Student Honor and Conduct Code

Rollins requires that all material submitted by a student in fulfilling his or her academic course
of study must be the original work of the student and must uphold academic integrity. Students
are expected to engage in ethical conduct consistent with the field of public health and Emory
University. Students become familiar with the Honor and Conduct Code during their pre-Orientation
Canvas module from Enrollment Services. Students are required to complete a Principles of Good
Scholarship Survey and score a grade of 80% or higher to ensure they are familiar with the Honor
and Conduct Code, Principles of Good Scholarship, and Citations. The Academic Resource Center
offers a variety of resources to support student success.


Allegations of violations of the Honor and Conduct Code undergo a preliminary investigation by the
Senior Associate Dean of Enrollment Management & Student Affairs or their appointee. The matter
may be resolved at that point or referred to a formal Hearing Committee consisting of students and
faculty members who make their recommendation to the Executive Associate Dean for Educational
Affairs. Students may petition to appeal that decision, in which case a second Hearing Committee
may be convened. Policies and procedures governing honor and conduct code violations are
contained in this document.

Introduction

In accordance with university bylaws, the president of the university has delegated to the dean and
faculties of each school the responsibility of designing honor and conduct codes for its students. The
Rollins Honor and Conduct Code was established to ensure personal responsibility and professional
standards consistent with the field of public health and the missions of both Emory University and
Rollins. In cases where the code has been alleged to be compromised, it sets forth a set of procedures to deal with the allegations. This code applies to any student registered in a Rollins course. Registered students are responsible for upholding all aspects of the code.

Rollins requires that all material submitted by a student in fulfilling his or her academic course of study
must be the original work of the student and must uphold academic integrity at the graduate level.
It is the obligation of every student to know the regulations regarding academic misconduct.


Ignorance of these regulations will not be considered a defense. If a student is unclear about whether
something violates the academic integrity of a course assignment and/or degree requirement, it is
their responsibility to seek clarity with the instructor and/or academic advisor. In situations outside
the classroom, the student should seek clarifications from the Senior Associate Dean of Enrollment
Management & Student Affairs.

Violations of Student Academic Honor

Violations of academic honor include any action by a student indicating dishonesty or a lack of
academic integrity. Violations of academic honor include but are not limited to cheating, plagiarism,
falsifying research data, falsification and forgery of university academic documents, facilitating
academic dishonesty, and providing false evidence.

  • Cheating includes, but is not limited to, seeking, acquiring, receiving, or passing information
    intended to facilitate performance on an examination prior to its authorized release or during
    its administration, or attempting to do so. Cheating also includes seeking, using, giving, or
    obtaining unauthorized assistance (including assistance from generative Artificial Intelligence
    tools) in any academic assignment or examination, or attempting to do so.
  • Plagiarism is the act of presenting as one’s own work the expression, words, or ideas of
    another person, whether published or unpublished (including the work of another student)
    without proper acknowledgment. Plagiarism also extends to presenting as one’s own work
    the expression, words, or ideas generated through Artificial Intelligence tools without proper
    acknowledgement.
  • Falsifying data includes, but is not limited to, creating information not actually collected,
    altering, or misrepresenting information and/or data.
  • Falsification and forgery of university documents includes knowingly making a false statement,
    concealing material information, or forging a university official’s signature on any university
    academic document or record. Such academic documents or records may include transcripts,
    add or drop forms, requests for advanced standing, requests to register for courses, etc. The
    falsification or forgery of non-academic university documents such as financial aid forms,
    academic standing verification letters, student recommendation letters, or other documents related
    to the academic record will also be regarded as a violation of the honor code.
  • Facilitating academic dishonesty includes but is not limited to intentionally or knowingly
    helping or attempting to help another to commit an act of academic dishonesty.
  • Providing false evidence in any Honor Council hearing or refusing to give evidence when
    requested by the Honor Council are considered to be honor code violations

The practice of public health requires an active commitment to ethical conduct consistent with the
field of public health throughout all program requirements including, but not limited to, internships,
research, field work, and Applied Practice Experiences. While this expectation is set, it is also
important to outline behavior that is clearly the exception, or in violation of the code. Rollins
respects the rights of organized and intentional student dissent and protests. In situations of student
dissent and protest, the statements below should be interpreted in accord with Emory policies on
student dissent and protest. The following conduct violations will be explored below.

