Appendix E or F to adjudicate student conduct violations related to incidents of sexual violence and sexual harassment. See PPM Section 400-20.

For cases involving discrimination, harassment or related retaliation prohibited by the University of California Anti-Discrimination Policy, campuses shall implement the procedures set forth in PACAOS Appendix G: Student Investigation and Adjudication Framework for Prohibited Conduct: Discrimination, Harassment, and Retaliation. In the event there are violations of both the University of California (UC) Anti-Discrimination Policy and PACAOS 100.00, campuses may implement both procedures concurrently, after consultation between the Student Conduct Administrator and the Local Implementation Officer. See PPM Section 400-15.

Registered student organization (RSO) responsibility is independent of individual member accountability. Registered student organizations, as defined in campus implementing regulations, may receive sanctions applicable to the group’s recognized status on campus when they are found responsible for violations of University policy. If a report is made alleging that a student organization violated university policy, a responsible University officer will review the report and issue a Notice of Allegations. If the student organization is found responsible, possible sanctions may include but are not limited to: educational sanctions (e.g., training), probation, suspension of privileges (e.g., event registration, access to funding, etc.), or loss of recognition or revocation (meaning the organization is no longer allowed to operate as a university-recognized student group). If a student organization relinquishes or loses its recognition during the conduct process, Student Conduct and Integrity may continue or conclude the proceedings — including by reaching an Administrative Resolution — even without the participation of the organization or its signatories.

C. Reporting Suspected Student Misconduct to Student Conduct and Integrity

1. Faculty, students, staff, or others, including individuals not affiliated with the University, may report suspected misconduct to Student Conduct and Integrity. Reports may be submitted by the individuals directly affected by the behavior, or someone acting on their behalf. At minimum, a report should include:
   1. Reporting individual’s name and contact information
   2. Approximate date of alleged violation
   3. Brief description of alleged misconduct
   4. The report may also include the names of any witnesses, and copies of any supporting documentation.
2. A student who has received a "Y" grade or subject to other adverse action but has not yet been reported to Student Conduct and Integrity, may bring the matter to Student Conduct and Integrity and request that their case be reviewed through these discipline procedures, if appropriate.
3. A reporting party may inform or discuss the suspected misconduct with a student before submitting a report.

D. Complaint Timelines

1. Reports of suspected academic misconduct must be submitted to Student Conduct and Integrity within 45 days after the end of the quarter in which the suspected misconduct occurred or reasonably should have been discovered.
2. Reports of suspected non-academic misconduct must be sent to Student Conduct and Integrity within 60 days of when the suspected conduct occurred or reasonably should have been discovered, unless Student Conduct and Integrity determines that a longer reporting period is warranted.

3. Exceptions to these reporting deadlines include, but are not limited to:

   1. Reports involving alleged physical abuse
   2. Reports in which the law or policy allows a longer reporting period
   3. Reports in which the complaining party provides justifiable reason for the delay

   The Director or Associate Director—Student Conduct and Integrity has the discretion to grant an exception, taking into consideration how the delay may impact the reported student, including the availability of witnesses or evidence.

E. Response to Alleged Misconduct

1. Initial Assessment

   As soon as practicable after receiving a report alleging student misconduct, and typically within 30 business days from receipt of all necessary information, Student Conduct shall conduct a preliminary assessment to determine whether the report falls within the scope of these procedures and whether the allegations, if true, may constitute a policy violation.

2. Preliminary Review by Student Conduct and Integrity

   Upon receiving a written report or a request for review, Student Conduct and Integrity will evaluate the matter. Student Conduct and Integrity may decline to pursue the report through the disciplinary process if:

   1. The report is untimely.
   2. The alleged conduct does not fall under Student Conduct and Integrity's authority.
   3. The suspected behavior, if true, would not constitute a violation of University policies.
   4. The suspected incident should be addressed through other policies or procedures.

   The Director or Associate Director has final discretion whether to accept a report for the disciplinary process.

3. Notice of Allegations

   If a policy violation may have occurred, the student will receive a written Notice of Allegations, by email, which will include information related to the procedures for resolution. The student shall be informed of the alleged misconduct, the specific policy or policies allegedly violated, and of the opportunity to review the information submitted that is directly related to whether a policy violation has occurred. A copy of the campus implementing regulations implementing these procedures shall be provided to the student.

   The Notice of Allegations will either assign an appointment time based on the student’s class schedule or instruct the student to schedule an appointment with Student Conduct and Integrity. If a student is instructed to schedule an appointment, they must contact Student Conduct and Integrity within three (3) business days to do so. Student Conduct and Integrity may set a shorter deadline if needed.

   A student charged with a violation of the Policy on Student Conduct and Discipline shall be informed of their right to an Advisor (See Section V.C below) when they receive the Notice of Allegations.

