Community Standards, Policies, and Procedures
Carnegie Mellon University is committed to cultivating an environment that supports each individual member’s personal and intellectual growth by promoting our traditions of innovation, leadership, responsibility to society, learning, dedication, commitment to quality and commitment to each other. We are a community with high expectations for those who choose to become members, including established community standards intended to foster behavior that is consistent with an educational setting where each member can achieve their full potential.
Carnegie Mellon Code
Students at Carnegie Mellon, because they are members of an academic community dedicated to the achievement of excellence, are expected to meet the highest standards of personal, ethical and moral conduct possible.
These standards require personal integrity, a commitment to honesty without compromise, as well as truth without equivocation and a willingness to place the good of the community above the good of the self. Obligations once undertaken must be met, commitments kept.
As members of the Carnegie Mellon community, individuals are expected to uphold the standards of the community in addition to holding others accountable for said standards. It is rare that the life of a student in an academic community can be so private that it will not affect the community as a whole or that the above standards do not apply.
The discovery, advancement and communication of knowledge are not possible without a commitment to these standards. Creativity cannot exist without acknowledgment of the creativity of others. New knowledge cannot be developed without credit for prior knowledge. Without the ability to trust that these principles will be observed, an academic community cannot exist.
The commitment of its faculty, staff and students to these standards contributes to the high respect in which the Carnegie Mellon degree is held. Students must not destroy that respect by their failure to meet these standards. Students who cannot meet them should voluntarily withdraw from the university.
It is the responsibility of each community member to become familiar with the standards and expectations of the Carnegie Mellon community. In general, each member should:
- Respect the rights of others;
- Respect the property of individuals, groups and Carnegie Mellon;
- Know, understand and abide by all Carnegie Mellon community standards, policies and regulations, as well as all local, state and federal laws;
- Engage in behavior that does not interfere with individual, group or Carnegie Mellon regular activities and/or operation;
- Ensure that guests behave in a manner consistent with and in accordance with the expectations of our community.
At the core, our standards, policies and procedures are designed to:
- promote and protect the rights of all members and guests of our community;
- promote and protect the health and safety of all members and guests of our community;
- promote the respect of and protect community members’ and University property;
- promote and protect the academic integrity of our community.
The Word provides a list of policies students are expected to uphold and the process by which violations will be addressed. Policies and procedures may be established or amended as necessary during the course of the academic year, which will become effective immediately upon notification by the dean of students.
Community Standards Violations
The following are groups of violations that constitute misconduct for which members of the student body may be held accountable. This list references policies that may be outlined in greater detail in this on-line handbook or other campus resources. It should be understood that the university is not limited by this list when it initiates the student conduct process, and further that any violation of university policy or applicable laws necessarily violates community standards. The university is not limited by this list nor by other published policies when it initiates student conduct actions since it is not possible to anticipate all of the behavior of a college population. The university reserves the right to review off-campus incidents to determine if a violation of community standards has occurred and whether resolution through the student conduct process is warranted.
Students at Carnegie Mellon are members of an academic community dedicated to the achievement of excellence. Therefore, students are expected to meet the highest standards of conduct. Failure to meet the expectations of high standards of integrity will be addressed through the university student conduct process.
Examples of violations of community standards in relation to integrity include, but are not limited to:
- Cheating, plagiarism or inappropriate collaboration
- Destruction of another person's work, specifically through the use of computer facilities
- Reverse engineering software or hardware without permission of the intellectual property owner
- Misrepresentation of research data
- Falsification of data
- Altering, falsifying, or misuse of university documents
- Invasion of or accessing personal files or a computer account other than one's own
- Misuse of computer facilities
- Violation of copyright laws including computing or Web-related documentation
- Violation of the Carnegie Mellon University Computing Policy
- Other acts that compromise the integrity of the academic process
- Violation of the Carnegie Mellon Code
- Providing false information to a university official
- Intentional misrepresentation of another individual through electronic communication or any other means
Carnegie Mellon University holds as its highest priority the welfare of its community members. Any behavior that places individuals in any kind of risk will be addressed through the university student conduct process. The sanctions that may result from this type of behavior may be severe.