Violations of Student Conduct

Violations of student conduct include any action by a student which violates ethical conduct
consistent with the field of public health or Emory University. These actions may include, but are
not limited to, dishonesty through misrepresentation or withholding of pertinent factual information;
forging, falsifying, or misusing university documents or records; infraction of university rules and
regulations which protect the university community; conduct in violation of university policies
prohibiting discrimination, sexual harassment and sexual misconduct; theft; personal abuse;
malicious damage/breaking and entering; disorderly conduct and disruption of class; misuse of
electronic equipment and information technology; substance use; infractions of public law that
involve and/ or are linked to Emory University; and actions that deliberately demean or violate the
integrity of other university members.

  • Dishonesty through misrepresentation or withholding of pertinent factual information
    in a student’s personal dealings with other students, faculty, or staff of the university, or
    organizations or agencies of the university. This also includes falsification of information for
    the purpose of admission to Rollins or on a job application while enrolled as a student.
  • Forging, falsifying, or misusing university documents, records, identification cards, or other documents so as to violate the requirement of academic honesty.
  • Infraction of rules and regulations established by university authority to protect the interests of the university community. These rules and regulations assure that all members of the university
    community will be able to attain their educational objectives without hindrance in a conducive
    intellectual and educational atmosphere throughout the university community. Further they
    protect the activity, health, safety, welfare, and property of all members of the university
    community and of the university itself. These policies also pertain to student conduct when
    representing Rollins in academically related and/or community activities. These policies may
    be found on the Emory University website at http://policies.emory.edu/8.1.
  • Non-consensual sexual activity, including sexual harassment, is considered Prohibited Conduct is an umbrella term that encompasses all unwelcome conduct based on sex or gender that is so severe and/or pervasive that it has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with
    a person’s University employment, academic performance or participation in University
    programs or activities, or creates a working, learning, program or activity environment that a
    reasonable person would find intimidating, hostile or offensive. “Prohibited Conduct” includes Non-Consensual Sexual Intercourse, Non-consensual Sexual Contact; Sexual Exploitation;
    Sexual Harassment; Gender-Based Harassment; Retaliation; Aiding, Facilitating, Encouraging,
    Concealing, or Otherwise Assisting, Violating a Protective Measure and Title IX Misconduct. The
    University’s Sex and Gender-Based Harassment and Discrimination Policy may be found on the
    Emory University website at https://emory.ellucid.com/documents/view/16836.
  • Hazing, as prohibited by the University Anti-Hazing Policy 8.11, is a broad term encompassing any
    activity expected of someone joining a group (or to maintain full status in a group) that humiliates,
    degrades or risks emotional and/or physical harm, regardless of the person’s willingness to
    participate.
  • Theft of any property of the university itself or of any property of any member of the university
    community, or its visitors or guests.
  • The intentional, wanton, or reckless physical abuse or verbal abuse of any person by a student on the campus or on property owned or controlled by the university, or at a function under the university’s
    supervision or sponsorship or such abuse of a member of the Emory community at any location or
    on-line forum.
  • Malicious damage/breaking and entering by a student to the property of another member of the university community (student, faculty, or staff ) or the property of the university itself, or to the property of any visitor or guest of the university or a member of the university community. Breaking into a locked room, office, or facility of the university, or entering a room, office, or facility that is clearly restricted is not permitted.
  • Disorderly conduct, disruption of class, and/or interference by a student by violence, force, disorder, obstruction, or vocal disruption of university activity, or activity authorized or sponsored by the University or by any school, program, division or authorized student body, including disciplinary proceedings. Interference by a student with the instructor’s right to conduct class as the instructor sees fit within the bounds of academic freedom and responsibility.
  • Misuse of electronic equipment and information technology is not permitted at Emory University. Computers, networks, and software applications are powerful tools that can facilitate Emory’s core missions in teaching, learning, research, and service. Access and utilization of these tools is a privilege. Users of Emory’s IT resources may not share their passwords or other access credentials; attempt to hack, bypass, or violate security controls; access, modify, or share sensitive data or information without appropriate authorization; use access credentials issued to other individuals or attempt to impersonate another individual in order to access IT resources. Additionally, users of Emory’s IT resources may not use those resources for any unethical or illegal purpose, such as violating copyrights or license agreements for any type of intellectual property (e.g., software, music, audio/ video recordings, photographs, illustrations, documents, media files, e-journals, e-books, databases); harassing other members of the Emory community; destroying or stealing equipment, software, or data belonging to others; intentionally damaging or destroying the confidentiality or integrity of IT resources or disrupting their availability; or monitoring or disrupting the communications of others.
  • Substance use that includes the use of illicit drugs or the non-medical use of prescription drugs is
    not permitted at Emory University. Users, possessors, and/or providers of such drugs violate federal laws and state laws. Students who possess or use such drugs or who furnish drugs to others while on property owned or controlled by the university are committing a conduct offense. Additionally, providing alcoholic beverages to underage persons (under the age of 21) or to noticeably intoxicated persons is a conduct code offense, as is consuming alcohol by underage individuals, Alcohol and Drug Abuse Policy, http://policies. emory.edu/8.8. Tobacco use while on the property owned or controlled by the university is a conduct code offense Tobacco-Free Environment, http://policies.emory.edu/4.113.
  • Infractions of public law that involve and/or are linked to Emory University that is the basis for an allegation or charge of violation of public law also may subject a student to an allegation of a student conduct violation. Acquittal or conviction in court does not necessarily exclude or dictate action by Rollins. Further, Rollins may proceed with a conduct matter without awaiting the start or conclusion of any legal proceeding.
  • Actions contrary to the standards of Rollins and Emory University, including actions that are
    deliberately demeaning to other human beings or that violates the dignity and integrity of other
    members of the university and community. See Emory University Policy 1.3. https://emory.ellucid.
    com/documents/view/16834/?security=d3b7518a869d72e6d5b0c965c987b3c9053079b3.