4. Advisory Notice

   As an alternative to resolving alleged policy violations of the Policy on Student Conduct and Discipline, Student Conduct and Integrity may issue an official written notification to a student that the student’s alleged behavior, if it occurred, would have violated University policy, and could have been subject to the conduct process. The notice informs the student that repeated violations may be subject to the disciplinary process. The Advisory is not a determination that the allegations are true, does not result in a conduct record, and therefore is not appealable. However, the alleged behavior as detailed in the Advisory may be introduced in a subsequent conduct process for the purpose of establishing that the student was advised that such behavior violates University policy and to determine the appropriate disciplinary sanction. Student Conduct and Integrity may issue an Advisory Notice in cases where alleged misconduct suggests a violation, but information is limited or may be inconclusive or incomplete. Normally the issuing of an Advisory Notice will close the matter, however, should additional relevant information be discovered in the future the matter may be reopened.

5. Interim Actions

   Consistent with PACAOS 107.00, the University may take Interim Actions before a final determination of an alleged violation.

6. Advisors

   At all stages of this process, the student has the right to an Advisor. A student may select an Advisor of their choice or request the University to provide them with one. The Advisor may be any person (including an advocate, attorney, friend, or parent), except a person with information relevant to the alleged policy violation. All advisors will receive training in accordance with the California Education Code section 66283(b)(3).

   1. The Advisor’s primary role is to provide guidance to the student throughout the process. The Advisor may not speak on behalf of the student at any time in the conduct process.
   2. Advisors may not disrupt any meetings or the process in any manner. At all stages of the process, Advisors must comply with the expectations within these procedures for participants in this process. The University reserves the right to exclude an Advisor who does not abide by these procedures.
   3. All communication with Student Conduct must come from the student; an Advisor cannot communicate with Student Conduct on the student’s behalf.
   4. In the interest of expediency, the student conduct process may not be delayed due to the unavailability of an Advisor.
   5. The Advisor selected by the student or provided by the campus will have access to training provided by the campus regarding its procedures for student conduct investigation and resolution.
      A student may give written permission for the Advisor to be copied on Student Conduct’s communications to the student during the investigation and resolution process.

7. Investigation Process

   Allegations of misconduct will be investigated by Student Conduct and Integrity or their designee. The Student Conduct and Integrity Administrator will offer a meeting for the purpose of explaining the alleged violation(s), discussing information that was received in relation to the allegation(s), and providing the student with an opportunity to respond to the allegation(s) and to present any information that may assist in investigation and resolution of the case.

   The Student Conduct and Integrity Administrator will review the facts and information available and shall determine, based on the preponderance of the evidence, whether it is more likely than not the student violated University policy.

   All investigations shall be concluded promptly, generally within 60 to 90 business days of issuing a Notice of Allegations, unless there is good cause for an extension. The investigation timeframe is concluded when an Administrative Resolution has been issued by Student Conduct and Integrity. The investigation timeframe may also be concluded if an Alternative Resolution process is initiated.

8. Participation

   If the student fails to respond or chooses not to participate by the deadlines provided by Student Conduct and Integrity, in the investigation and resolution process (including a formal hearing when required), Student Conduct and Integrity may proceed in the student’s absence. Appropriate outcomes may be applied unilaterally. Student Conduct and Integrity may proceed with the investigation and resolution process even if the student is subject to concurrent University processes, criminal or civil proceedings.

   The student is not required to participate in the conduct process outlined in these procedures. The University will not draw any adverse inferences from a student’s decision not to participate or to remain silent during the process. A Student Conduct and Integrity Administrator or Hearing Body, in the investigation or the hearing respectively, will reach findings and conclusions based on the information available.

   When a student selectively participates in the process – such as choosing to answer some but not all questions posed, or choosing to provide a statement only after reviewing the other information gathered in the investigation – a Student Conduct and Integrity Administrator or Hearing Body may consider the selective participation in evaluating the student’s credibility. In doing so, they should try to discern reasonable non-adverse explanations for the selective participation, including the student’s own explanations and determine whether the information available supports those explanations.

9. Standard of Proof

   The standard of proof for fact-finding and determining whether a policy violation(s) occurred is preponderance of evidence. A preponderance of evidence is defined as “more likely to be true than not”.

10. Disability-Related Accommodations

    Student Conduct and Integrity will consider requests from the student and witnesses for disability-related accommodations.

11. Language Interpretation

    Student Conduct and Integrity will consider requests from the student and witnesses for language interpretation.

12. Extension of Timelines

    The Student Conduct and Integrity Administrator or designee may extend any timelines contained in these procedures for good cause shown and documented. Good cause is defined for purposes of these procedures as significant or unforeseen circumstances that impede completion of the process within the projected timeframe.

F. Resolution Pathways

The following resolution pathways are available generally as an outcome of the Student Conduct Investigation Process. A determination on which resolution pathway will be followed will typically be made within the 60 to 90 business day investigation timeframe.

1. Closure – No Responsibility or Insufficient Information

   If the Student Conduct and Integrity Administrator’s determination is that the student is not responsible for violating University policy, or if there is insufficient information to make a determination, Student Conduct and Integrity will notify the student accordingly and may issue an Advisory Notice or take no further action.

2. Alternative Resolution

   At any point during the process, Student Conduct and Integrity may offer an Alternative Resolution option (e.g., mediated dialogue, restorative justice, educational agreement), subject to the following conditions:

   1. The student does not dispute the facts relevant to whether the policy violation occurred, and/or acknowledges responsibility.
   2. All parties involved who are willing to participate in any process, including any impacted individuals, consent in writing to participate. The Student Conduct and Integrity Administrator will determine who is an “involved party”.

