SGAP Current Policies and Procedures

SGAP is the accountability process for student groups, which includes all voluntary student organizations, Row Houses, sports teams (both club and varsity), fraternities, and sororities.

• Updated: September 2023

Section I. Introduction

A. Purpose

The Stanford Group Accountability Process (SGAP) is the accountability process for student groups, facilitated by the Office of Community Standards (OCS). SGAP addresses alleged violations of university policies by student groups, which includes all voluntary student organizations, Row Houses, sports teams (both club and varsity), fraternities, and sororities (“Groups”).

B.  Philosophy & Collective Responsibility

The Fundamental Standard has set the standard of conduct for individual students at Stanford since 1896 and embodies the values and definition of good university citizenship. Violations of university policies also constitute violations of the Fundamental Standard. The Fundamental Standard, as well as all university policies, apply to both individuals and Groups. In the spirit of collective responsibility, Groups bear a certain level of responsibility for the individual actions of their group members when this behavior can be attributed to the Group under the university’s policy on Collective Responsibility. The goals of SGAP are to identify problematic conduct and behavioral issues within a Group and to provide educational sanctions or a combination of educational and disciplinary sanctions, depending on the severity of the violations, to help the Group self-correct their behavior. Students are expected to cooperate fully and truthfully from the outset of an SGAP concern. Failure to do so may delay the investigation and/or resolution of a matter.

C. Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction: OCS has jurisdiction to implement and enforce the SGAP. SGAP covers all instances of alleged violations of either the letter or spirit of the Honor Code, Fundamental Standard or applicable policies, laws, directives, or regulations (each a “Violation”) arising from or related to both on- and off-campus Group activities and events. The OCS may, at its sole discretion, decline to exercise jurisdiction over Group behavior that occurs off-campus. In determining whether to exercise off-campus jurisdiction, the OCS will consider factors including, but not limited to, the seriousness of the alleged misconduct; whether an impacted party is a member of the campus community; the ability of the university to gather information, including the statements of witnesses; and whether the off-campus conduct is part of a series of actions that occurred both on and off campus.

D. Individual Students

Alleged violations by individual students are not addressed through the SGAP, but members of a Group may, in certain cases, be referred to the OCS individual student conduct process for Fundamental Standard violations.

E. Support Resources

Please see the SGAP website for information about support and resources that are available to individual students and Groups throughout the process.

Section II. Complaints/Reports of Information

A. Filing a Report

Any member of the campus community or the public may file a report with the OCS alleging Violation(s) by Group(s) (a “Concern”) using the online form. Individuals who are unable to access or use the online form should contact the Office of Community Standards via email or telephone at 650.725.2485. Individuals reporting a Concern should include the name(s) of all known witnesses or others who may have information concerning the allegation of a Violation and all known facts about the incident. There is no time limit by which Concerns must be submitted after an incident occurred. However, the ability of the OCS to fully investigate an incident is likely to be impacted by how much time has elapsed since the date the incident occurred. Concerns that are submitted anonymously will be reviewed; however, anonymity may limit the ability of the OCS to fully investigate an incident.

B. Other Ways to Receive Concerns

The OCS may receive Concerns from several sources and in other ways than the form listed above, including from the Department of Public Safety, university offices/employees, and persons unaffiliated with the university. All Concerns are reviewed before a resolution is determined.

C. Reporting Obligation

All instances of alleged Violations should be reported to the OCS. Student staff must follow all reporting obligations outlined in their staff contract.

Section III. Procedural Overview

A. Determination of the Appropriate Level of Review

1. The OCS receives notice of a Concern.
2. The Associate Dean for the Office of Community Standards or their designee (hereinafter, Associate Dean) will review the nature of the Concern, the Group’s disciplinary history, and whether the Group has a Conduct Status to determine whether the Concern should be handled through a Low-Level, Mid-Level, or High-Level Review. The Associate Dean may refer the Concern to another more appropriate office or process. The Associate Dean may also determine that there is no situation in which the charging standard could be met and may close the matter.
   •  In addition to the factors listed above, this determination will depend on a consideration of the following factors: intent; seriousness of potential or actual personal injury (physical or emotional); seriousness of potential or actual property damage; the number of alleged Violations at issue or potentially at issue in the Concern; seriousness of potential or actual liability created for the university, the Group, and/or individual members of the Group; the impact on the community and/or individual students; the Group’s disciplinary record; whether the Group has a Conduct Status; and whether the Group took immediate steps to mitigate the alleged Violation. The Associate Dean will consider both the degree of severity of the alleged Violation as well as the interrelationship of the above factors.
   • In making this determination, the Associate Dean may also consult withother university staff and may speak with and/or request information from any individual reasonably believed to have relevant information.
3. The OCS will notify the Group as soon thereafter as reasonably feasible as to the nature of the Concern, the decided level of review, and whether a Formal Investigation will be initiated.