Policies and Procedures

The Student Honor and Conduct Standing Council (subsequently referenced as the council) will be
formed at the beginning of each academic year. The council shall consist of no fewer than
12 faculty members representing each department and degree program and no less than 20 student
members reflecting the current Rollins student-body demographics. The Executive Associate Dean
for Educational Affairs, in collaboration with the Senior Associate Dean of Enrollment Management
& Student Affairs will nominate faculty who will be members of the Council for a two-year term.
Six new faculty members will be named each year to provide a staggered membership. Student
membership will be comprised of students who volunteer their service and are selected by the Senior
Associate Dean of Enrollment Management & Student Affairs or a designee. These students will
serve as Honor and Conduct Code liaisons to their departments and fellow students for a one-year
term. Members will be selected to serve on individual Hearing Committees based on affiliation and
availability.


• The Executive Associate Dean for Educational Affairs, or their designee, reviews the findings
and recommendations for sanctions of the Hearing Committee and of the Appeal Committee.
• The Senior Associate Dean of Enrollment Management & Student Affairs, or their designee,
serves as the student honor and conduct code adviser. The student honor and conduct
code adviser conducts the preliminary investigation and writes up the initial findings and
determination.
• A Hearing and Appeal Committee Facilitator, appointed by the Senior Associate Dean of
Enrollment Management & Student Affairs, coordinates the hearing procedures and provides
consistency in the processes and proceedings. The facilitator identifies council members
to serve on a Hearing Committee and an Appeal Committee, prepares the agenda and the
evidence, and presides over the actual proceedings to assure fair and systematic processes.
• Student’s faculty or staff adviser (non-legal). The student charged may ask a faculty or staff
member to assist and counsel him/her in preparing for and participating in the hearing. The
adviser will not have the right to examine witnesses.
• A Hearing Committee will be comprised of a subset of the Student Honor and Conduct Code
Standing Committee, and will include four members: two faculty members and two students.
The hearing committee facilitator will serve as an ex-officio, non-voting member of each
Hearing Committee. The hearing committee facilitator will preside over the proceedings.
No person involved in advising the student honor and conduct code adviser or his/ her designee
during the preliminary investigation may serve as a voting member on the Hearing Committee for
the specific proceeding. No individuals making the charge or directly involved with the case shall be
members of the Hearing Committee.


In the case of an appeal, the Appeals Committee will be selected in the same method as the initial
Hearing Committee and members are a subset of the council; however, no individual who served on
the initial hearing committee shall sit on the appeals committee. If needed, a selected faculty member
from the initial Hearing Committee may attend the Appeal Committee hearing as an ex officio, non-voting member to provide continuity with the original proceedings.

It is the responsibility of every member of the faculty, staff, and student body to cooperate in
supporting the honor code. In pursuance of this duty, any individual, when he or she suspects that an
offense of academic misconduct has occurred, shall report this suspected breach to either:

(a) the faculty member in whose class the suspected breach occurred; (b) a departmental assistant/ associate director of academic programs (ADAP); (c) a faculty member of the Honor Standing Council; or (d) the Senior Associate Dean of Enrollment Management & Student Affairs.