   Not all allegations are eligible for Alternative Resolution. The Student Conduct and Integrity Administrator, is responsible for making the final decision regarding whether or not Alternative Resolution is appropriate and may change their determination if additional information is received.

   Upon acceptance of the Alternative Resolution Agreement, the student waives the right to a hearing and appeal. The Agreement will be in writing and likely include educational or restorative components. Records of Alternative Resolution will be maintained as a non-disciplinary record (unless otherwise agreed to within the resolution plan), but failure to accept the Agreement or to comply with the terms of the Agreement may lead to a cancellation of the Alternative Resolution Agreement and a return to the investigation and/or resolution process.

   Student Conduct and Integrity will complete the Alternative Resolution process typically within 30 to 60 business days of notifying the student in writing of the beginning of the process. However, Student Conduct may extend past 60 business days for good cause.

3. Administrative Resolution

   If the Student Conduct and Integrity Administrator has determined that the student is responsible for violating University policy, Student Conduct and Integrity will determine what sanction and/or University action should be taken and will issue an Administrative Resolution.

   1. If the student accepts the Administrative Resolution, the outcome is final, and no hearing or appeal will follow.
   2. If the student does not accept the Administrative Resolution and:
      1. The Administrative Resolution does not include suspension or dismissal, the student may elect to appeal the Administrative Resolution finding(s) and/or sanction(s) within 10 business days of the issuance of the Administrative Resolution, via written communication to the designated appeal body identified in campus implementing regulations. The student may appeal on the grounds described in this section. The appeal should identify the reason(s) why the student is challenging the Administrative Resolution under one or more of the following:
         1. New information not available at the time of the investigation, the absence of which can be shown to have materially affected the outcome.
         2. There was procedural error in the process that materially affected the outcome.
         3. The proposed sanction is disproportionate given the findings of fact.
      2. The Administrative Resolution includes suspension or dismissal, the student may elect to contest Student Conduct and Integrity’s determination of responsibility by proceeding to a Formal Hearing (see Section II.F.4 below). Within five (5) business days of the issuance of the Administrative Resolution, the student must indicate via written communication to Student Conduct and Integrity or their designee if they wish to contest Student Conduct and Integrity’s determination of responsibility.
      3. If the Administrative Resolution includes suspension or dismissal, and the student accepts responsibility for the policy violation, but wishes to appeal the sanction (suspension or dismissal), they may submit a written appeal on only one ground, that the proposed sanction is disproportionate given the findings of fact. Within five (5) business days of the issuance of the Administrative Resolution, the student must indicate via written communication to Student Conduct and Integrity or their designee if they wish to accept responsibility for the policy violation, but appeal the sanction. The student will have an additional five (5) business days to submit their written appeal to Student Conduct and Integrity or their designee, identifying the reason(s) why the student is challenging the proposed sanction.
      4. When an appeal is permitted under the procedures outlined above, the implementation of sanctions will be deferred pending the outcome of the appeal. Student Conduct and Integrity may submit a written response to the designated appeal body within seven (7) business days of receiving a copy of the appeal. Absent good cause for an extension, the appeal body will issue a written decision to the student within 20 business days of receiving the appeal and all related documents. The decision of the appeal body is final.
      5. Following the issuance of the Administrative Resolution, if the student does not respond within the timelines listed above, the outcome is final, and no hearing or appeal will follow.

4. Formal Hearing

   When the outcome of the Administrative Resolution includes suspension or dismissal, and the student has contested Student Conduct’s determination of responsibility, the case will proceed to a formal hearing. Campus implementing regulations shall provide the following minimum procedural standards to assure the student a fair hearing:

   1. Written notice (via the Notice of Allegations or subsequent Administrative Resolution), within 10 business days before the hearing (unless the reported student agrees to a shorter period) and include:
      1. A brief statement of the factual basis of the charges,
      2. The University policies or campus regulations allegedly violated,
      3. The time and place of the hearing,
      4. The University bears the burden of proof, that is, a student is considered not in violation unless resolved through a Formal Hearing,
      5. The opportunity to present documents and witnesses,
      6. The opportunity to question witnesses presented by the University,
      7. The right to remain silent without any inference of culpability, however, when a student selectively participates in the process – such as choosing to answer some but not all questions posed or choosing to provide a statement only after reviewing the other information gathered in the investigation, the hearing body may consider the selective participation in evaluating the student’s credibility,
      8. The initial information to be provided prior to the Formal Hearing, such as documents, and the names of any witnesses with a brief description of the purpose of their testimony,
      9. The deadline by which the parties must submit information and witness names with a brief description of the purpose of their testimony,
      10. The right to be accompanied and assisted by an advisor,
      11. An outline of the Formal Hearing process,
      12. Upon conclusion of the hearing, a recording of the hearing is available upon request,
      13. Written findings of fact,
      14. A decision in writing based on a preponderance of the evidence, and
      15. An appeal process.
   2. The opportunity for a fair hearing where the University will bear the burden of proof, and at which the student will have the opportunity to present documents and witnesses and to question witnesses presented by the University; See Section II.F.5 below for the Formal Hearing Procedures.
   3. A record of the hearing; a written decision based upon the preponderance of evidence, that includes a summary of the relevant facts and a conclusion for each alleged policy violation, sanctions, if applicable, and information about the right to appeal, within 20 business days of the Formal Hearing.

