Author: saveadmin

AG Eric Holder Needs to Put an End to Domestic Violence Myths

Post author By saveadmin
Post date December 23, 2020

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Teri Stoddard, 301-801-0608, tstoddard@saveservices.org

WASHINGTON / February 22, 2011 – Attorney General Eric Holder is being called upon to correct a false statement he made about partner abuse, and to set up a task force empowered to review and correct all erroneous domestic violence claims that appear on the DoJ website. The request comes from Stop Abusive and Violent Environments
(SAVE), a victim rights group working for evidence-based solutions to domestic violence: www.saveservices.org

At a Domestic Violence Awareness Month event, Attorney General Eric Holder made this claim: “Intimate partner homicide is the leading cause of death for African-American women ages 15 to 45.” http://www.justice.gov/ag/speeches/2009/ag-speech-091019.html
But a February 4 USA Today article by Christina Hoff Sommers reveals Holder’s claim is wrong. The leading causes of death for these persons are heart disease, cancer, and accidents, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control:
http://www.saveservices.org/2011/02/for-the-record-leading-causes-of-death-for-blackwomen/

“It’s hard to understand why Attorney General Holder is condoning false information on the Department of Justice website,” according to SAVE spokesperson Dr. Claudia Cornell. “Misleading claims give rise to policies that leave abuse-reduction programs ineffective, and in the case of mandatory arrest policies, place victims’ lives at risk.”

Hoff Sommers will headline a press conference to be held in Washington, DC on Thursday, February 24. The event will analyze Attorney General Holder’s claim, as well as other domestic violence myths that have been repeated so often that the American
public has come to accept them as true. Panelists at the press conference will include Philip Cook, author of Abused Men, and
Carl Starling, a victim of domestic violence who was falsely accused by his wife. SAVE recently released a report that shows how often programs fail to provide a truthful depiction of the problem of partner abuse. The analysis concludes that nine out of 10
training, education, and public awareness programs fail to meet minimum standards of objectivity: http://www.saveservices.org/pdf/SAVE-DV-Education-Programs.pdf

Each year the federal government spends $76 million for domestic violence training, education, and public awareness programs. Few of these programs are required to meet quality assurance standards.

The press conference will be held 12:00 – 1:30pm at the Heritage Foundation, 214 Massachusetts Ave, NE, Washington, DC. Media representatives who wish to attend the conference, or to interview Christina Hoff Sommers or other panelists, can register here:
tstoddard@saveservices.org .

False Allegations Press Release

Maine Prosecutor Coddles Known Child Abuser In Pursuit of False Rape Claim

Post author By saveadmin
Post date December 23, 2020

PRESS RELEASE
Contact:
Teri Stoddard: 301-801-0608
tstoddard@saveservices.org

WASHINGTON, March 30 / P.R. Newswire / Victim advocacy group Stop Abusive
and Violent Environments (SAVE) has filed a Grievance Complaint with the
Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar, requesting the disbarment of assistant
district attorney Mary Kellett. The Complaint can be seen here:
http://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/COMPLA1.pdf
“Thanks to prosecutor Kellett, proven child abusers in Maine know they can
get a free pass by making a claim of rape,” explains Philip W. Cook, SAVE
spokesman. “Mary Kellett has prosecuted many innocent citizens on
allegations of domestic violence and rape. The Board of Overseers of the Bar
needs to disbar prosecutor Kellett immediately.”
The case arose from the accusations of Ligia Filler, a proven child abuser
with a previous criminal charge history. “The children were victims of
violence from their mother,” including hitting her oldest daughter with
spatulas and spoons, according to a December 3, 2009 Ellsworth (Maine)
District Court ruling. One son said that his mother “would hit everyone in
the house. She was a terror to everybody.”
After Ligia’s husband Vladek indicated his plan to leave the marital home
for the safety of the children, Ms. Filler had an apparent mental
break-down, running through the streets partially clothed, screaming death
threats at police officers on the scene.
Ligia made an allegation of marital rape, and within few days prosecutor
Mary Kellett filed charges. No forensic, medical, or other physical evidence
of sexual assault was presented during the trial. Assistant district
attorney Kellett repeatedly sought to bar the introduction of key evidence
that would serve to exonerate the defendant.
Court-appointed attorney Neil Fishman later commented the proceeding was so
flawed that it resembled a “Salem Witch Trial.” On September 9, 2010 the
Maine Supreme Court issued a ruling that found Kellett had “improperly
encouraged the jury to use the absence of evidence regarding the marriage
ending and a child custody dispute…as a reason to reject Filler’s
defense.” The case was remanded for a retrial in May.
More information on the case can be seen at
http://www.saveservices.org/abuse-hysteria-campaign