Examples of violations of community standards in relation to the welfare of others include, but are not limited to:
- Threats of physical violence
- Tampering with or alternating of life support systems
- Harassment, including discriminatory harassment
- Unreasonable noise
- Violation of the Carnegie Mellon University Policy against Sexual Harassment and Sexual Assault
- Violation of the Carnegie Mellon University policy on HIV/AIDS
- Violation of the Carnegie Mellon University policy on hazing
- Hosting and/or participating in a disorderly event
- Endangering the welfare of others
- Dating Violence
- Domestic Violence
- Violation of a No Contact Agreement or No Contact Order
- Failure to enact the Alcohol Medical Assistance Procedure (AMAP)
The care and upkeep of our campus buildings, grounds and facilities are critical to providing students, faculty and staff with an environment that is conducive to learning. Any behavior that jeopardizes the maintenance of the campus or an individual's property will be addressed through the university student conduct process.
Examples of violations of community standards in relation to property include, but are not limited to:
- Repairing and storing vehicles, motorized or otherwise, in unauthorized university spaces
- Damage to property
- Improper possession of property
- Improper placement of posters/banners
- Trespassing on a roof, parapet, and/or other non-public areas
- Propping open doors that are kept locked for security purposes
- Unauthorized possession or use of keys or access cards
- Unauthorized tapping into or altering university utility lines
- Operation of vehicles in restricted areas
- Theft or irresponsible use of university property or services
- Willful destruction of, disabling, or damaging computer facilities, equipment or software
- Willful mutilation, destruction, or illegal possession of library materials
- Violation of the Carnegie Mellon University Library Policies
- Violation of the Carnegie Mellon University Housing Services policies
Carnegie Mellon has established basic guidelines that have been approved by students, staff and faculty. These policies ensure the safe and functional operation of the university. Students are expected to abide by these policies at all times. Failure to abide by these guidelines will be addressed through the university student conduct process.
Examples of violations of community standards in relation to health, safety and security include, but are not limited to:
- Harboring of an unauthorized animal(s)
- Failure to comply with a request to produce identification
- Violation of the Carnegie Mellon University Smoking Policy
- Disorderly or disruptive behavior
- Failure to comply with a reasonable request of a university official
- Violation of the Carnegie Mellon University Alcohol and Drug Policy
- Unauthorized use of appliances
- Tampering with or misuse of fire safety equipment
- Failure to evacuate for fire drills and alarms
- Violation of the Carnegie Mellon University Policy on Deadly Weapons
- Unauthorized entry into secured spaces
- Installation of a private locking system
- Violation of the Carnegie Mellon University bicycle/wheeled transportation policy
- The use of pyrotechnics, fireworks or hazardous devices
- Improper storage of chemicals, gases or hazardous materials
- Violation of the Carnegie Mellon University Housing Services policies
The Student Conduct Process
Violations of community standards by students are responded to by designated staff members in the Division of Student Affairs through the student conduct process. The following forums exist for formal resolution of violations:
- Administrative Resolution Meeting with a university adjudicator
- University Disciplinary Committee (UDC)
- Academic Review Board (ARB)
- All Greek Community Standards Board
For incidents that pose immediate concerns for the safety and welfare of the campus community, during the pendency of university student conduct proceedings, the dean of students or associate vice president of student affairs for community life or designee may take summary action or implement interim measures that limit a student's ability to be present on campus, engage in coursework, and/or interact with specific members of the university community until resolution is reached.
Additionally, the dean of students or designee may direct that a degree not be certified by the university registrar and therefore not awarded pending the resolution of university student conduct proceedings, including completion of all outcomes.
Initiating the Student Conduct Process
The student conduct process is initiated when student affairs receives information that substantiates the facts and circumstances associated with any alleged violation(s) of community standards by a Carnegie Mellon student. The substantiating information may be contained in a report from a security or policing agency (such as University Police or the Information Security Office), or in a complaint or report filed by a student, a faculty or staff member, or a community member at large, with a campus security authority of their choosing (as defined in the university's Annual Security and Fire Safety Report). Such complaints or reports, once received, should then be directed to the Office of Community Standards & Integrity or the Office of Title IX Initiatives (for Title IX-related incidents).