B. Formal Investigations

1.  If the Associate Dean determines that a High-Level review is warranted, then the Associate Dean will initiate a Formal Investigation.
2. If a Formal Investigation is deemed necessary, the Associate Dean will assign an investigator(s) and notify the Group Representative(s) of the name(s) of the investigator(s) who will be conducting the Formal Investigation.
3. The investigator(s) may conduct interviews with and/or request responses to written questions regarding the issues and allegations raised in the Concern from any individual reasonably believed to have relevant information.
4. The investigator(s) submit a report to the Associate Dean (the “Investigation Report”) explaining their decision as to whether the charging standard has been met and the evidentiary basis for this decision. The investigator(s) should make every effort to submit the Investigation Report to the Associate Dean within 60 business days of a Formal Investigation being initiated. Failure to do so may be considered a mitigating factor.
5. The Associate Dean should review the Investigative Report within 10 business days and communicate to the Group Representative(s) whether the charging standard is met. If, based on the Investigation Report, the Associate Dean determines that the charging standard is met, the Associate Dean will also determine whether the matter should continue to be handled through a High-Level Review or whether it should be moved to a Low-Level or Mid-Level Review. If the charging standard is not met, the case will be closed.
6. If a matter proceeds without a Formal Investigation and further information is learned at a later time that would indicate a High-Level Review may be appropriate, then the Associate Dean may initiate a Formal Investigation at that time.
7. Failure to cooperate fully and truthfully from the outset of an SGAP concern may delay the investigation and/or resolution of a matter.

C. Charging Standard & Burden of Proof

1. The charging standard is whether a fair-minded panelist could determine it is more likely than not that a Violation occurred.
2. The burden of proof is more likely than not.

D. Low-Level Review

1. Matters may be referred directly to a Low-Level Review, or matters may be referred to a Low-Level Review after a Formal Investigation has been conducted and the Associate Dean determines that a High-Level Review is not merited.
2. If the Associate Dean determines that a Concern should be handled through a Low- Level Review, the OCS notifies the Group Representatives of the level of review, the nature of the Concern (or, if after a Formal Investigation, the nature of the Violation(s) and that the charging standard has been met) and which of the following Low-Level Resolutions will be used to resolve the Concern:
   •  Formal Warning: Group Representative(s) will receive an official written Formal Warning that notifies them of the Concern, specifies the alleged Violations(s), and provides that, if repeated, such Violations(s) may be subject to more serious disciplinary action (See Section IV(A)(1) for further information on Formal Warnings).
   • Corrective Action Plan: Group Representative(s) are required to create a Corrective Action Plan (“CAP”) in which they summarize what happened, identify what led to the alleged Violation(s), and create a plan to remedy harms caused and prevent future Violations. Group Representative(s) must meet with their University Advisor to review their completed CAP within two weeks of receiving notice from the OCS (See Section IV(A)(2) for further information on Corrective Action Plans).
   • The Group may decide to accept responsibility for the Violations or to dispute the allegations. If the Group disputes the allegations, they may request that the matter receive a Mid-Level Review.
3. Formal Warnings and Corrective Action Plans may also include Conditions. (See Section V for further information on Sanctions).
4. Matters resolved through a Low-Level Review may not be appealed.

E. Mid-Level Review

1. Matters may be referred directly to a Mid-Level Review, or matters may be referred to a Mid-Level Review after a Group disputes a Concern originally designated for Low-Level Review or after a Formal Investigation has been conducted and the Associate Dean determines that a High-Level Review is not merited.
2. If the Associate Dean refers the matter directly to a Mid-Level Review, then the OCS notifies the Group Representatives of the level of review, the nature of the Concern, and the name of the OCS staff member who will be managing the case. This section also governs when a Group disputes a Concern originally designated for Low-Level Review and the matter is then referred to a Mid-Level Review.
   1. Group Representative(s) meet with the OCS staff member to discuss the Concern and offer their perspective.
   2. The OCS staff member may also meet with other members of the Group or any other individual reasonably believed to have relevant information.
   3. After meeting with the Group Representatives, the OCS staff member may recommend to the Associate Dean that the matter be moved to a different level of review and/or receive a Formal Investigation.
3.  If the Associate Dean determines that a Concern should be handled through a Low- Level Review, the OCS notifies the Group Representatives of the level of review, the nature of the Concern (or, if after a Formal Investigation, the nature of the Violation(s) and that the charging standard has been met) and which of the following Low-Level Resolutions will be used to resolve the Concern:
   • Formal Warning: Group Representative(s) will receive an official written Formal Warning that notifies them of the Concern, specifies the alleged Violations(s), and provides that, if repeated, such Violations(s) may be subject to more serious disciplinary action (See Section IV(A)(1) for further information on Formal Warnings).
   •  Corrective Action Plan: Group Representative(s) are required to create a Corrective Action Plan (“CAP”) in which they summarize what happened, identify what led to the alleged Violation(s), and create a plan to remedy harms caused and prevent future Violations. Group Representative(s) must meet with their University Advisor to review their completed CAP within two weeks of receiving notice from the OCS (See Section IV(A)(2) for further information on Corrective Action Plans).
   • The Group may decide to accept responsibility for the Violations or to dispute the allegations. If the Group disputes the allegations, they may request that the matter receive a Mid-Level Review.
4. Formal Warnings and Corrective Action Plans may also include Conditions. (See Section V for further information on Sanctions).
5. Matters resolved through a Low-Level Review may not be appealed.