Allegations must be made within 30 days of when the alleged activity was discovered. Allegations
may not be made more than 30 days after the end of the term OR after degree conferral.
The individual should write their allegation of the specific violation and provide supporting
documentation. An email submission from the person making an allegation will fulfill this
requirement. The name of person making allegation will be shared with the student unless the person
making the allegation submits a written request that they do not want their name shared during the
preliminary investigation. If the preliminary investigation leads to a formal hearing, the name of the
person making the allegation would be made known.


If an allegation is made at the end of the term, instructors may enter the grade the student has earned
NOT including the allegation. The instructor may change/update the grade once the allegation has
concluded. If an allegation is made before the end of the term, instructors are asked to refrain from
posting a grade until the allegation has concluded.

The student has the following rights:

  1. Be considered not in violation of the Honor and Conduct Code until found otherwise by the
    Hearing Committee appointed by the student honor or conduct code adviser for this purpose.
  2. The right to be notified in writing (email) of the allegation(s) against them. Written
    documentation of the allegation(s) must include the allegation(s) against them with enough
    specificity to enable them to prepare for the hearing on these allegation(s) (if a hearing occurs).
  3. The right to choose a faculty or staff advisor (non-legal) to counsel them.
  4. The right to a hearing before the Student Honor and Academic Code Hearing Committee
    facilitated by the Hearing Committee facilitator and to know the date, time, and place of the
    hearing. The right to know the names of witnesses who may be present at the hearing. From the
    time they receive written notice the allegation is referred for a hearing, the hearing takes place in
    at least 10 business days, unless they request for the hearing to take place within a shorter period
    of time.
  5. The right to receive the roster of names of the faculty and student members of the council with
    the notice of the formal hearing. The student may identify any individuals on the council who
    they would not find acceptable to serve on the Hearing or Appeal Committees. The student must
    provide the list of unacceptable individuals and reasons for their exclusion to the Hearing and
    Appeal Committee Facilitator within 48 hours of receiving the roster. The Hearing and Appeal
    Committee facilitator will consider the written request of the student when they nominate
    members of these committees.
  6. The right to be present during the hearing and/or appeal while all evidence is presented; the
    accused student does not have the right to be present during deliberations or voting of the
    committee. If the accused student is not present at the proceeding, it will be conducted with the
    accused student in absentia.
  7. The right to have access to all written statements presented to the Hearing Committee and be
    allowed to hear and question witnesses who appear at the hearing. The right to appeal the findings
    of the hearing. A student who wishes to appeal the decision of the Hearing Committee must
    make such a request in writing to the Executive Associate Dean for Educational Affairs. The
    written appeal must be made within 10 business days of receiving written notice of the Hearing
    Committee’s findings and sanctions. (see Appeals).
  8. If a determination is made the Honor or Conduct Code is violated, the Honor Code Committee
    will be informed of prior honor and conduct code violations and the current status of the student,
    before sanctions are recommended to the Executive Associate Dean for Educational Affairs.