Non-academic student conduct action involving students is generally handled by the Office of Community Standards & Integrity (OCSI). OCSI has the authority to investigate all violations of university standards and policies and regulations that involve residential, non-residential or Greek students, and the duty to take any appropriate action.
The university student conduct process may not be used for the adjudication of cases involving the relationships between two students except as such cases involve violations of community standards that make the university a party to them.
Student organizations, as members of the academic community, are expected to uphold university policies and community standards. Alleged violations of community standards associated with student organization activities will be handled through the student conduct process. Individual students may be held accountable through the student conduct process separate from any sanctions imposed on an organization found responsible for violating community standards.
State citations are issued by University Police for violations of state law. While these citations are handled through the criminal justice system, students may also be expected to meet with a university adjudicator to determine whether a violation of community standards has also occurred.
Review After a Conviction of a Crime
The university may review the case when a student has been convicted in public court of the following serious crimes in circumstances that constitute a potential threat against the university's ability to function in whole or in part. The review will be conducted utilizing the university's student conduct process, and may entail the need to determine whether the student's presence at the university will endanger the university community.
- Murder or manslaughter
- The manufacturing, selling or possessing to sell any drug on the prescribed list subject to the criminal code of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
- Aggravated assault
- Criminal mischief
Withdrawal with Pending Allegations
Students who withdraw from the university with unresolved community standards allegations should expect the university to adjudicate the matter to bring the case to resolution and uphold the university’s obligation to expressly articulate eligibility to return to the university. If a good faith effort to participate in the appropriate process is not exhibited by the respondent, the university may elect to resolve the matter through the student conduct process without that student's participation.
Procedures for the Student Conduct Process
Adjudicator - University official authorized to resolve allegations or impose sanctions for students alleged to have violated community standards. This person is usually a housefellow or college liaison, but the dean of students or designee may also act as an adjudicator.
Complainant - The person(s) or group bringing allegations forward. In cases where there is no individual community member bringing forward an allegation, the university may act as complainant. Further, in cases where there is a community member bringing forward an allegation, a university official may serve as co-complainant where the university determines that a broader community interest exists to safeguard the welfare of the university community and when the potential outcome in such a case could include separation from the university.
Moderator - The Student Affairs staff member who facilitates a University Disciplinary Committee hearing. The hearing runs at their discretion according to process guidelines.
Process Advisor - The Office of Community Standards & Integrity staff member who is responsible for the logistics of convening a University Disciplinary Committee. The Process Advisor schedules the hearing, assembles the hearing board, prepares the complainant(s) and respondent(s) for the hearing, and manages other administrative tasks.
Resolution- Typically, the result of a complaint being adjudicated through the student conduct process which may entail administrative resolution or the University Disciplinary Committee. However, a complaint may be resolved informally outside of the student conduct process at the discretion of the dean of students or designee and the individuals involved in the matter.
Respondent - The person(s) or group alleged to have violated community standards.
In all cases involving infractions of community standards the following procedures will be used:
- The case will be reviewed and the associate vice president of student affairs for community life or designee will determine the appropriate venue for resolution.
- When appropriate, an Administrative Resolution Meeting will take place with a university adjudicator. If the student respondent and the university adjudicator can resolve the matter, the student will be notified in writing of the determined action once said action is approved by the Resolution Review Board (RRB).
- When the University Disciplinary Committee is assigned original jurisdiction or when Administrative Resolution has failed, a student respondent who is alleged to have violated one or more university standards will:
- be notified in writing by a representative of the Office of Community Standards & Integrity of the allegation(s);
- have access to all information referring the case to the Office of Community Standards & Integrity and all supporting documents (appropriately redacted), and;
- be informed about the scheduled time and place of the meeting of the University Disciplinary Committee for review of the case.
Administrative Resolution Meeting
Upon notification of an alleged violation of community standards, a student will be asked to meet with an university adjudicator to attempt to resolve the matter.