F. Mid-Level Review

1. Matters may be referred directly to a Mid-Level Review, or matters may be referred to a Mid-Level Review after a Group disputes a Concern originally designated for Low-Level Review or after a Formal Investigation has been conducted and the Associate Dean determines that a High-Level Review is not merited.
2. If the Associate Dean refers the matter directly to a Mid-Level Review, then the OCS notifies the Group Representatives of the level of review, the nature of the Concern, and the name of the OCS staff member who will be managing the case. This section also governs when a Group disputes a Concern originally designated for Low-Level Review and the matter is then referred to a Mid-Level Review.
   • Group Representative(s) meet with the OCS staff member to discuss the Concern and offer their perspective.
   • The OCS staff member may also meet with other members of the Group or any other individual reasonably believed to have relevant information.
   • After meeting with the Group Representatives, the OCS staff member may recommend to the Associate Dean that the matter be moved to a different level of review and/or receive a Formal Investigation.
   • If the OCS staff member determines that the charging standard is met, then the OCS notifies the Group Representative(s) of the charge(s) and provides information about how to review the evidence upon which the charges are based (the “Administrative Record”). Any relevant evidence gathered becomes a part of the Administrative Record.
   • After a charge, Group Representative(s) have the right to inspect and review all documents in the Administrative Record. Note: documents will be redacted as necessary to comply with state and federal laws and regulations and university policies.
3.  If after a Formal Investigation, the charging standard is met and the Associate Dean determines that the matter would be more appropriately handled through a Mid-Level Review, then the OCS notifies the Group Representative(s) in writing of the charges, the name of the OCS staff member who will be managing the case, and information about how to review the Administrative Record.
   1. Group Representative(s) have the right to inspect and review all documents in the Administrative Record (including the Investigation Report). Note: documents will be redacted as necessary to comply with state and federal laws and regulations and university policies.
   2. Group Representative(s) meet with the OCS staff member to discuss the charge(s) and offer their perspective. Any relevant evidence provided by the Group will be added to the Administrative Record.
4. The OCS staff member will then decide on one of the following Mid-Level Resolutions to resolve the Concern, depending on the facts and circumstances of the matter, including but not limited to the seriousness of charges, the Group’s disciplinary history, whether the Group has a Conduct Status, the Group’s cooperation throughout the process, and whether or not the Group accepts responsibility:
   • Restorative Action: For Groups that accept responsibility for the Violation(s), OCS may offer the opportunity to participate in a Restorative Action. Group Representative(s) meet with harmed/impacted parties and facilitator(s) to explore ways that the harm can be redressed and to create an agreement which describes Sanctions to redress these harms. (See Section IV(B)(1) for further information on Restorative Action).
     •  If Group Representative(s) and harmed parties cannot reach an agreement, then the matter is forwarded to a different Mid-Level Resolution.
   • Resolution Through Agreement (Mid-Level): If the Group accepts responsibility for the Violation(s), they may request that the Concern be resolved by a Resolution Through Agreement (“RTA”). (See Section IV(B)(2) for further information on Resolutions Through Agreement). If Group Representative(s) do not agree to the proposed terms of the RTA, then the matter is forwarded to a Mid-Level Hearing.
   •  Mid-Level Hearing: If the Group does not accept responsibility for the Violation(s), does not agree to the proposed terms of an RTA, or the OCS determines that an RTA or Restorative Action is not appropriate, then the matter will be referred to a Mid-Level Hearing before a three-person Panel consisting of two staff/faculty panelists and one student panelist. (See Section IV(B)(3) for further information on Mid-Level Hearings).