Press Release

Rape Accusation a ‘Fabrication, ’ Says Former Natalee Holloway Investigator

Post author By saveadmin
Post date December 23, 2020

PRESS RELEASE
Contact: Teri Stoddard, 301-801-0608, tstoddard@saveservices.org

WASHINGTON / April 5, 2011 – The former lead investigator of the high-profile Natalee Holloway case is now calling for Maine prosecutors to drop their 4-year-old case against Vladek Filler. TJ Ward, a lead investigator in the Natalee Holloway case in Aruba, has concluded the original allegation was a “fabrication” and believes continued prosecution of the innocent man would be “malicious.”
In a recent radio interview, Ward ticked off a long list of irregularities in the case involving an allegation of rape that was made in the course of a marital break-up. The accuser had a well-known psychiatric condition. She refused the rape kit that the doctor offered to use. During the trial, the prosecutor provided no medical or forensic evidence. Worse, the prosecutor wrongfully blocked the introduction of evidence that would have served to prove Mr. Filler’s innocence. The exculpatory evidence included evidence that the accuser was a known child abuser, that she had a record of prior criminal charges, and that the defendant had requested a restraining order to protect him and his children from her abusive behavior. Ward also highlighted that the state Department of Health and Human Services had sided
with Mr. Filler by recommending he continue to have custody of the children. But Kellett sought to bar that fact, as well.
“It’s just a shame that this gentlemen…has come here to the United States, the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave, and is experiencing this type of behavior, when he’s been exonerated, when he’s not guilty with what he’s charged with, and they’re
continuing to hound this man and run him into the ground.”
The State of Maine’s prosecution of Vladek Filler has attracted international media attention. In December, the state Supreme Court criticized assistant district attorney Mary Kellett for prosecutorial misconduct and ordered a retrial. The case is scheduled to be
heard May 23-26 in Ellsworth Superior Court, Maine.
The interview of TJ Ward can be heard here:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/avoiceformen

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is now calling for the immediate dismissal of all charges against Mr. Filler: http://www.saveservices.org/wpcontent/uploads/BassanoLtr4.4.2011.pdf

False Allegations Press Release

SAVE Offers Condolences Following the Tragic Death of Reginald Daye, Victim of Duke

Post author By saveadmin
Post date December 23, 2020

PRESS RELEASE
Lacrosse Accuser
Contact:
Teri Stoddard, 301-801-0608
tstoddard@saveservices.org