A successful administrative resolution meeting will include the following:
1) The facts must be determined. The student must agree that essential facts related to the incident are undisputed.
2) A violation of community standards must be determined. The student must agree that what occurred during the incident was a violation of the university's community standards.
3) A proposed outcome or set of outcomes must be determined. The student and adjudicator must jointly agree about what outcome or set of outcomes will be proposed for resolution of the matter, taking into account where appropriate the concerns of the reporting party.
The aforementioned proposed outcome or set of outcomes will be reviewed by the Resolution Review Board. If approved, the student will receive notification in writing confirming the determined action, which then becomes final. If agreement on the appropriate action cannot be reached, the matter may be referred to the appropriate hearing board for review.
The following are detailed descriptions of the appropriate uses and processes of the Carnegie Mellon hearing boards that serve in cases of alleged student misconduct. The boards are:
- University Disciplinary Committee (UDC)
- All Greek Community Standards Board
University Disciplinary Committee
The University Disciplinary Committee has jurisdiction in the following cases:
- Any cases of alleged violations of university standards and policies that the associate vice president of student affairs for community life or designee, deems sufficiently serious in nature.
- Any cases of alleged violations of university standards and policies in which one student(s) is filing allegation against another student(s) that cannot be appropriately resolved through the administrative resolution process.
- Appeals from penalties imposed by a university adjudicator or university staff members taking summary actions (for example, University Library action according to written policy).
- Cases in which the facts of the situation are in dispute.
- Alleged violations for which administrative resolution is deemed by the associate vice president of student affairs for community life or designee to be an inappropriate means of resolution or instances when administrative resolution has not been successful.
Composition of the University Disciplinary Committee
The University Disciplinary Committee consists of two student board members, one staff board member, one faculty board member and one additional faculty or staff board member. In addition, a moderator, typically a member of the Office of Community Standards & Integrity, will preside over the hearing. All board members and moderators are trained.
The faculty members will be appointed by the Faculty Senate. The staff members will be appointed by the Staff Council. The student members will be appointed with the concurrence of the Undergraduate Student Senate and the Graduate Student Assembly following a selection process coordinated by the Office of Community Standards and Integrity. All board members will be appointed for a term of up to three years which may or may not be followed by reappointment.
Members participating in a given hearing will be selected based upon availability and disinterestedness in the hearing subject or parties. No one who has prior substantial knowledge of the student involved or the event leading to allegations or who has substantial interest in the student or the case involved or who may appropriately be a witness in the case may sit on the committee.
Conduct of University Disciplinary Committee Hearings
The university attempts to ensure fair, timely and orderly procedures in all student conduct reviews. To provide for this, the university has adopted the following procedural protections for the rights of students. The moderator will remind all persons present at the opening of each student conduct hearing that the purpose of a University Disciplinary Committee is to determine an appropriate response, through a deliberative process, when a member of the university community believes that a violation of policy, standard or regulation has taken place. The following is a list of procedures that govern the University Disciplinary Committee process:
- The student must be notified in writing of the specific policy, standard or regulation the student has allegedly violated. Such notification is normally made at least seven calendar days before the hearing.
- Throughout the student conduct process, the student respondent will receive full notification of complaint, notification of any hearing and notification of disposition of the charge and will have the right to be present throughout the hearing process.
- The complainant will receive full notification of the complaint, notification of any hearing, and will have the right to be present throughout the hearing process. In cases that involve crimes of violence, sexual harassment, sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, stalking and other policy violations related to Title IX, the complainant will receive notification of disposition of the allegation(s) as applicable.
- In advance of the hearing, the members of the hearing board will be provided a pre-read packet, which may include, among other relevant items: the initial complainant report; any investigation reports and/or witness statements; a statement from the complainant(s) to the board; and a statement from the respondent(s) to the board.
- Complainant(s) and respondent(s) may submit up to three written letters of support as part of the hearing process. Letters received in advance of the hearing will be included in the pre-read packet; those submitted at the hearing will be offered to board members and other party for their review during the formal hearing.