The Senior Associate Dean of Enrollment Management & Student Affairs serves as the student honor
and conduct code adviser, or can appoint another official of Rollins to fill this role. The prehearing
process consists of a preliminary investigation with the possibility of going into arbitration. The
preliminary investigation is designed to determine if there is sufficient evidence to substantiate a
potential honor or conduct code violation. The student honor and conduct code adviser will have 10
business days to review the written allegation and documentation and determine whether evidence
supports future action. The student honor and conduct code adviser may decide that insufficient
evidence exists to substantiate a potential violation. In this case, allegations will be dropped. If the
student honor and conduct code adviser decides that evidence warrants further action, the adviser
will notify the student in writing that he/she must make an appointment to meet with the adviser
within five business days to review the allegation. If the student fails to schedule or attend the
meeting within that time frame, the allegation will go to a hearing.

The possible outcomes of the preliminary investigation include:

  1. Allegations are dropped: The student honor and conduct code adviser finds that there is not
    sufficient evidence to proceed after speaking with the student. In this case, the allegation is
    dropped.
  2. Case is referred to the Hearing Committee: The student honor and conduct code adviser finds that there is sufficient evidence to support a violation, but believes that the case, because of unusual circumstances or evidence, warrants a review by the Hearing Committee. These cases will go to a formal hearing.
  3. Arbitration: The student honor and conduct code adviser finds that there is sufficient evidence to
    support violation and offers an appropriate disciplinary action to the student and the other parties
    involved. This may include the student admitting they violated the Honor or Conduct Code.
    Within five business days of the initial meeting with the student, the student honor and conduct
    code adviser will meet separately with all parties such as the student, the witnesses, and the
    faculty member to acquire additional information regarding the alleged incident. Arbitration can
    have of two outcomes:
    • Arbitration A: If all parties are satisfied with the findings and the proposed disciplinary
      action, the case will be considered successfully resolved and no further action will be taken.
      The issue and the final decision will be appropriately documented and maintained in the
      official student file to inform on any future allegations that may be brought forward.
    • Arbitration B: If either the student or the other parties do not agree with the guilty
      determination or do not believe the recommended disciplinary action is appropriate, the case
      will go to a formal hearing.

If it has been decided that the case will proceed to a formal hearing, the student will have no less
than 10 business days between the date that the student receives written notice of the preliminary
investigation resulting in a recommendation for a formal hearing, unless the student requests that the
hearing take place within a shorter period of time.