WASHINGTON / April 18, 2011 – Stop Abusive and Violent Environments (SAVE) is offering its condolences to the family and friends of Reginald Daye. “Reggie” Daye, 46, succumbed April
13 after girlfriend Crystal Mangum stabbed him in the chest with a kitchen knife. Mangum is the woman who falsely accused three Duke University lacrosse players of rape in 2006. Daye’s nephew said the couple had been arguing over rent money. The argument got so heated
that someone called police who made a visit to the apartment, but left before the stabbing incident occurred. Mangum is being held on a $300,000 bond. “Reggie” Daye was born on November 3, 1964 in Durham, North Carolina. He was employed by Scotts Painting and Decorating Company. His hobbies included painting, fishing, and cheering on the Dallas Cowboys. Last December Mangum was convicted on most of the charges related to a February, 2010
domestic dispute in which police said she threatened to stab her then boyfriend Milton Walker. Mangum smashed a car windshield, slashed car tires and allegedly set Walker’s clothes on fire while her children were in the home. Mangum spent 88 days in jail for the offenses,
which also included three counts of child abuse. In 2006 Mangum falsely claimed Duke lacrosse players Dave Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann trapped her in a bathroom during a party, then raped and sexually assaulted her. Prosecutor Mike Nifong indicted the three on charges of rape, sexual assault and kidnapping. The case fell apart, but not before the university ended the lacrosse team’s season and forced the coach to resign.
Funeral Services will be held Tuesday, April 19, at 1:00 pm at Union Baptist Church in Durham,
NC. Persons can sign the Guest Book or send a Sympathy Card here:
http://www.meaningfulfunerals.net/fh/obituaries/obituary.cfm?o_id=1134657&fh_id=13210&s_i
d=FB878D5D-0297-2072-368A0F9A757F229A

Press Release Victims Violence Violence Against Women Act

Press Release: Anti-Violence Bill Loses Focus on Victims, Many Claim

Post author By saveadmin
Post date December 21, 2020

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Teri Stoddard
Email: tstoddard@saveservices.org

Anti-Violence Bill Loses Focus on Victims, Many Claim

WASHINGTON, Feb. 6 — A growing number of groups, including Stop Abusive and Violent Environments, are criticizing the proposed reauthorization bill of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) for losing sight of the law’s original intended purpose: to help victims of domestic violence. These concerns were highlighted during the recent February 2 meeting of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Concerned Women for America, the largest women’s organization in the country, noted in a February 1 group letter that the Leahy-Crapo bill will “actually squander the resources for victims of actual violence by failing to properly prioritize and assess victims.”

Victim-advocacy group Survivors in Action decries what it calls the “DV run-around” in which victims are shunted from hotlines to shelters to social service agencies, never receiving the services they need.

Sen. Charles Grassley, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, deplored the fact that VAWA bill S. 1925 “creates so many new programs for underserved populations that it risks losing the focus on helping victims.” (1)

Even Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy acknowledged criticism that the VAWA bill is “trying to protect too many victims.” Following debate, Sen. Leahy’s proposed bill was approved by a slim 10-8 margin and was forwarded to the full Senate for consideration.

Vague and over-broad definitions of abuse found in the current law undermine key Constitutional protections for the accused, as well: http://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/SAVE-Assault-Civil-Rights.pdf

“If we want to stop the cycle of violence and help real victims, the Violence Against Women Act must rein in sweeping definitions, improve accountability, and recognize that women are as likely as men to be physically abusive with their partners,” explains SAVE spokesman Philip W. Cook.

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is proposing consideration of the Partner Violence Reduction Act (2), which accords priority to persons with evidence of physical violence.

Congressman Ted Poe, co-chair of the Victim’s Rights Caucus, has suggested changing the name of VAWA to the Domestic Violence Act, in order to recognize that partner abuse affects members of both sexes (3).

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is a victim-advocacy organization working for evidence-based solutions to partner abuse: www.saveservices.org

(1) http://www.saveservices.org/2012/02/statement-by-sen-chuck-grassley-about-vawa
(2) http://www.saveservices.org/pvra
(3) http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2011/jul/21/picket-vawa-supporter-capitol-hill-looks-have-law-/

Campus Office for Civil Rights Sex Stereotyping Title IX Title IX Equity Project Victims

PR: Hinting at Sex Bias, Federal Judge Slaps Down RPI for Circumventing New Title IX Regulation

Post author By saveadmin
Post date October 25, 2020

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Hinting at Sex Bias, Federal Judge Slaps Down RPI for Circumventing New Title IX Regulation

WASHINGTON / October 26, 2020 – A federal judge has ruled against Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute for utilizing its old Title IX policy for a case that was adjudicated after the August 14 effective date of the new regulation. The decision is widely seen as a rebuke to RPI, both because it reversed a decision by college administrators, and because of the strong language used in the opinion (1).