- Information provided during a University Disciplinary Committee hearing should remain confidential. The complainant(s) and respondent(s) are provided a full copy of all materials provided to the hearing board for the purpose of preparing for or use during the hearing, consistent with the privacy rights of those involved. These materials are to be kept confidential and may be shared only with permission from the process advisor. These documents may not be duplicated nor utilized for any other purpose. All materials provided to the complainant(s) and respondent(s) must be returned to the process advisor at the conclusion of the hearing.
- During the actual hearing before the board, a student has the right to be present when evidence relative to the case is being presented. In the student conduct process, a student who is charged with a violation has the right to remain silent.
- Counter-allegations. After having been properly notified of the violations with which the respondent has been charged, the respondent may file in writing counter-allegations against the complainant in connection with the incident(s) currently under review by the University Disciplinary Committee. Counter-allegations must be raised within a reasonable time (normally within two business days) of the notification of the complainant’s allegations. The counter-allegations must detail the university regulation or policy that the respondent believes has been violated in connection with the incident(s) currently under review by the UDC and provide information that substantiates the facts and circumstances. Counter-allegations cannot be based solely on the fact that a complaint was brought forward, nor can they be retaliatory in nature. The Resolution Review Board will determine if the counter-allegations will be reviewed by the UDC or resolved in a subsequent hearing, based on the connection of the counter-allegations to the incident(s) already under review.
- Prior to the hearing, the individuals involved will be asked if they believe that the potential hearing board members are biased toward or against them. If a perceived bias is reasonable, replacements will be chosen for the board.
- Advisors. Both the complainant and respondent have the right to have one person of their choosing appear at any hearing as their advisor. Both parties are required, however, to notify the process advisor at least three days in advance if legal counsel will be present so that the hearing group may determine whether it wishes to secure legal advice in connection with the hearing. Legal counsel or any other advisor, if present, will not be permitted to participate in the proceedings but may advise the respondent or the complainant or be present at a hearing at the request of the associate vice president of student affairs for community life or designee. In the event that one party to a case appears represented by legal counsel without advance notice, a hearing may be postponed until all parties to the case have had an opportunity to have counsel present.
- In scheduling a hearing, consideration should be given to allow that witnesses significant to the case being heard are available to the hearing group. If a witness is not available to be called by the hearing group in person or via telecommunication, they may submit a written statement to the process advisor to be reviewed if the board requests information from the witness. It is within the discretion of the board to determine whether they wish to hear from suggested witnesses. Witnesses will be questioned one at a time by the hearing group and subsequently dismissed. They should only be present in the room when providing information to the board. Except in documented extenuating circumstances, students are expected to make a good faith effort to provide information to the university disciplinary committee when called as a witness.
- All proceedings before a hearing group, except the deliberation of the group, will be recorded. Recordings will be kept in accordance to student conduct records retention practices
- The complainant(s) and respondent(s) will each be limited to ten minutes for introductory statements and five minutes for summary statements.
- Following summary statements, the board will enter closed deliberations. A preponderance of the evidence standard (more likely than not) will be used to determine if a university policy, standard or regulation was violated. If responsibility is determined, the board will make a recommendation for appropriate outcomes.
- No information about a respondent's prior student conduct record will be shared with the hearing board until a determination of responsibility has been made unless the case being reviewed stems from the prior incident for which a student conduct record exists. If a respondent(s) has a prior student conduct record and is found responsible by the hearing board that student may be recalled before the board to discuss the prior violations and sanctions prior to the hearing board making a recommendation for appropriate sanctions for the present case.
- A representative of the Office of Community Standards & Integrity will be responsible for notifying the associate vice president of student affairs for community life or designee in writing of the recommendation of the hearing group regarding responsibility and any sanctions deemed appropriate.
- After reviewing the recommendations, the associate vice president of student affairs for community life or designee will notify the respondent(s) in writing of the final decision.
- Parents of a student normally will not be notified of any student conduct action.
- Student conduct actions will normally be recorded only in the student's personal file in the Office of Community Standards & Integrity except as they affect eligibility for enrollment, in which cases appropriate notation on other university records will be made. Suspension or expulsion will be recorded on the official student records of the university with the University Registrar's Office. They will not be released as a part of the official transcript of the academic record of a student.