      1. Record of Formal Hearing

         Student Conduct and Integrity will record the Formal Hearing, but not deliberations.

         1. A written index noting the timing of each witness's testimony may be kept but is not required.
         2. After the Formal Hearing, both the reported student and the reporting party may request to review the Formal Hearing recording and index.
         3. The recording becomes part of the official record and is retained for as long as the discipline record is retained.
         4. No mechanical or electronic devices may be used to record or broadcast the hearing, except for the official record described above.
      2. Hearing Body Report
         1. The hearing body will prepare a written decision (“report”) including factual findings for each specified allegation, and conclusions for each alleged policy violation. If the decision is not unanimous, both a majority and minority report may be submitted.
         2. At the Director’s or Associate Director’s discretion, the hearing body may be asked to provide recommended sanctions as part of their deliberations.
         3. The report is typically submitted within 10 business days of the hearing, unless the Director or Associate Director grants an extension.
         4. Director’s or Associate Director’s Review: Upon receipt of the report, the Director or Associate Director may:
            1. Accept the report;
            2. Return the report for clarification or reconsideration, specifying the issues or evidence to be considered; or
            3. Not accept the report—if the Director or Associate Director determines that a reasonable person would not reach the hearing body’s findings based on the evidence, the Director or Associate Director will explain the reasoning.
            4. If the Director or Associate Director accepts a report that finds the student in violation, the Director or Associate Director will decide on appropriate disciplinary sanction(s).
         5. Notification of Decision
            1. Student Conduct and Integrity will notify the parties of the Director’s or Associate Director’s sanctions decision, if any, and provide a copy of the hearing body’s report within 20 business days of the Formal Hearing.
            2. The notice may be sent to the UC Davis email address on record for the reported student and include:
               1. The due date of any appeal
               2. The appeal submission instructions

   4. Appeals Process

      A party who is dissatisfied with the written decision and wishes to challenge it submit an appeal in writing to the designated appeal body within 10 business days of the notice of decision.

      1. Who may appeal:
         1. The reported student may appeal the written decision on one or more of the grounds specified below.
         2. In cases involving academic misconduct, the University representative may also appeal on one or more of the same grounds.
         3. Appeals by undergraduate students are submitted in writing to the Associate Vice Chancellor or their designee.
         4. Graduate or professional student appeals are submitted in writing to the designated official from Graduate Studies or their respective school.

      2. Grounds for Appeal

         The appealing party must identify, in writing, the reason(s) for challenging the hearing body’s decision and/or sanction(s) be amended or overruled. Acceptable grounds include:

         1. New Information
            1. New information not available at the time of the hearing, the absence of which can be shown to have materially affected the outcome.
            2. The appealing party has the burden of persuading the appeal body that there is new information that was not known or available at the time of the hearing that is substantial to alter the factual findings and decision.
         2. Procedural Error
            1. There was a procedural error in the process that materially affected the outcome.
            2. The appealing party has the burden of persuading the designated appeal body that the University did not follow its procedures during the Formal Hearing.
         3. Disproportionate Sanctions
            1. The proposed sanction is disproportionate given the findings of fact.
            2. The appealing party has the burden of persuading the designated appeal body that the proposed sanctions are disproportionate to the factual findings. The designated appeal body may consider all relevant information, including the record of the case, the reasons that supported the sanction decision, and any information submitted by the parties in the appeal process.
      3. Appeal Process
         1. When an appeal is permitted under the procedures outlined above, the implementation of sanctions will be deferred pending the outcome of the appeal.
         2. Student Conduct and Integrity may submit a written response to the designated appeal body within seven (7) business days of receiving a copy of the appeal.
         3. Unless an extension is granted for good cause, the appeal body will issue a written decision to the student within 20 business days of receiving the appeal and all related documents.

      4. Possible Outcomes

         The appeal body may:

         1. Deny the appeal
         2. Grant the appeal in whole or part
         3. Return the matter to a hearing body for a new hearing
         4. Direct other relief deemed appropriate

         The decision of the appeal body is final, and no additional appeal rights are available to either party. The student may submit a statement in response to the appeal decision, which is retained on file in their disciplinary record.

5. Formal Hearing Procedures

   1. Purpose

      A Formal Hearing is a process in which members of the campus community (students, faculty, and/or staff), or in exceptional circumstances, a third party not affiliated with the University, receive evidence and make recommended findings of fact. It is not a court proceeding. These procedures apply to Formal Hearings unless specifically waived by the reported student or reporting party. A hearing body may adopt other procedures consistent with these policies to ensure a fair hearing for all parties if reasonable notice is given before the hearing.

      1. Third-Party Hearing Bodies:
         1. May be assigned only in exceptional circumstances for social misconduct cases.
         2. May be faculty or staff at other UC campuses, the Office of the President, or individuals unaffiliated with the UC.
         3. Assignment is at the discretion of the Director or Associate Director.
      2. Timing:
         1. Formal Hearings are scheduled and concluded with reasonable promptness to avoid unnecessary hardship for students, reporting parties, or witnesses, and to permit the parties reasonable time to prepare.
         2. Formal Hearings may be held during summer sessions or academic breaks, depending on the availability of parties and a hearing body.