G. High-Level Review

1. All High-Level Reviews will include a Formal Investigation. If, after a Formal Investigation, the charging standard is met and the Associate Dean determines that the matter should continue to be handled through a High-Level Review, the OCS notifiesthe Group Representative(s) in writing of the charges, the OCS staff member who will be managing the case, and provides information about how to review the Administrative Record.
2. Group Representative(s) have the right to inspect and review all documents in the Administrative Record (including the Investigation Report). 
   • Note: documents will be redacted as necessary to comply with state and federal laws and regulations and university policies.
3. Group Representative(s) meet with the OCS staff member to discuss the charge(s) and offer their perspective. Any relevant evidence provided by the Group will be added to the Administrative Record.
4. The OCS staff member will then decide on one of the following High-Level Resolutions to resolve the Concern, depending on the facts and circumstances of the matter, including but not limited to the seriousness of charges, the Group’s disciplinary history, whether the Group has a Conduct Status, the Group’s cooperation throughout the process, and whether or not the Group accepts responsibility:
   • Resolution Through Agreement (High Level): If the Group accepts responsibility for the Violation(s) they may request that the Concern be resolved by a Resolution Through Agreement (RTA). (See Section IV(C)(1) for further information on Resolutions Through Agreement). If Group Representative(s) do not agree to the proposed terms of the RTA, then the matter is forwarded to a High-Level Hearing.
   •  High-Level Hearing: If the Group does not accept responsibility for the Violation(s), does not agree to the proposed terms of an RTA, or the OCS determines that an RTA is not appropriate, then the matter will be referred to a High-Level Hearing before a three-person Panel consisting of two staff/faculty panelists and one student panelist. If the Panel finds the Group responsible for a Violation(s), the Panel will provide its responsibility determination and recommend appropriate Sanctions to the Senior Associate Vice Provost and Dean of Students or their designee (hereinafter, Dean of Students), who may accept, reject, and/or modify the recommendations in whole or in part. (See Section IV(C)(2) for further information on High-Level Hearings). The Dean of Students will communicate the final outcome to the Group Representative(s) within 30 business days.

H. Appeals & Conclusion of Matter

1. Groups found responsible for a Violation(s) through a Hearing have the right to appeal. (See Section VII).
2. The case closes officially when the Group has completely satisfied the Sanctions imposed and either the Group or the Group’s University Advisor (depending on the level of review and the chosen Resolution) has submitted documentation to this effect to the Associate Dean.

Section IV. Resolutions

A.        Low-Level Reviews

1. Formal Warning
   •  Group Representative(s) will receive an official written Formal Warning that notifies them of the Concern, specifies the alleged Violations(s), and provides that, if repeated, such Violations(s) may be subject to more serious disciplinary action.
   • Group Representative(s) must notify the entire membership of the Formal Warning within 3 days of accepting responsibility for the alleged violations. This notification must 1) attach the Formal Warning, and 2) describe what, if anything, the Group is doing in response, including any Conditions (See Section V for further information about Conditions). The OCS and the Group’s University Advisor must be copied on this email and may follow-up with additional information to the Group if necessary.
2. Corrective Action Plan (CAP)
   • Group Representative(s) are required to create a CAP in which they summarize what happened, identify what led to the alleged policy Violation(s), and create a plan to remedy harms caused and prevent future Violations. If there were damages, the plan must include restitution as a Condition (See Section V for more information about Conditions).
   • Within two weeks of accepting responsibility for the alleged violations, the Group Representative(s) must meet with their University Advisor to review and discuss their CAP. The CAP must also include a clear schedule for completion.
   • Group Representative(s) must send their completed CAP to their University Advisor at least 1 day prior to their scheduled meeting.
   •  During the meeting, the University Advisor may require the Group to modify their CAP before approving it.
   • Group Representative(s) must send a copy of their approved CAP to the Associate Dean within 1 day of their University Advisor approving it.
   • Group Representative(s) must notify the entire membership of the Violation and share the CAP within 3 days of their CAP being approved. This notification must 1) attach the CAP, and 2) describe what the Group is doing in response, including any Conditions (See Section V for more information about Conditions). The OCS and the Group’s University advisor must be copied on this email and may follow-up with additional information to the Group if necessary.
     • If the Group does not meet with their University Advisor and get their CAP approved within two weeks of receiving notice of the Concern from the OCS, or if they do not complete any part of the CAP within the agreed upon schedule, the Group may not host events or reserve space on campus until the CAP is approved or the entire CAP is complete. If necessary, the Group may seek from their University Advisor exceptions to this restriction to hold meetings for specific business purposes.
   • The Group is responsible for notifying their University Advisor once items in their CAP are complete.
   • The University Advisor will notify the OCS when all Conditions are complete or if there are past due items.
3.  Formal Warnings and Corrective Action Plans may also include Conditions. (See Section V for further information about Conditions).
4. Violations that result in a Low-Level Review are considered part of a Group’s disciplinary history until the end of the academic year during which they occurred.