In this case, John Doe and Jane Roe had a sexual encounter while under the strong influence of alcohol. Echoing the familiar he-said, she-said pattern, Doe alleged that Roe pressured him to put his hands around her neck and engage in unprotected sex. In contrast, Roe claimed that his hands were placed on her neck in a non-sexual way, and that the sexual activity was non-consensual.

Doe and Roe filed Title IX complaints against each other with school officials.

During the campus adjudication, RPI applied different standards against the two parties, deciding that “Doe’s complaint against Roe was insufficiently substantiated because he failed to prove that he did not voluntarily consume alcohol and did not initiate sexual contact with Roe.” As a result, the college made a determination in favor of Roe.

Doe then filed a lawsuit in the New York Northern District Court. In his October 16 ruling, Judge David Hurd suggested that sex bias was at work: “[T]he female’s complaint proceeded without issue, the male’s was struck down in part on grounds not contemplated anywhere in the policy’s definition of consent. That inequitable treatment provides not inconsiderable evidence that gender was a motivating factor in RPI’s treatment of Doe.”

Relying on unusually strong language, the court commented that “whatever answer may come to the question of how to secure the rights of an accusing woman and an accused man, that answer cannot be that all men are guilty. Neither can it be that all women are victims.” Doe had presented strong evidence that “RPI has come down on the opposite side of that truth,” the court concluded.

Sex discrimination against male students appears to be widespread on college campuses. Recently, George Washington University ordered 23 student groups to amend their constitutions to comply with the school’s nondiscrimination policy. These groups include Girls Who Code, Queens Movement, and female-only service groups (2).

Other forms of sex discrimination include female-only services (3), female-specific scholarships (4), one-sided gender studies courses (5), and sex stereotyping (6).

This appears to be the first judicial ruling regarding the applicability of the new Title IX regulation. Judge Hurd’s decision can be viewed online (7).

Links:

Campus Department of Education Discrimination Due Process Executive Order Office for Civil Rights Race Sex Stereotyping Sexual Assault Title IX Title IX Equity Project

PR: Noting the ‘Seriousness of Penalties,’ College Administrators Suspend Trainings that Promote Sex Stereotypes

Post author By saveadmin
Post date October 19, 2020

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Noting the ‘Seriousness of Penalties,’ College Administrators Suspend Trainings that Promote Sex Stereotypes

WASHINGTON / October 19, 2020 – In response to new federal requirements, college administrators have begun to stop school trainings and curricular offerings that promote stereotypes based on sex or race. For example, the University of Iowa recently announced a decision to suspend all such trainings, workshops, and programs. Noting “the seriousness of penalties for non-compliance with the order,” the pause applies to all harassment and discrimination trainings offered by the institution (1). Other institutions of higher education reportedly have made similar decisions (2).

Two federal policies are driving the re-evaluation. First, the new Department of Education sexual harassment regulation states that Title IX training activities “must not rely on sex stereotypes.” (3) Second, Executive Order 13950 directs federal agencies to suspend funding for any institution that promotes concepts that “an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive.” (4)

SAVE is urging administrators at colleges and universities across the country to take immediate steps to end trainings and other activities that may promote sex stereotypes. Title IX and other training programs are known to be promoting sex stereotypes in at least seven ways:

Domestic violence: Each year there are 4.2 million male victims of physical domestic violence, and 3.5 female victims, according to the Centers for Disease Control (5). University training programs need to clearly and accurately state these numbers.
Sexual assault: Nearly identical numbers of men and women are victims of sexual assault, according to the federal National Intimate Partner and Violence Survey. Each year, 1.267 million men report they were “made to sexually penetrate,” compared to 1.270 million women who report they were raped (6). But many university training programs utilize data from surveys relying on methodologies that undercount the number of male victims who were made to penetrate.
Annual vs. lifetime incidence: Due to well-known problems with recall and memory retrieval, lifetime incidence numbers significantly undercount domestic violence and sexual harassment incidents, especially less serious incidents that occurred in previous years. University trainings should use annual, “in the past 12 months” numbers, not “lifetime” numbers.
Sex-specific pronouns: In referring to domestic violence or sexual assault perpetrators and victims, many training materials misleadingly refer to the perpetrator as “he” and the victim as “she.”
Examples: Training materials often provide hypothetical examples to illustrate key concepts. Such examples need to highlight approximately equal number of male and female victims.
Imagery: Some university websites feature domestic violence incidents that portray a threatening male standing over a fearful, often cowering female. Such one-sided portrayals are misleading.
Negative stereotyping of men as a group: Some universities offer campus-wide programs that seek to redefine, reform, and/or stigmatize masculinity. University-sponsored courses that promote theories of “toxic masculinity,” “rape culture,” and “patriarchal privilege” are likely to be in violation of the federal ban on sex stereotyping. Such stereotypes serve to undermine principles of fairness and equity for male students.

For example, the University of Texas offers a program titled “MasculinUT.” The program’s website states that concerns about sexual assault and interpersonal violence justify the “need to engage men in discussions about masculinity as one tool to prevent violence.” (7) The university does not offer a similar program directed at females, thereby creating an unlawful stereotype of male perpetrators and female victims.

Some universities teach courses that feature the American Psychological Association report, “Guidelines for Psychological Practice with Boys and Men.” (8) The accompanying APA article made the stereotyping claim that “traditional masculinity — marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression — is, on the whole, harmful.”

To date, the SAVE Title IX Equity Project has submitted 20 complaints to the federal Office for Civil Rights for non-compliance with regulatory requirements for Title IX training materials (10).

Links:

https://diversity.uiowa.edu/regarding-executive-order-13950?utm
https://blog.aspb.org/policy-update-uneven-implementation-of-executive-order-on-race-and-sex-stereotyping/
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/titleix-regs-unofficial.pdf 45(b)(1)(iii)
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-combating-race-sex-stereotyping/
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/2015data-brief508.pdf Tables 9 and 11.
Lara Stemple and Ilan Meyer. The Sexual Victimization of Men in America: New Data Challenge Old Assumptions. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4062022/
https://deanofstudents.utexas.edu/masculinut.php
https://www.apa.org/about/policy/boys-men-practice-guidelines.pdf
https://www.apa.org/monitor/2019/01/ce-corner
http://www.saveservices.org/equity/

Campus Scholarships Sex Stereotyping Sexual Harassment Title IX Title IX Equity Project

PR: Recent Central Oklahoma Resolution Agreement Highlights Problem of Widespread Title IX Non-Compliance

Post author By saveadmin
Post date October 13, 2020

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Recent Central Oklahoma Resolution Agreement Highlights Problem of Widespread Title IX Non-Compliance

WASHINGTON / October 13, 2020 – A recent Resolution Agreement between the federal Office for Civil Rights and the University of Central Oklahoma reveals continuing problems with Title IX compliance on college campuses. In this case, the University offered a “Computer Forensics Summer Academy and STEM CareerBuilder for Girls” that stated the program was “unavailable for male students.” The Resolution Agreement was signed by UCO president Patti Neuhold-Ravikumar on September 30 (1).

The UCO Resolution Agreement highlights the problem of widespread sex bias at colleges across the country in the areas of sex-specific programs, female-only scholarships, Title IX regulatory compliance, and sex stereotyping:

Sex-Specific Programs: Professor Mark Perry has filed 231 complaints to date with the Office for Civil Rights alleging Title IX violations, among which the Office for Civil Rights has already opened 80 investigations. His complaints address a broad gamut of sex-specific programs, including female-only STEM academies, leadership development efforts, gym exercise hours, study lounges, and more (1).