- It is the responsibility of the Office of Community Standards & Integrity to ensure that times set for hearings are reasonable and that necessary accommodations have been offered to both the complainant and respondent whenever appropriate. In turn, both the complainant and respondent will be expected to demonstrate good faith efforts in their participation with this process, particularly in relation to the scheduling of the hearing. In a case involving exigent circumstances that prevent the complainant or respondent from participating in a scheduled hearing, the hearing will be rescheduled.
- In the rare circumstance where a respondent fails to make a good faith effort to participate in the process, the university (having made reasonable attempts to accommodate the respondent) may elect to schedule and conduct a hearing without that student's participation.
- Classroom attendance, except for scheduled examinations, will not be a reasonable excuse for delaying a hearing.
- Review of incidents involving both student conduct allegations and academic integrity allegations may be conducted by a university disciplinary committee at the discretion of the dean of students.
- Allegations stemming from multiple incidents indicating an alleged pattern of behavior may be collectively reviewed by a single university disciplinary committee at the discretion of the dean of students.
An appeal of a decision delivered through university student conduct action must be submitted in writing to the president of the university by the respondent, complainant or victim (where notification of the disposition of the charge to the complainant or victim is permitted) within seven calendar days of the official notification of the decision.
The written appeal request should indicate whether the student is appealing the finding(s) of responsibility, the outcome(s), or both, as well the basis for the appeal itself. The basis of an appeal will be limited to one or more of the following cases:
- A gross error in procedural process;
- The sanction(s) imposed were not commensurate with the violation(s) of community standards for which the respondent(s) were found responsible;
- The decision was unsupported by any substantial evidence at the hearing;
- New information, which was unavailable at the time of the hearing, that merits re-consideration of the final disposition.
The appeal officer designated by the president will review the written appeal request and determine whether, in the judgment of the appeal officer, sufficient grounds exist for at least one basis of appeal to be further explored through review by the appeal officer; if not, the appeal request may be denied. In hearing an appeal, the appeal officer, at their discretion, may meet with individuals and review information relevant to the bases of the appeal. In the event of an appeal, sanctions will normally be held in abeyance pending the outcome of the appeal, except in cases where the university determines there may exist a threat to the safety and welfare of the campus community, in which case sanctions will take immediate effect.
Appeals will be decided by the appeal officer in a timely manner. There may be particular circumstances, however, that necessitate additional time for the appeal officer to reach a decision. While an appeal is under review, the appeal officer will update the respondent(s) and/or complainant(s) (if applicable) and/or victim (if applicable) as necessary about the timeline.
The appeal officer has the authority to modify the decision as they deem appropriate for resolution of the matter being appealed, which could entail an increase, decrease or change to the nature of the sanction(s), or a remanding of the matter to a new University Disciplinary Committee for review.
Cases Involving Sexual Harassment, Sexual Assault, Dating Violence, Domestic Violence, Stalking and Policy Violations Related to Title IX
Carnegie Mellon University is committed to managing all cases involving allegations of sexual harassment, sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, stalking and other policy violations related to Title IX with appropriate care and sensitivity. In these cases, the university may be expected to vary from the procedural provisions set forth in this policy as necessary to comply with the requirements of Title IX, the Violence Against Women Act and other applicable laws, as well as to ensure that the university appropriately addresses issues related to sexual harassment, sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, and stalking for all community members.
In cases of sexual harassment, sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, stalking and other Title IX violations, the following procedures will be followed:
- In cases where a student provides information to the university describing behaviors that may violate university policy related to Title IX (including sexual harassment, sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and/or stalking) but chooses not to serve as a complainant in a student conduct proceeding, the university may act as a complainant when there exists a broader or overriding community interest. In such cases, the university will afford to the victim all of the rights customarily afforded to a complainant. Notwithstanding the fact that the victim wishes not to serve as complainant, they may nevertheless act as a witness in a University Disciplinary Committee hearing.