B. Mid-Level Review

1. Restorative Action
   • For Groups that accept responsibility for the Violation(s), OCS may offer the opportunity to participate in a Restorative Action. A Restorative Action brings together Groups with harmed/impacted party(ies) and facilitator(s) to explore ways that the harm can be redressed and to create an agreement which describes Sanctions to redress these harms (See Section V for further information about Sanctions).
   • This process is voluntary. If the harmed party(ies) and/or the Group decides not to participate, or if these parties cannot reach an agreement, then the OCS will decide upon a different Mid-Level Resolution.
   • If the OCS, the harmed party(ies) and the Group reach an agreement, it is considered binding and the Group will be expected to fulfill the terms of the agreement.
   • By agreeing to the terms of the agreement, the Group waives its right to appeal.
   • If the agreement is not upheld, the Group may face Conduct Status and/or additional Conditions as determined by the OCS.
   • When an agreement is reached, Group Representative(s) must notify the entire membership of the Violation(s) and share the agreement within 3 days. This notification must 1) attach the agreement, and 2) describe what the Group is doing in response, including any Sanctions. The OCS and the Group’s University Advisor must be copied on this email and may follow-up with additional information to the Group if necessary.
   • The Group is responsible for notifying the OCS once the terms of the agreement are fulfilled.
   •  The OCS will notify the Group’s University advisor when the terms are fulfilled or if there are past due items.
2. Resolution Through Agreement (Mid-Level)
   •  If the Group accepts responsibility for the Violation(s), they may request that the Concern be resolved by an RTA.
   • The OCS staff member will create an RTA which outlines Sanctions designed to 1) remedy any harm caused and 2) prevent future Violations. The RTA will also include a clear schedule for completion (See Section V for further information about Sanctions).
   • If Group Representative(s) do not agree to the Sanctions in an RTA, then the matter is forwarded to a Mid-Level Hearing.
   • By agreeing to the terms of the RTA, the Group waives its right to appeal.
   • The OCS will send a copy of the RTA to the Group’s Advisor.
   • Group Representative(s) must notify the entire membership of the Concern and share the RTA within 3 days of their RTA being approved. This notification must 1) attach the RTA, and 2) describe what the Group is doing in response, including any Sanctions. The OCS and the Group’s University Advisor must be copied on this email and may follow-up with additional information to the Group if necessary.
   • If the Group does not complete any part of the RTA within the agreed upon schedule, they may not host events or reserve space on campus until the entire plan is complete.
   • The Group is responsible for notifying the OCS once items on their RTA are complete.
   • The OCS will notify the Group’s University advisor when all Sanctions are complete or if there are past due items.
3. Mid-Level Hearings
   • Mid-Level Hearings are conducted before a three-person Panel composed of two staff/faculty panelists and one student panelist
   • The OCS will notify Group Representative(s) of the date for the Mid-Level Hearing. Group Representative(s) will be given 10 days to submit a written response to the Investigation Report (if a Formal Investigation was initiated) and/or any other information included in the Administrative Record not to exceed 25, single-sided pages in length (the “Response”). The Response, if any, should be sent to the OCS and will be added to the Administrative Record.
     • If a Group does not accept responsibility for the Violation(s) and believes that a particular witness’s credibility is central to their defense against one or more elements of a Violation(s), they may submit a request to the Associate Dean for the disclosure of that witness’s identity. The Associate Dean will determine whether that witness’s credibility is central to the Group’s defense against one or more elements of a Violation(s) by considering: (a) Whether there are other witnesses whosetestimony regarding that element was substantially similar, (b) Whether there is corroborating evidence that would support a finding of that element. If the Associate Dean determines that the witness’s credibility is central to the Group’s defense against one or more elements of a Violation(s), then the Group Representatives may learn the identity of that specific witness.
   • The names of witnesses provided to the Group Representatives are strictly confidential, and the two Group Representatives may be investigated and held jointly responsible in the OCS process for any leak of the witness’s names.
   • Group Representative(s) will then meet with the Panel. During this meeting, the Panel will hear from Group Representative(s) and also consider the information in the Administrative Record. Other than the verbal presentation by the Group Representatives and their answers to any questions by the Panel, all evidence presented to the Panel will be documentary, other than as noted below in subsection (e)
   • The Panel may ask the OCS to make any witness available at the hearing. The Panel shall meet with the witness separately from the Group Representative(s) in person or by other means (such as means provided by technology like videoconferencing). The Group Representative(s) may listen to the witness testimony through audio conference and may submit written questions to that witness, to be asked by the Panel. This practice is to cover relevant subject matter areas that have not already been covered and that are likely to elicit information necessary to make findings of fact. The Panel has ultimate authority as to what questions to ask.
   •  The Panel will determine by majority vote whether it is more likely than not that the Group committed a Violation(s).
   •  If the Panel finds the Group responsible for a Violation(s), the Panel will determine the appropriate Sanction(s). (See Section V for further information about Sanctions). The Panel will provide its responsibility and Sanctions determination, including a brief rationale, to the OCS, which will be transmitted in an Outcome Letter to the Group Representative(s).
   •  If found responsible, Group Representative(s) must notify the entire membership of the Violation(s) and resolution within 3 days of receiving their outcome. This notification must 1) attach the Outcome Letter, and 2) describe what the group is doing in response, including any Sanctions. The OCS and the Group’s University advisor must be copied on this email and may follow-up with additional information to the Group if necessary.
   • If the Group does not complete a Sanction on time, they may not host events or reserve space on campus until all of their Sanctions are complete.
   • The Group is responsible for notifying the OCS once all of their Sanctions are complete.
   • The OCS will notify the Group’s University Advisor when all Sanctions are complete or if there are past due items.
   • The Group may appeal to the Dean of Students within 7 days of receipt of the Outcome Letter (See Section VII for further information about appeals).
   • A Violation(s) resolved through a Mid-Level Review is considered part of a Group’s disciplinary history for three years.

