University official authorized to resolve allegations or impose outcomes 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.
The person(s) or group bringing allegations forward in the community standards process. In cases where there is no individual 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.
In cases where there is a community member bringing forward an allegation, a university official may serve as co-complainant where the Resolution Review Board 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.
The Student Affairs staff member who facilitates a University Disciplinary Committee hearing. Moderators are appointed and trained by the Office of Community Standards & Integrity. The hearing runs at their discretion according to process guidelines.
As a member of the team the Office of Community Standards & Integrity, the Process Advisor is responsible for the logistics of convening a University Disciplinary Committee. The Process Advisor schedules the hearing, assembles the hearing board, informs the complainant(s) and respondent(s) of the procedures for the hearing, and manages other administrative tasks.
Typically, the result of a complaint being adjudicated through the community standards process which may entail administrative resolution or the University Disciplinary Committee. However, a complaint may be resolved informally outside of the community standards process at the discretion of the dean of students or designee and the individuals involved in the matter.
Resolution Review Board
The team of designated and trained staff that reviews and approves initial allegations and determines appropriate venues for resolution through the community standards process. The Resolution Review Board also reviews and approves proposed outcomes stemming from Administrative Resolution Meetings.
The person(s), group, or student organization alleged to have violated community standards.
Any person registered for, enrolled in, or auditing any course(s) at Carnegie Mellon University at the time of the alleged violation. For community standards purposes, an individual is also considered to be a student if they have accepted their offer of admission and are not yet enrolled. Examples include, but are not limited to, students who are enrolled but not taking classes due to an academic break, medical leave, suspension, or other personal leave; students who were enrolled at the time of the incident; persons who demonstrate an intent to enroll by registering for courses; and students participating in study abroad programs.
A person of the student's choosing who accompanies the student to any meeting related to the community standards process, including a University Disciplinary Committee hearing. The role of the support person is limited to supporting the student in meetings or a hearing. Support persons may not actively participate in meetings, the hearing process or communicate on the student's behalf.