- Mediation between a reporting party and a responding party will not be pursued in cases involving allegations of sexual harassment, sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, stalking, or other policy violations related to Title IX. This does not preclude informal resolution of a complaint outside of the student conduct process.
- A preponderance of the evidence standard (e.g., more likely than not) will be used to determine if a university policy, standard, or regulation has been violated.
- Victims of alleged sexual harassment, sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, stalking or other policy violations related to Title IX will be provided a copy of the board packet provided to the hearing board before or during the hearing, even in cases where they are not serving as a complainant (in such cases the victim may elect not to receive the materials, but they are entitled to a copy).
- The university is committed to resolving cases involving allegations of sexual harassment, sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, stalking, or other policy violations related to Title IX in a timely manner. Typically, an investigation will be completed within approximately sixty calendar days following the university's receipt of a complaint. Where circumstances prevent resolution in this timeframe, the university will endeavor to minimize delay. Complainants, respondents, and victims will receive periodic status updates related to the timeline for resolution of the case, as well as specific information when there will be a deviation from the typical sixty-day timeline.
- Unless a different timeline is set forth in this section or required by law, stated timelines for a University Disciplinary Committee hearing and notification of a decision will be followed in cases involving allegations of sexual harassment, sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, stalking, or other policy violations related to Title IX.
- In cases involving allegations of sexual harassment, sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, stalking, or other policy violations related to Title IX the victim will receive notification of the outcome as appropriate, regardless of the role played in the student conduct process.
- In cases involving allegations of sexual harassment, sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, stalking, or other policy violations related to Title IX, a victim has the right to submit an appeal following notification of the disposition of a complaint resolved by a University Disciplinary Committee.
- When informing the respondent (and the complainant or victim in cases involving allegations of sexual harassment, sexual assault, dating violence, domestic violence, stalking, or other policy violations related to Title IX) of the decision of the associate vice president of student affairs for community life or designee, the process advisor responsible shall in writing inform the parties of the appeal process.
- Appeals will be decided by the appeal officer in a timely manner. There may be particular circumstances, however, that necessitate additional time for the appeal officer to reach a decision. While an appeal is pending, the appeal officer will update the respondent(s), complainant(s), and/or victim(s) as necessary about the timeline. Complainant(s), respondent(s), and victim(s) will all be notified of the final decision, as appropriate.
- Administrative resolution meetings and University Disciplinary Committee hearings will be conducted by officials who receive annual training on the issues related to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, sexual harassment and stalking on how to conduct an investigation and hearing process that protects the rights and safety of complainant(s), respondent(s) and victim(s) while promoting accountability.
All Greek Community Standards Board
The All Greek Community Standards Board (AGCSB) responds to alleged violations of council and select university policies by fraternities and sororities that are members of the Interfraternity Council (IFC), Multicultural Greek Council (MGC), National Pan-Hellenic Council, Inc. (NPHC), and the Panhellenic Council (PHC). The All Greek Community Standards Board promotes accountability and encourages shared governance of organizations within the Carnegie Mellon community.
Additional Information about the All Greek Community Standards Board can be found here.
Sanctions and Outcomes
The student conduct sanctions defined below comprise a range of official action that may be imposed by the university for violations of community standards. One or more of these actions may be imposed in response to a given situation. This list is not comprehensive, as other sanctions may be utilized as appropriate.
When sanctions are decided as part of the student conduct process, the educational and developmental needs of the involved student will be considered with utmost importance. Educational and developmental sanctions may accompany additional administrative sanctions with the university.
Non-compliance with sanctions may result in further action through the student conduct process.
The determination of sanctions will be guided by the following considerations: the interests of the community, the impact of the violation on the victim(s), documented student conduct history, and any mitigating or aggravating circumstances.
Students with two (2) community standards violations within an academic year may immediately be placed on disciplinary probation. Students involved in three (3) violations within an academic year may be referred to the University Disciplinary Committee.
- Warning: For minor infractions, a student may be issued a written warning. The warning will be noted in the event of any further infractions of community standards and may justify consideration of more severe sanctions.
- Residence Hall Probation: An official notice to a resident student that conduct with regard to residence hall regulations or policies has been unacceptable and that future violation of university regulations may result in more serious student conduct action, including the possible loss of campus residency. Probation lasts for a stated period of time.