C. High-Level Review

1. Resolution Through Agreement
   • RTAs for High-Level Reviews operate the same as for Mid-Level Reviews, described above in Section IV(B)(2).
   • If Group Representative(s) do not agree to the Sanctions in an RTA, then the matter is forwarded to a High-Level Hearing.
2. High-Level Hearings
   • Other than as noted below, High-Level Hearings operate the same as Mid-Level Hearings, described above in Section IV (B)(3a-f).
   •  If the Panel finds the Group responsible for a Violation(s), the Panel will provide its responsibility determination and recommend appropriate Sanctions to the Dean of Students (See Section V for further information about Sanctions).
   • The Dean of Students may accept, reject, and/or modify the recommendations in whole or in part. Recommendations to the Dean of Students are advisory innature, not prescriptive.
   •  The Dean of Students will notify the Group and their University Advisor in writing of their decision in an Outcome Letter as soon thereafter as is reasonably feasible. When the Sanction includes Removal of University Recognition, if the group is associated with a national organization, the national organization will also receive a copy of the Outcome Letter.
   • If found responsible, Group Representative(s) must notify the entire membership of the Violation(s) and resolution within 3 days of receiving their Outcome Letter. This notification must 1) provide the Outcome Letter, and 2) describe what the group is doing in response, including any Sanctions. The OCS and the Group’s University Advisor must be copied on this email and may follow-up with additional information to the Group if necessary.
   • If the Group does not complete a Sanction on time, they may not host events or reserve space on campus until all of their Sanctions are complete.
   • The Group is responsible for notifying the OCS once their Sanctions are complete.
   • The OCS will notify the Group’s University Advisor when all Sanctions are complete or if there are past due items.
   • The Group may appeal to the Vice Provost for Student Affairs or designee (hereinafter, Vice Provost) within 7 days of receipt of the Outcome Letter (See Section VII for further information about appeals).
3. A Violation(s) resolved through a High-Level Review is considered part of a Group’s disciplinary history for three years.

Section V. Sanctions

When determining appropriate Sanctions, the nature of the incident and its context, including any mitigating or aggravating factors as described in subsection D below, the Group’s disciplinary history, and whether Group has a Conduct Status will be considered.

A. Conduct Status

1. A Violation(s) may result in the following Conduct Statuses. A Violation(s) of any Conduct Status will warrant a review by the Associate Dean and may result in more serious disciplinary action.
   1. Probation: Probation is a designated period of time during which the Group is given the opportunity to demonstrate the ability to abide by university policy. If the Group is found responsible for any additional Violation(s) during the period of Probation, the Group may be subject to more severe disciplinary action for the additional Violation(s).
   2. Probation with Restrictions: Probation with restrictions is a designated period of time during which a Group is limited in, or prohibited from, certain privileges including but not limited to hosting parties, events, and/or activities; selecting staff for housed groups; or the ability to choose pre-assignment for housed groups. If the Group is found responsible for any additional Violation(s) during the period of Probation with Restrictions, the Group may be subject to more severe disciplinary action for the additional Violation(s).
   3. Removal of University Recognition: The Group loses all university privileges normally accorded to Groups, including but not limited to loss of housing, loss of authority to designate the theme of the student residence, and/or university-allocated space for either a set or indefinite period of time.

B. Conditions

1. In addition to imposing a Conduct Status, Groups may also receive Conditions designed to ensure responsible behavior and the well-being of the university community, help the Group learn from the experience, and ameliorate the effects of the conduct on the impacted parties.
2. Examples of Conditions include but are not limited to restitution, community service, restorative circles, attending or presenting educational programs, or referrals to other offices/resources on campus. When there are damages and/or theft, restitution will be included.

C. Conduct Status Guidelines

D. Aggravating & Mitigating Factors

1.  Aggravating Factors - Examples of aggravating factors include, but are not limited to:
   • The Violation was premeditated.
   • The behavior occurred on multiple occasions or was part of a pattern of similar conduct.
   • There was an active attempt to conceal or hide the Violation(s).
   •  There was physical, emotional or financial damage done to the university community or to another student.
   • The Group failed to seek help for someone who needed medical assistance.
   • The Group has a history of Violations, including Violations of different university policies.
   • Members of the Group were deceitful and/or uncooperative during an investigation.
   • Members of the Group threatened the impacted party, witnesses or others involved in the SGAP, or contacted potential panelists.
2. Mitigating Factors - Examples of mitigating factors include, but are not limited to:
   • The Group acted as Good Samaritans, as described in the Student Alcohol and Other Drugs Policy, and sought medical assistance for someone who needed it. In accordance with the Good Samaritans provisions of the Student Alcohol and Other Drugs Policy, a student Group seeking medical treatment for someone for the effects of drug or alcohol use will not be subject to disciplinary action with respect to the use of drugs or alcohol in violation of that policy. When a student Group is subject to disciplinary action for other violations, a student Group having acted as Good Samaritans may be considered a mitigating factor. No such mitigation will be available in cases involving Sexual Violence.
   • There is a lack of intent to deceive and/or harm.
   • The Group has demonstrated sincere remorse for the Violation.
   • The Group has clearly accepted responsibility for the Violation.
   • The Group took immediate steps to remedy and/or address relevant underlying issues that may have contributed to the Violation.
   • The Group cooperated fully and respectfully in the SGAP.
3.  In order to be considered an aggravating or mitigating factor, the factor must be proven to be more likely true than not.