   2. Hearing Body

      A matter may be referred for a Formal Hearing to a hearing body as described below.

      1. Role:

         Conduct the Formal Hearing, recommend factual findings to Student Conduct and Integrity, and determine whether a preponderance of the evidence establishes a violation of University policies or campus regulations.

      2. Types of Hearing Bodies:

         1. Student Conduct and Integrity Board panel
         2. Hearing Officers
         3. Hearing Panels
         4. Graduate and Professional School Hearing Panels

         The term "hearing body" applies to types listed above.

      3. Composition:
         1. Formal hearings involving charges of alleged academic misconduct will be heard by hearing panels composed of faculty and students, or a faculty hearing officer.
         2. A Student Conduct and Integrity Board panel, typically composed of students and faculty, has primary responsibility for hearing disputed cases of academic misconduct.
         3. Student Conduct and Integrity Board panels composed of students and faculty, or staff may hear social misconduct cases at the discretion of the Director or Associate Director.
         4. Typically, a hearing body consists of three persons. A student, staff or faculty member may chair a hearing, as appropriate. When using a panel as a hearing body, at least one student must be included.
         5. By agreement between a reported student and a reporting party and with approval by the Director or Associate Director, the composition of the hearing body may include fewer than three persons.
      4. Appointments:
         1. Students:
            1. Appointed by the Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs ("Vice Chancellor") or designee to the Student Conduct and Integrity Board (who serve one-year terms and may be reappointed).
            2. Student Conduct and Integrity Board student members will receive annual training regarding University policies for student conduct, the student disciplinary process, and procedures to be followed in formal hearings.
            3. Under the general direction of Student Conduct and Integrity, additional roles for Student Conduct and Integrity Board student members may:
               1. Develop, implement, and present outreach programs and educational materials to encourage academic integrity and responsible and ethical conduct in the campus community
               2. Provide information to students about the student discipline process
         2. Faculty:
            1. The Vice Chancellor, or designee, may appoint faculty members (Academic Senate and Academic Federation members) to the Student Conduct and Integrity Board as nominated by the Davis Division Committee on Committees.
            2. Any faculty member may serve as hearing chair or a hearing officer without special appointment. Faculty Student Conduct and Integrity Board members serve one or two-year terms and may be reappointed.
         3. Staff:
            1. The Vice Chancellor, or their designee, may appoint staff members to serve as hearing officers or as hearing panel members.
            2. Staff members serve one or two-year terms and may be reappointed. Staff serve on hearing panels or as hearing officers only for social misconduct cases.

      5. Hearing Officer

         University faculty, students, staff members or third parties appointed by the Vice Chancellor or designee to hear student disciplinary cases.

         1. The Director or Associate Director has authority to determine whether a hearing officer or hearing panel conducts a formal hearing.
         2. A hearing officer typically hears cases of reported social misconduct.
         3. An appointed Student Conduct and Integrity Board student or faculty member may serve as a hearing officer in disciplinary matters without special appointment.
         4. With agreement by the reported student(s), a faculty member may be assigned to serve as a hearing officer for cases of academic misconduct when it is difficult to assemble a hearing panel such as during the summer or other break periods.
         5. Unless previously trained as a Student Conduct and Integrity Board member, hearing officers will receive training from Student Conduct and Integrity regarding University policies, the student disciplinary process, and the procedures to be followed in conducting a formal hearing.

      6. Hearing Panels

         University faculty, students, and staff members may be appointed by the Vice Chancellor or designee to hear student disciplinary cases as hearing panel members.

         1. Hearing panels may be assigned when Student Conduct and Integrity Board panels are not available or when Student Conduct and Integrity determines that a hearing panel is required to ensure fairness.
         2. An appointed Student Conduct and Integrity Board student or faculty member may serve on hearing panels in disciplinary matters without special appointment.
         3. Unless previously trained as a Student Conduct and Integrity Board member, hearing panel members will receive training from Student Conduct and Integrity regarding University policies, the student disciplinary process, and the procedures to be followed in conducting a formal hearing.

      7. Graduate and Professional Schools

         Cases involving graduate students or professional students in Graduate Studies, the Graduate School of Management, the Law School, the School of Education, or the School of Nursing, may be heard before a graduate and professional school hearing panel.

         1. A graduate and professional hearing panel will receive appropriate training in University disciplinary policies and procedures.
         2. For cases involving alleged academic dishonesty, the graduate and professional hearing panel should include at least one graduate-level or professional-level student and one faculty member with graduate-level or professional-level teaching or research experience, preferably from the Division or School in question.
         3. For cases involving alleged social misconduct, a hearing officer may be appointed consistent with E. above.

      8. The School of Medicine and School of Veterinary Medicine

         Have established their own hearing bodies and written procedures for resolving student discipline cases involving their own students.

         If requested by the school, the Student Conduct and Integrity board may assist or decide cases involving students in these schools. Disciplinary records for students are maintained by the schools, and Student Conduct and Integrity may be notified of any disciplinary action taken against such students consistent with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act.