- Disciplinary Probation: For a second infraction or for a single offense of a more serious nature, a student may be placed on disciplinary probation for a designated period of time. Probation may entail specific requirements to be met. When a student is on disciplinary probation they are vulnerable to suspension or expulsion in the event of further infractions of community standards.
- Community Service: The university may require uncompensated service (a specified number of hours) to the university or an off-campus, non-profit organization as a sanction. The particular assignment of duties must be pre-approved through the appropriate university adjudicator. Students must provide appropriate documentation verifying their completed community service. Failure to complete the service satisfactorily within the specified period of time may result in further action through the student conduct process.
- Educational/Developmental Assignment: The university may require a student to complete a project, assignment, or activity to promote the student’s education and development. These assignments are at the discretion of the university adjudicator or University Disciplinary Committee. Assignments may include but are not limited to: reflection or research paper, development of a presentation, discussion with an individual, apology letter, reading assignment, etc.
- Behavioral Assessments and Recommendations: The university may require a student to meet with a health care provider and/or a mental health care provider within a specified time frame. If so, the student will be expected to fully participate in any relevant assessment requested by the provider and complete any consequent recommendation(s), such as a treatment plan or a referral to another provider.
- Fines: Any fines imposed are payable to the general funds of the university and may not directly benefit any person or persons bringing charges. Fines not paid within one month my become a charge payable to the university through the student's account and are enforced in the same way all other financial obligations to the university are enforced. In other cases, fines are normally applied to the general programming efforts to improve the educational environment in the residence halls.
- Restitution: In cases where a student is found responsible for damaging or misappropriating property, the student may be responsible for reimbursing the property owner for all or some of the cost.
- Room Reassignment: An action where a student is assigned to either another room in the same house community or a room in another house community. When a student is assigned to another house community, specific restrictions concerning the previous community may be invoked.
- Loss of Residency in University Housing: An action that excludes a student or student group from residence in university housing for a stated period of time. A student who loses residency in university housing shall be considered for future housing accommodations once the period of debarment is concluded and as space permits.
- Disciplinary Suspension: A student may be barred from enrollment for a designated period of time. Students who have been suspended are required to absent themselves from the campus (including university housing and fraternity or sorority houses) within a maximum of two days after the action and to remain off the campus for the duration of the time specified. The policy governing suspensions is available on-line at http://www.cmu.edu/policies/student-and-student-life/suspension-required-withdrawal-policy.html. A student on disciplinary suspension is not eligible for employment by the university during the period of suspension.
- Expulsion: The student is required to sever entirely their connection with the university. Students who have been expelled are required to absent themselves from the campus (including university housing and fraternity or sorority houses) within a maximum of two days after the action and to remain off the campus permanently, unless otherwise specified.
- Withholding A Degree: Because a degree from the university signifies not only successful completion of academic requirements but also compliance with the university's standards and good standing as a member of the university community, the university may withhold a degree entirely as a sanction for a violation of community standards, or may impose further conditions on the certification of a degree, e.g., compliance with other sanctions imposed as a pre-requisite to the certification of the degree.
Student Conduct Records Retention
Records of student conduct proceedings are confidential and are not released without the consent of the current/former student or as otherwise required or authorized by law or court order. With the exceptions as noted below, records of student conduct proceedings are retained for either the period of time required under the federal Clery Act (which in most cases is six to seven years after the date the incident was reported to the university), or three years after final separation of the student from the university, whichever is longer, and then are subsequently destroyed. For purposes of student conduct record checks, information from these records is only provided, with appropriate authorization as necessary, for three years after final separation from the university provided the student has fulfilled all obligations to the university. If a student has not fulfilled all obligations, the file may be maintained indefinitely and reported longer than three years after the student separates from the university. Records of student conduct proceedings resulting in the permanent separation of a student from the university (e.g., expulsion) will be maintained and reported indefinitely. Case-specific questions regarding timeframes for student conduct records retention and reporting can be directed to the Office of Community Standards & Integrity.