Section VI. Interim Actions

1.  During the pendency of a Concern, the Dean of Students or the Associate Dean may impose an immediate interim Probation with Restrictions if the allegations in the complaint and other information available to the OCS reasonably imply there was or continues to be a serious risk of harm to the university community as a whole or to individuals within it.
2. Examples of circumstances warranting an Interim Action include but are not limited to: situations where medical care to one or more individuals was necessary due to alcohol or other substance use at the Group’s event and the group is not subject to the Good Samaritans provisions of the Student Alcohol and Other Drugs Policy, where there was an alleged sexual assault, where the Group violated university alcohol and/or party planning guidelines resulting in the serving of minors, or where there was alleged hazing activity.
3. Group Representatives may meet with the Dean of Students or the Associate Dean after an Interim Action has been imposed, who may modify the Interim Action.

Section VII. Appeals

 A. Submission & Deadlines

1.  Within seven days of receipt of the Outcome Letter after a Mid-Level or High-Level Hearing, the Group may appeal in writing setting out the reason(s) for the appeal (See Below).
2.  Appeals should be submitted to community-standards@stanford.edu and will be transmitted to the appropriate university staff member hearing the appeal as described below (the “Appeal Officer”).
3. The Appeal Officer may request a written response to the appeal from the OCS and/or the OCS may choose to provide a written response to the appeal.
4. Appeals resulting from a Mid-Level Hearing will be heard by the Dean of Students.
5. Appeals resulting from a High-Level Hearing will be heard by the Vice Provost.
6. Sanctions resulting from Low-Level Reviews, Restorative Action, and Resolution Through Agreement cannot be appealed.

B. Appeal Requirements

1. Appeals will be considered only when: (1) there is relevant new evidence that was not reasonably available to be presented to the original proceeding that, in the judgment of the Appeal Officer, would have changed the outcome; or (2) demonstration of a significant procedural error that, in the judgment of the Appeal Officer, would have changed the outcome; or (3) demonstration of bias on the part of any of the original panelists that, in the judgment of the Appeal Officer, would have changed the outcome.
2. Any basis for appeal that could have been raised by the Group at the Hearing may not be raised for the first time by the Group in their appeal.
3. The Appeal Officer has the following options:
   • To deny the appeal.
   • To return the case to the original Panel.
   • To convene a new Panel to rehear the case.
   • To reduce the sanctions.
   •  To dismiss the original charges.
4. Appeals may not exceed 25 single-sided pages in total length, including any attachments or exhibits. The Group may in their appeal refer to materials in the Administrative Record, and such materials will not count towards the 25-page limit.

C. Communications

1. The Appeal Officer will notify the Group and their University Advisor in writing of their decision. If a group is not recognized at the time of the decision (as a result of Removal of University Recognition or otherwise) then the OCS may report SGAP resolutions, including the decision of any Appeal Officer, to the relevant National Organization(s).

Section VIII. Responsibilities of Specific Parties

 A. Group Representatives

1.  Two group members will serve as Group Representatives throughout the SGAP.
   • For student organizations, the President and one additional officer shall serve as the Group Representatives.
   • For sports teams, the team captain(s) will serve as the Group Representatives. If there are more than two team captains, then they will choose two members amongst themselves to serve.
   • For Row Houses, student staff members will serve as the Group Representatives. If there are more than two student staff members, then they will choose two members amongst themselves to serve.
2. Group Representatives may submit a written request to the OCS asking for permission for other currently enrolled student members or other support persons to attend SGAP meetings or hearings. Support persons who are not currently enrolled student members of the Group must limit their participation to private advice to the Group Representative(s) they accompany and are not allowed to speak for the Group during meetings or hearings. OCS has ultimate authority as to whether support persons are permitted to attend SGAP meetings or hearings. All work submitted during the SGAP process mustbe authored by the Group members themselves and not their support person(s).
3. The specific responsibilities of the Group Representatives are:
   • Receive official communications and documents from the OCS.
   •  Participate fully and truthfully throughout the process.
   • To the fullest extent possible, ensure that members of the Group participate fully and truthfully.
   • Review and become familiar with the SGAP procedures.
   • Review the Administrative Record.
   • Provide any documentation on behalf of the Group.
   • Notify Group membership of SGAP outcomes.
   • Oversee the completion of any Conditions and submit documentation of completion to the OCS and/or their University Advisor.
   • Abide by any Conduct Status and take an active role in ensuring Group Membership abides by any Conduct Status, including by ensuring that new leadership is adequately informed if a Conduct Status lasts through a leadership transition.
   • Protect the confidential nature of the materials and testimony. All information in the Administrative Record as well as written and spoken information submitted during a Hearing are considered confidential. Failure to keep such information confidential may result in individual action through the OCS process.