Female-Only Scholarships: Over the past two years, the SAVE Title IX Equity Project has identified hundreds of scholarships that are reserved for female students. For example, the University of Missouri-Columbia offers 70 female-specific scholarships, and only one male-specific scholarship. To date, the Office for Civil Rights has opened 121 investigations into these sex-discriminatory scholarships (2). These biased offerings have attracted extensive media attention (3).

Title IX Regulatory Compliance: The new Title IX regulation, which became effective on August 14, was designed to end sex bias against students accused of sexual harassment. One recent review concluded that some colleges have sought to evade the new Title IX requirements, such as cross-examination by an advisor. But at the University of St. Thomas, for example, investigators are instructed to make credibility determinations before the accused student has a meaningful chance to defend himself (4). To date, SAVE has filed OCR complaints against 15 colleges alleging failure to post their Title IX training materials.

Sex Stereotyping: Title IX has long been understood to address the problem of sex-based stereotyping (5). For example, the new Department of Education regulation advises that any Title IX training materials “must not rely on sex stereotypes.” (6)

Many universities offer courses that examine topics such as “patriarchy,” which has been defined as an “unjust social system that subordinates, discriminates or is oppressive to women.” (7) According to one widely used college textbook, patriarchy causes “women everywhere [to] suffer restrictions, oppression and discrimination.” (8) The fashioners of such “unjust social systems” are purported to be males. Such depictions serve to stereotype male students.

Following are examples of such negative stereotypes:

Georgetown University professor Christine Fair recently published a guidebook titled “Wanted: Smash Patriarchy.” The front cover of the book depicts the silhouette of a man (9).
Five University of Massachusetts professors have blamed patriarchy for women’s mental “fragmentation.” (10)
Michael Olenick enrolled in a Women’s Studies course at the University of Minnesota, where he reportedly was lectured on “theories about world conspiracies dedicated to repressing and exploiting women.”

A recent Executive Order authorizes the Department of Education and other federal agencies to suspend funding to any institution that promotes concepts that “an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive.” (11)

College presidents and other administrators need to assure Title IX compliance and to assure curricular offerings avoid sex stereotypes.

Links:

Campus Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Title IX

PR: Legal Experts Warn of the Perils of Campus ‘Dual-Track’ Adjudications

Post author By saveadmin
Post date September 16, 2020

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Legal Experts Warn of the Perils of Campus ‘Dual-Track’ Adjudications

WASHINGTON / September 17, 2020 – One month after a historic civil rights policy took effect at colleges across the nation, legal experts are warning administrators about the legal pitfalls of “dual-track” adjudications. Dual-track adjudications are employed by colleges when students or faculty are accused of a type of sexual misconduct that falls outside the strict definitions found in the new Title IX regulation.

Yesterday, SAVE issued a report titled, “Dual Track Adjudications: Recipe for Legal Disaster.” The Commentary notes that apart from the requirements of the new federal policy, “there is another branch of government that vigorously enforces due process rights: the judiciary.” The analysis cites recent decisions by the Third, Sixth, Eighth, and Ninth Circuit Courts that make it easier for an accused student to prevail in a legal action charging the university with sex discrimination (1).

The article concludes, “While universities may seek to evade the intent of the new Title IX regulation by creating dual-track disciplinary systems, they cannot ignore the courts. As federal circuits change the law to favor accused students in these lawsuits, universities should think twice about attempting to preserve their discriminatory practices.”

The SAVE Commentary echoes concerns recently expressed by a number of legal experts:

Last week, Samantha Harris and Michael Allen published an editorial titled, “Universities Circumvent New Title IX Regulations.” The attorneys reveal, “Things were supposed to change in August, when the new Title IX regulations took effect, with robust free speech and due process protections. Now it appears that many campuses are fighting to ensure these protections remain illusory. It’s not that institutions aren’t changing their policies. Rather, they are doing so to comply superficially while claiming increased authority to subject students and faculty to processes that provide few, if any, of the protections that the regulations require.” (2)