      9. Preparation and Presentation of Cases
         1. Reported students speak on their own behalf at the hearing. University representatives may speak on their own behalf.
         2. Reporting party
            1. In academic cases, the reporting party is generally the instructor of record (IOR) for the class, a teaching assistant, an associate instructor, or a University staff member who reported the matter to Student Conduct and Integrity.
            2. If the reporting party is not the IOR, Student Conduct and Integrity will notify the IOR about the report and the outcome.
            3. In social cases, a University student, staff or faculty member may be assigned to serve in the reporting party’s role to present information in support of the charges.
            4. A Student Conduct and Integrity staff member or Student Conduct and Integrity Board student member may serve in the role of a University representative for academic or social cases.

      10. Conduct of the Hearing

          A Student Conduct and Integrity representative attends all hearings and may provide directions and instructions to a hearing body to ensure compliance with policies and to facilitate the hearing process. 

          The Student Conduct and Integrity representative may serve in one or more of the following capacities but will not attend nor participate in deliberations:

          1. Attend the hearing to ensure that procedures are properly followed,
          2. Answer procedural questions that arise during the hearing,
          3. Lead the hearing process, performing the administrative tasks of the Hearing Chair, and/or
          4. Present information gathered during the investigation phase and answer questions from the hearing body or parties.

          Student Conduct and Integrity sends the student written notice within 10 business days before the hearing unless the reported student agrees to a shorter period.

          The notice should include the information provided in Section II.F.4.a as well as either in the notice of hearing, or as soon as possible afterwards, the name(s) of the hearing body so that the student may submit a challenge (see Section xii.B below).

      11. Evidence Submission and Records
          1. The reported student may request records in the possession of the University to be considered as evidence at the Formal Hearing. The Director or Associate Director or hearing body may exclude material that is determined to be repetitious or not relevant. The Director or Associate Director or hearing body will provide a brief explanation as to why the information will be excluded.
          2. Any information to be provided at the hearing must be submitted in advance to Student Conduct and Integrity, including:
             1. Copies of documents and other evidence, and
             2. The names of potential witnesses with a brief description of the purpose of each witness’ testimony.
          3. The University representative and reported student will submit information to Student Conduct and Integrity described in 1) above at least four (4) business days before the Formal Hearing. The information will be made available to the parties three (3) business days before the Formal Hearing.
          4. The University representative and reported student may submit additional information limited to rebuttal of the other party’s submission of information no later than two (2) business days before the Formal Hearing and be made available to the parties one (1) business day before the Formal Hearing. Any information submitted after this deadline will be considered at the Formal Hearing by exception with the approval of the Director or Associate Director or the hearing body.
      12. Conflicts of Interest
          1. Hearing bodies must not have prior involvement in the case and should disqualify themselves for any conflict of interest or if they believe they cannot make a fair decision.
          2. Either party may challenge a hearing body for stated reasons. A challenge must be made to Student Conduct and Integrity within three (3) business days after receiving notice of the name(s) of the hearing body.
          3. Student Conduct and Integrity or the Hearing Chair may disqualify the challenged hearing body upon a finding that the hearing body is unable to make an impartial decision or may overrule the challenge.
          4. Student Conduct and Integrity or the Hearing Chair may provide a brief statement of reasons if a challenge is denied.
          5. If disqualification of a hearing body prevents a quorum, an alternate hearing body will be assigned to the Formal Hearing.
      13. Pre-Hearing
          1. If several witnesses will be presented, the issues are complex, or if otherwise deemed useful, a pre-hearing conference may be scheduled at the discretion of the hearing body or Student Conduct and Integrity.
          2. At the pre-hearing conference, the parties will submit documents and lists of witnesses and the general facts to which they will testify.
          3. Student Conduct and Integrity, the body may decide any procedural issues and may exclude proposed testimony that is irrelevant, unduly repetitive, or unreasonably time-consuming or may reserve such determinations until the hearing.
          4. Hearings will normally be "closed," but the reported student may request that the hearing be "open" if the request is submitted no later than three (3) business days after receiving the notice of hearing.
          5. The Director or Associate Director has authority to deny the request if the Director or Associate Director determines that an open hearing would invade the privacy rights of others; if it might reasonably be expected to result in threats to or intimidation of witnesses; or for other substantial reasons.
          6. If Student Conduct and Integrity grants the request for an open hearing, it should be scheduled in a location that provides reasonable space for the public to be present. If there is interference with the orderly progress of an open hearing, the hearing body may adjourn and reconvene as a closed hearing.
      14. Who May Be Present at a Formal Hearing
          1. The reported student and the reporting party are both entitled to be present throughout the Formal Hearing and to hear testimony of all individuals who testify at the hearing, with their advisors, if any.
          2. Student Conduct and Integrity or the hearing body may implement measures they deem appropriate to protect the well-being of the parties and witnesses. This may include:
             1. Visual or physical separation of the parties,
             2. The use of a physical partition,
             3. A separate physical location,
             4. Videoconference and/or other appropriate technology, or
             5. Arrangement that questions for the parties or witnesses will be directed through the hearing authority.
             6. To assess credibility, the hearing body must have access to the parties or witnesses presenting information.