B. Group Membership

1.  The specific responsibilities of Group Members are:
   • Participate fully and truthfully throughout the process.
   • Abide by any Conduct Status and participate in Conditions.

C. The Group’s University Advisor

1. The specific responsibilities of Group’s University Advisor are:
   • Meet with Groups to review their Corrective Action Plans.
   • Oversee completion of Group’s Corrective Action Plans and communicate with the OCS once it is complete or if anything is past due.
   • Be available to Group Representative(s) throughout the SGAP.
2. For student organizations, their University Advisor shall be their Office of Student Engagement advisor. For fraternities and sororities, their University Advisor shall be their Fraternity & Sorority Life Advisor. For sports teams, their University Advisor shall be a staff member designated by OCS from the Department of Athletics, Physical Education and Recreation or Stanford Recreation and Wellness. For Row Houses, their University Advisor shall be the Neighborhood Director from their designated neighborhood.

D. Witnesses

1. Anyone reasonably believed to have relevant knowledge or information is required to participate fully and truthfully when requested.
2. Witness statements and any evidence shared by a witness will become part ofthe Administrative Record.
3. All information in the Administrative Record shall be redacted to remove Witnesses’ personally identifying information, other than as noted above in Section IV(B)(3).

E. Panelists

1. The SGAP Panelist pool consists of students, faculty, and staff. Panelists shall be selected from those available for the date and time of the scheduled hearing.
2. Panelists cannot sit on any panel where there is an actual or reasonably perceived conflict of interest or bias. The OCS has the authority to remove any member with an actual or reasonably perceived conflict of interest or bias.
3. The OCS shall provide the Group with the names of the Panel members and inquire whether the Group has a conflict of interest with or concern about bias as to any Panel member. If a conflict of interest or concern about bias is alleged by the Group, then the OCS shall determine whether the allegation is reasonably based.
4. Once a Panelist is notified about being selected to serve on a Panel, they understandthat they cannot discuss the case with anyone other than OCS staff members, including any member or prospective member of the Group.
5. The specific responsibilities of Panelists are:
   • Prepare in advance for Hearings, including reviewing the Administrative Record.
   • Select a Panel Chair for Hearings, which should presumptively be the student Panelist. If the student Panelist declines to serve as Panel Chair, then a Chair should be chosen from among the other two Panelists.
   • Determine whether it is more likely than not that a Violation occurred and, if yes, determine appropriate Sanctions (Mid-Level) or recommend appropriate Sanctions to the Dean of Students (High-Level) (See Section V for further information about Sanctions).
   • Where necessary, determine whether a witness’s credibility is central to establishing one or more elements of a Violation, and, if so, determine what questions to ask that witness.
   • Protect the confidential nature of the materials and testimony. Both written and spoken information submitted during a Hearing are considered confidential.

Section IX. Referral to Policy on Fraternal Organizations Housed on Campus

1. The Policy on Fraternal Organizations Housed on Campus (“Housing Review Process”) provides for a review of fraternity and sorority housing eligibility when a Group is found responsible for “one major” or “three minor violations” of university policy within an academic year.
2. The Dean of Students will make the determination as to whether the conduct meets the criteria for referral to the Housing Review Process after sanctions have been determined in the Group’s most recent SGAP process that triggers the referral. The Group may appeal as described in Section VII above but may not appeal the referral to the Housing Review Process.
3. The Housing Review Process will begin as soon as practicable after the appeal has been decided or the time to appeal has expired.
4. Matters resolved through a Low-Level Review are educational and will not count towards the “three minor violations” in any subsequent process under the Housing Review Process, nor could they constitute “one major violation” under that process. Such matters, however, could be considered as part of the Group’s disciplinary history during the Housing Review Process.
5. Matters resolved through a Mid-Level Review may count towards the “three minor violations” in any subsequent Housing Review Process but would not constitute “one major violation” under that process.
6. Matters resolved through a High-Level Review may count towards the “three minor violations” in any subsequent process under the Housing Review Process, and could constitute “one major violation” under that process, as determined by the Dean of Students.

Section X. Deadlines & Requests for Extension of Time

1. All referrals to days within this policy refer to business days. When the date that an action is to be completed under this policy falls on a weekend or university holiday, the action should be considered due on the following business day.
2. Requests for extension on time for Corrective Action Plans should be submitted to the Group’s University Advisor by email.
3. All other requests for extension of time should be submitted to the OCS by email and will be considered by the Associate Dean.
4. Reasonable first requests for extension of time should be granted unless they would result in hardship as determined by the Associate Dean or Appeal Officer. Any second requests for extension should include compelling reasons for why the deadline(s) cannot be met.

Section XI. Support & Resources

Please see the SGAP website for information about support and resources that are available to individual students and Groups throughout the process.