In an August 24 editorial, attorney Teresa Manning voiced concerns that schools “are devising their own sexual-misconduct policies, presumably with their own definitions, separate from Title IX.” For example, Princeton University’s dual-track policy does not require in-person questioning of parties, even though legal scholars believe that live cross-examination is “beyond any doubt the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth.” (3)

Addressing the issue more broadly, legal commentator KC Johnson identifies three themes reflected in the four recent appeals court decisions: officials’ indifference to innocence, widespread procedural irregularities, and institutions that bowed to political pressures to find more accused persons guilty. In his September 15 article, Johnson warns of the specter of continued litigation: “In theory, the new federal Title IX regulations, which require colleges to use fairer procedures, will protect against the injustices identified in the recent appellate decisions. But political, legal, and university opposition to the regulations cloud their future. It may be that federal courts will need to continue to correct campus processes that too often seem indifferent to justice.” (4)

If college administrators decide to create “dual-track” adjudications, SAVE urges that these systems assure the same level of due process protections as campus Title IX adjudications.

Links:

Campus Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Title IX Equity Project Training

PR: Many Universities Not Compliant with New Title IX Requirement to Post Training Materials

Post author By saveadmin
Post date September 8, 2020

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Many Universities Not Compliant with New Title IX Requirement to Post Training Materials

WASHINGTON / September 8, 2020 – A review of the websites of 50 colleges and universities across the nation reveals that 65% are out of compliance with the Title IX regulation’s requirement to post all Title IX training materials. This past week, SAVE filed complaints with Office for Civil Rights against several of these non-compliant schools.

The Title IX implementing regulation, 34 CFR 106, has new provisions, which went into effect on August 14, 2020, that require the posting of Title IX training materials. The regulation calls on schools to post on their websites, “All materials used to train Title IX Coordinators, investigators, decision-makers, and any persons who facilitate an informal resolution process.” §106.45(b)(10)(D)

On May 18, the Office for Civil Rights issued detailed guidance on the topic: https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/blog/20200518.html. The guidance states, “All materials used to train Title IX personnel…Must be publicly available on the school’s website.” [emphasis in the original].

The guidance goes on to explain:

“Section 106.45(b)(10)(D) does not permit a school to choose whether to post the training materials or offer a public inspection option. Rather, if a school has a website, the school must post the training materials on its website.

A school must post on its website: “All materials used to train Title IX Coordinators, investigators, decision-makers, and any person who facilitates an informal resolution process.” Posting anything less than “all materials” on the website in insufficient. Accordingly, merely listing topics covered by the school’s training of Title IX personnel, or merely summarizing such training materials is not the same as posting “all materials.” [emphasis in the original]

Many institutions, such as Princeton University (1), posted training materials geared toward students and faculty, or webinars provided by the Department of Education, but did not post the training materials used for Title IX staff. The federal regulation states that all materials used to train Title IX personnel must be posted. Training materials that are protected by a student ID number or password are also out of compliance, as the federal regulation states the material must be made publicly available.

In contrast, many schools are in compliance with the federal regulation’s posting requirement. Examples of such schools are Amherst College (2) and the University of Colorado-Boulder (3). The University of Vermont even posted a YouTube video of the actual training program that their staff attended (4).

SAVE has filed complaints with the Office for Civil Rights against 10 schools that are out of compliance with the federal regulation. More OCR complaints will be filed as SAVE continues its review of school websites.

The SAVE Title IX Equity Project has found that Title IX violations are widespread at schools across the country. These violations pertain to sex-specific scholarships, sex-specific programs, and due process procedures in campus adjudications. The number of open OCR investigations of such violations currently exceeds 200 cases, and continues to increase (5).

Citations:

https://sexualmisconduct.princeton.edu/reports
https://www.amherst.edu/offices/title-ix/title-ix-policy
https://www.colorado.edu/oiec/policies
https://www.uvm.edu/aaeo/title-9-sexual-misconduct
http://www.saveservices.org/equity/ocr-investigations/