          3. Joint Hearing

             When more than one student is reported about a single incident or set of facts, Student Conduct and Integrity may schedule a joint hearing for all the reported students to conduct a full and fair consideration of the case. All the reported students may be present at the joint Formal Hearing. Student Conduct and Integrity may, at its discretion, schedule and conduct separate Formal Hearings.

          4. Witnesses wait outside the hearing room when not testifying. Witnesses are excused upon completion of their testimony, but may be recalled, if necessary.
          5. A reported student is entitled to one support person (this may be in addition to an Advisor) to accompany them at a Formal Hearing. The support person may not take an active part during the Formal Hearing or testify as a witness.
          6. Deliberations are conducted in closed session, with only members of the panel or hearing officer present.
      15. Rules of Evidence and Testimony
          1. Student discipline hearings are not court proceedings. The formal rules of evidence and court procedures used in civil and criminal proceedings before a court or administrative agency do not apply.
          2. The hearing body may receive and consider spoken, written, or other evidence that reasonable persons are accustomed to relying on in serious matters, as described below.
          3. The reported student and the reporting party will have the opportunity to testify and present witnesses and other evidence regarding the facts of the suspected violation and whether a violation occurred.
          4. A Student Conduct and Integrity Administrator may present evidence (a) regarding an alleged violation.
          5. Eyewitness testimony and circumstantial evidence in any form (e.g., documents, pictures, electronic, and/or physical evidence) may be presented to the hearing authority. Character evidence will not be permitted or considered during fact-finding.
          6. One person's report of another's statements (hearsay) may be considered by the hearing body. The hearing body may discount hearsay evidence in part or in whole as appropriate. A hearing body may not base a decision solely on hearsay evidence.
          7. A criminal plea, trial, and/or conviction, including a court order, opinion, transcript of sworn testimony, or other official record may be received as evidence.
          8. The findings and report of a University investigation may be received as evidence. The person who conducted and prepared the investigation report may testify at the hearing about the investigation process and the findings.
          9. The hearing body may weigh credibility and make findings based on the testimony of one witness against another or against other evidence.
          10. The hearing body may exclude irrelevant or unduly repetitious evidence.
          11. The hearing body may choose to limit the length of testimony so that the hearing can be completed in a reasonable length of time.
      16. Testimony and Questioning of Witnesses
          1. All parties and witnesses must specifically agree before testifying that their testimony will be truthful. Individuals may be subject to appropriate disciplinary procedures and actions if they provide false information at the Formal Hearing.
          2. No student witness may be compelled to incriminate themself.
          3. The reported student may remain silent, and their silence not be taken as an inference of culpability. If the parties or witnesses decide to selectively testify, the hearing body may consider selective participation when evaluating credibility. (See Section xv above).
          4. Parties may ask questions of each other and witnesses in the order determined by the hearing chair, unless the hearing chair decides that questions will be posed through the hearing body.
          5. Both the reported student and the reporting party may request that specified witnesses attend the Formal Hearing and testify. If a witness is unavailable to testify at the Formal Hearing, Student Conduct and Integrity may arrange for testimony to be taken at an alternate time under conditions providing an opportunity for oral or written questioning by both parties and the hearing body Student Conduct and Integrity does not have the authority to compel the attendance or testimony of witnesses.
          6. After all evidence has been heard, the reported student and the reporting party may present a brief closing summary. No new evidence may be presented during a closing summary. The closing summary allows the parties to review and highlight evidence for the panel that was provided at the Formal Hearing.
          7. To substantiate charges of misconduct in the Formal Hearing process, the University bears the burden of proof based on a preponderance of the evidence.
          8. A preponderance of the evidence is a standard of proof that requires that a fact be found when its occurrence, based on evidence, is more likely than not.
          9. The standards of "beyond a reasonable doubt" and "clear and convincing evidence" do not apply to UC Davis student disciplinary proceedings.
          10. Factual findings and determinations about whether a violation occurred may be based only upon evidence considered during hearings.

G. Sanctioning Framework

To promote accountability, safety, and educational development within the University of California community, this framework provides a consistent yet flexible structure for assigning sanctions and other university actions in response to violations of PACAOS 100.00 Policy of Student Conduct and Discipline.

1. Principles

   Educational Purpose: When appropriate, sanction(s) and/or other university action(s) serve an educational purpose—supporting accountability, student growth and learning. They are intended to reduce the likelihood of recurrence of behavior that violates University policy. The conduct process also seeks opportunities to foster reflection and development whenever possible, while reinforcing the importance of community standards and the shared responsibility of maintaining a respectful and safe campus environment.

   Consistency with Individualization: Sanctions and other university actions are guided by consistent standards and institutional values, while also considering the unique circumstances of each case. The decision-maker will consider a range of factors to ensure that outcomes are both fair and appropriate to each situation. Depending on the circumstances, multiple sanctions, varying in type and degree, may be applied.

   Proportional and Contextual Response: The student conduct process is designed to assess each case individually, with outcomes based on the nature, severity, and context of the behavior. A single severe incident may, in some circumstances, result in a more significant sanction; in others, misconduct may be addressed through educational and/or restorative—but still appropriate—responses.

