School Board Special Work Session
Beaverton School District 48 
Administration Center
October 22, 2018
5:30 p.m.

Board Members Present:

Becky Tymchuk, Chair
Eric Simpson, Vice Chair
LeeAnn LarsenDonna Tyner 
Susan Greenberg 
Anne Bryan
Tom Colett

Visitors: 10 

Media: 0

WELCOME– Becky Tymchuk

School Board Chair Becky Tymchuk called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.  She introduced Megan Farrell, a consultant hired by the School Board, to assist with a Title IX/Sexual Misconduct compliance review of procedures and process, including recommendations and/or revisions to ensure compliance with laws and practices that enhance compliance.

Review of Sexual Harassment Complaint Reporting and Response Processes – Megan Farrell

The scope of the review was to review policies, procedures, and practices of BSD related to sexual misconduct, to include sex/gender discrimination and harassment, prohibited under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972.

Aside from School Board policies, other district documents were reviewed: Code of Professional Conduct and Annual Notices for Education Practitioners, Parent/Family Handbook, BSD School Board Handbook, Student Staff Boundaries from Salem/Keizer Public Schools, file for recent investigation at Westview High School and Title IX Athletics Self-Evaluation Status Report.  Sue Robertson from HR provided forms and templates developed to assist in Title IX investigations.  Leslie Rodgers from T&L provided SIRC forms and training and student safety data from 2016 – 2017.

Interviews of school and district office administrators and the Board of Directors were conducted in face-to-face meetings, telephone interviews, and follow-up conversations. 

There was a knowledge of Title IX-Sexual Misconduct but there was some confusion beyond the scope of enforcement of equity in sports only. 

Ms. Farrell outline the OCR guidance and how it has evolved over the years.

2001 OCR Guidance

• Designation of a Title IX Coordinator.
• Adopt a grievance procedure that provides for prompt and equitable resolution of complaints, ending harassment and preventing recurrences and remedying the effects of harassment.
• Provide periodic training programs for staff on sexual harassment.
• Provide support services for complainants.

2015 OCR Guidance

• Title IX Coordinator Role.
• Provide a notice of Nondiscrimination guidelines.

2017 OCR Guidance

1. The process must be equitable for complainant and respondent.  The process set forth in Beaverton’s policies address only complainant’s rights to challenge or appeal the decisions.  This distinction could be a violation of the requirement that the process be equitable.
2. Interim measures should be offered and fairly given to either party.  Schools are putting interim measures in place.  The SIRC guidelines provide questions and forms that are helpful.  The policies are silent about the requirement to offer interim measures. 
3. Timeframe to complete an investigation has a standard of reasonableness.  BSD policies do not reference a timeframe for completion of investigations.  However, it appears that the district moves quickly through each stage as required under the procedures.
4. Informal resolutions are permitted.  Most of the complaints are resolved informally.
5. Investigators must be trained, emphasis on bias and avoiding stereotypes.  It does not appear that those tasked with conducting investigations have received any formal training.  The formal training that some reported is related to continuing education and/or personal initiative.  There also appears to be a “coaching” investigation education practice where newer Assistant Principals rely on more seasoned administrators at the site to learn how to conduct an investigation.
6. Standard of proof must be adopted consistent with standard used in other misconduct.  BSD policies are not clear about the standard that is used in determining whether a policy violation has been found and that standard is not defined in the policies.
7. Appeals not required; may be offered to only the respondent, not the complainant; if offered to both, equally offered.  Both procedures examined in this review offered appeals only to complainants.  This appears to be a violation however, it is possible that respondents have another avenue through which to bring an appeal that is not referenced in this policy.

RECOMMENDATIONS

• Suggest Beaverton take a broader look at Title IX-Sexual Misconduct and improve its program to address all of the relevant areas.
• Designation of a Title IX Officer – Although Beaverton is in technical compliance with this requirement, confusion exists surrounding the current officer and the responsibilities for that role.  Beaverton’s website currently lists one Title IX officer.  However, many people interviewed in Beaverton could not name who holds that position.  The Title IX officer role may not have been properly defined as having “overall responsibility” for Title IX, including athletics and sex and gender discrimination/harassment.  Beaverton may want to write a job description for the Title IX Officer and determine which structure makes the most sense considering the current workload of those involved in Title IX compliance, budgetary constraints, climate/culture, and other relevant considerations.  If not financially able to hire a stand-alone coordinator than a logical division of the responsibilities should take place.  Suggest Title IX deputy be assigned by Athletics, Human Resources and Student Services.
• Adopt a Nondiscrimination statement that is consistent.  The website nondiscrimination statements includes some important information but it is not in technical compliance with OCR guidance.  The statement does not include contact for the local OCR office which is required.  Also, the statement appears to not have been disseminated to staff, students and the public as extensively as recommended.
• Current policies related to Title IX have significant overlap and are not clear about which process applies to which allegation.  Policies should clarify what is covered and should also apply exclusions so that only one avenue is available to complainants.  Language indicating which policy covers which offenses, which it does not cover, and which particular procedure applies should be added to the policies.
• None of the Title IX policies explicitly address sexual violence and the types of violence that may occur and be considered a violation.  During the policy review process, it should be determined which policy would best address sexual violence and the proper language should be added.
• The nondiscrimination procedure requires a written submission, while the sexual harassment procedure indicates that the complaint must be put in writing, without indicating who is responsible for the writing. 
• Policies should include notice of allegations in all Title IX matters.
• In order to be in compliance with current guidance Beaverton must offer the option to the respondent as well as the complainant. 
• Policies do not list what the burden of proof is for coming to a conclusion.  Clear and convincing standards should be used in the policies.
• The multi-step appeal of the Sexual Harassment Complaint Procedure and the Discrimination Complaint/Grievance procedure is complex and not designed to offer a prompt resolution to the parties. Consider changing the process and offering one appeal per policy.  The appeal should be offered to both complainant and respondent.
• The sexual harassment procedure, nondiscrimination procedure and public complaint procedure do not set forth a standard of evidence for the determination of whether a policy violation has taken place.  Whichever standard is selected, it should be stated clearly in the policies. 
• All parties must agree to the informal process, which does not appear to be required in the Beaverton process. 
• A written notice of outcome to both parties should be sent, with guidance about how to file an appeal.  An appeal option must be offered to the respondent. 
• More rigor needs to be established in the process around intake, policy violation, analysis and outcome. 
• It was recommended that a flow chart be used in the policy, on the website and/or with materials describing the process.
• In the future anyone investigating Title IX claims should have Title IX training annually.  Current levels of training is inconsistent. 

Questions/Comments from the Board:

1. How periodic should the trainings be?  Title IX Officers and Investigators should be trained annually.  All staff training could be less than annual.  Some insurance carriers have trainings at no cost.  Do you have any preference in terms of type of training?  Face to face is best.  Title IX coordinator and staff could be done online or in a webinar.
2. Surprised that our nondiscrimination statement was not compliant.  Could you help educate us?  OCR guidance started in 2001 and went into more specifics in 2015.  Adding local OCR information to the nondiscrimination statement would guide the community on where the offices are and whom to call. 
3. Are there any other school districts in the nation that are using cutting edge language and/or best practices?  Our Policy Committee has just finished a two-year process updating all policies  Once you have gone through the OCR process you will be pointed in the right direction of reworking policies.  Adding exclusion in policies that overlap would help.  The complaint process is transparent on the website but it is hard to know what to do next.  A flow chart might help guide people through the process.
4. What is the normal grievance process?  Usually goes up to the superintendent, particularly around students.  Do you have any suggestions on how to coordinate across all the sites to communicate around this issue?  Are there other things that large districts do?  Having forms in place that state what needs to be done right away, a better understanding of interim measures and having somebody be a point person at the site to check in with are all great strategies.  Interim measures get a lot of attention from OCR.
5. Where do we go from here?   It definitely is not going on a shelf.  The next step is to go to the Policy Committee.
6. In school districts/institutions that you have worked with you mentioned it is important in some cases to have trained investigators?  In your role, is it usually the Title IX Coordinators making that call if they don’t have those internal investigators in their district/institution?  Yes, there are a lot of considerations.  Ms. Farrell stated that she will often have a discussion with her superintendent when she feels it is something that should not be handled internally.  The Title IX Coordinator will have a feel for the issue and know when to bring someone in.  Cases need to be accepted as adequate or satisfactory (pass the muster) externally and sometimes independence is important.

Megan Farrell is available for future questions.  She noted that we have great staff dedicated to doing the right thing.

CONCLUSION

Chair Tymchuk thanked Megan for her report.  She anticipates the district working closely with the HR team and working on policies.  We are doing a lot of things well but there are also a lot of things that we can improve upon.

The meeting was adjourned at 6:07 p.m.

Submitted by
Mary Hawkins

___________________________
Board Chair Becky Tymchuk