2. Types of Student Conduct Sanctions and Actions.

   Consistent with the principles above, campuses have a range of options (as defined in PACAOS 100.00, Section 105.00 Types of Student Conduct Sanctions and Actions) available to respond to possible violation(s) of policy. The sanctions and actions fall under three categories, grouped into tiers of increasing severity.

   In most circumstances, sanctions are accompanied by Other University Actions (e.g., alternative resolution, advisory notices, supplemental education, or educational conversations). As such, education is included in each tier.

   1. Tier 1: Other University Actions, including but not limited to:
      1. Alternative Resolution
      2. Advisory Notice
      3. Educational conversation
   2. Tier 2: Sanctions for more complex or severe violations that may not warrant separation from the institution, including but not limited to:
      1. Warning
      2. Disciplinary Probation, with or without conditions
      3. Loss of Privileges/Exclusion from Activities
      4. Restitution
      5. Other University Actions (supplemental with sanctions)
   3. Tier 3: Sanctions for severe or repeated violations that may warrant separation from the institution, including but not limited to:
      1. Suspension
      2. Dismissal
      3. Exclusion from areas of campus or University Functions
      4. Other University Actions (supplemental with sanctions)

3. Factors Considered in Determining Student Conduct Sanctions and Actions.

   Each violation includes a recommended range of sanctions and/or actions and assumes a student is being charged with a single policy violation and has no prior history of violating University policy. Sanctions may fall outside these ranges in cases involving multiple policy violations and/or a prior history of policy violations. Campus officials should determine the appropriate sanction or action based on a variety of factors, including but not limited to, the following:

   1. Whether the act was deliberate/intentional
   2. Severity of the policy violation, including any result in personal injury or property damage
   3. Student’s previous conduct record
   4. Nature and context of the policy violation
   5. Impact on or harm to other members of the University community or the community as a whole
   6. Degree to which the student’s behavior disrupted or obstructed University activities
   7. Abuse of authority
   8. Response following violation: voluntarily acknowledged wrongdoing at early stage of the process; engaging in actions that seek to disrupt the Student Conduct process (e.g., harassing witnesses, expressing hostility towards conduct staff and/or reporting persons), or failing to engage in a forthright and transparent manner
   9. Number and type of violations associated with the incident

4. Range of Sanctions and Actions for Each Type of Violation.

   The range of sanctions and/or actions for each type of violation are summarized in Table A. Consistent with the factors and tiers described above, the table is intended to serve as a guiding framework for Student Conduct Administrators when considering sanctions and/or actions in response to specific types of policy violations. It provides a range of possible outcomes, listed in increasing severity, that may be appropriate depending on the circumstances of each case. Table A is not prescriptive and does not represent a mandatory and/or exhaustive list of sanctions and/or actions. Rather, it is a starting point to support consistency and informed decision-making in the student conduct process.

   Sanctioning decisions should always reflect the totality of the circumstances. Where appropriate, multiple sanctions and/or actions may be assigned, and more significant sanctions and/or actions may be warranted in cases involving repeat violations, aggravating factors, or broader community impact.

   This tool is meant to assist Student Conduct Administrators in exercising their professional judgment, in alignment with institutional values and the goals of education, accountability, and harm reduction.

Table A: Guiding Framework for Sanctions and Actions by Tier and Type of Violation

III. Compliance/Responsibilities

Chancellors shall adopt campus implementing regulations consistent with these Policies. The University shall publish these Policies and make them widely available, and Chancellors shall do the same with respect to the implementing regulations for their campuses. This requirement may be satisfied through the online publication of these Policies and their respective campus implementing regulations. (See also Section 13.20 of these Policies.)

IV. Procedures

The President shall consult as appropriate with Chancellors, Vice Presidents, the Office of the General Counsel, and Universitywide advisory committees prior to amending these Policies. Chancellors shall consult with faculty, students, and staff prior to submitting to the President any campus recommendations related to proposed amendments to these Policies. Amendments that are specifically mandated by law, however, do not require consultation with campus representatives or Universitywide advisory committees to the extent that legal requirements do not permit such consultation. (See also Section 13.10 of these Policies.)

Chancellors shall consult with students (including student governments), faculty, and staff in the development or revision of campus implementing regulations except when the development or revision of such regulations results from changes to these Policies that have been specifically mandated by law. Campuses shall specify procedures, including consultation processes, by which campus implementing regulations may be developed or revised. (See also Section 13.30 of these Policies.)

Prior to their adoption, all proposed campus implementing regulations, including all substantive modifications to existing such regulations, shall be submitted to the Office of the President for review, in consultation with the Office of the General Counsel, for consistency with these Policies and the law. (See also Section 13.40 of these Policies.)

V. Related Information

See also Policies Applying to Campus Activities, Organizations and Students sections:

• 10.00 Preamble and General Provisions
• 11.00 Authority
• 12.00 Applicability
• 13.00 Development and Review of Universitywide Policies and Campus Implementing Regulations
• 14.00 Definitions
• 100.00 Policy on Student Conduct and Discipline
• See also the University of California Policy on Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment See also the University of California Anti-Discrimination Policy

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Not applicable

VII. Revision History

• September 24, 2025: This is the first issuance of the Appendix. The Appendix is formatted to meet accessibility requirements.