  1. The Hearing Committee Facilitator is responsible for conducting the hearing in a fair and impartial manner.
  2. At the hearing, the alleged violation will be read. Evidence against the student will be
    presented by the Hearing Committee Facilitator, followed by questions from the Hearing
    Committee and the student. The Facilitator then presents the evidence provided by the student,
    and the Hearing Committee members again may ask questions.
    • Evidence shall be admitted without regard to the rules of evidence in courts of law.
    •  Evidence may include, but is not limited to, witnesses, documents, tangible evidence, and
      written statements from witnesses not present. This documentation should all be from the
      preliminary investigation.
  3. After thorough review of the case, the Hearing Committee will decide whether there is clear
    and convincing evidence that the student is in violation of the Honor and Conduct Code. A
    majority vote of the committee will suffice for a finding of a violation. An abstention is not
    considered a vote. If the student is not present at the hearing, the hearing will be conducted
    with the student in absentia.
  4. a)If the student is found in violation of the Honor Code, the Hearing Committee may recommend
    one or more of the following actions, or such other action as the Hearing Committee deems appropriate.
    • Issue the student a warning with no further disciplinary action.
    • Request that the faculty re-evaluate the assignment in question and recalculate the grade.
    • Issue a failing grade on the assignment or for the course in question.
    • Place the student on academic probation for the remainder of the term or longer.
    • Suspend the student for the remainder of the semester or longer.
    • Dismiss the student from school.

b) If the person is found guilty of a conduct code violation, the Hearing Committee may recommend one or more of the following actions, or such other action as the Hearing Committee deems appropriate.

    • Issue the student a warning with no further disciplinary action.
    • Issue the student a warning with a requirement to make amends (apology, service, etc.).
    • Place the student on probation for a specified period of time.
    • Suspend the student for the remainder of the semester or longer.
    • Dismiss the student from school.
5. The Executive Associate Dean for Educational Affairs will receive the Hearing Committee
decision and recommendations for sanctions in writing within three business days of the
hearing’s close. The Executive Associate Dean for Educational Affairs may choose to accept
the recommendations for sanctions or suggest modifications to the recommended sanctions.
The Executive Associate Dean for Educational Affairs will communicate his proposed
modifications to the Hearing Committee within three business days of receiving the Hearing
Committee’s decision and recommendations. The Hearing Committee will collaborate with
the Executive Associate Dean for Educational Affairs to reach a consensus on the appropriate
sanctions. The Executive Associate Dean for Educational Affairs will send a letter to the
charged student indicating the findings of the Hearing Committee, and the sanctions that
will be taken. The finding will be made available to the accuser upon request. The Executive
Associate Dean for Educational Affairs will report any action taken to the appropriate
University, Rollins, and/or other officials.
6. A copy of the written notification will be included in the student’s official school file. A copy will also be maintained in the Honor and Conduct Code database as part of a permanent record. If the student violates the honor or conduct standards again, the sanctions would be harsher with the possibility of suspension or even dismissal.

A student who wishes to appeal the Hearing Committee’s decision must make such a request
in writing to the Executive Associate Dean for Educational Affairs. The written appeal must be
made within 10 business days of receiving written notice of the Hearing Committee’s findings and
sanctions from the Executive Associate Dean for Educational Affairs. In the letter to the Executive
Associate Dean for Educational Affairs, the student must indicate the reasons for the appeal. After
reviewing the request for appeal, an Appeal Committee will be appointed to review the charge(s),
finding(s), and recommendation(s).

  1. The Appeal Committee:
    • Shall be composed of members of the Council. It will consist of one student, two faculty
      members, and the Hearing and Appeal Committee Facilitator. The Hearing and Appeal
      Committee Facilitator will be responsible for conducting the hearing in a fair and impartial
      manner, and will be a non-voting member of the Appeal Committee. No voting member of the
      Appeal Committee shall have participated in the previous Hearing Committee. No member of
      the Appeal Committee can be involved in the case. If needed, a selected faculty member from the initial Hearing Committee may attend the Appeal Committee Hearing as an ex officio, non-voting member to provide continuity with the original proceedings.
    • Shall be furnished with all written data concerning the formal hearing, including evidence presented, committee findings, and sanctions.
    • May request oral or written statements from the accused student and other witnesses, and may request that additional documentary evidence be presented.
    • Shall require a majority vote for a decision. An abstention is not considered a vote.
  2. The following actions may be recommended by the Appeal Committee:
    • Affirm the prior decision.
    • Reverse the prior decision.
    • Modify the prior decision.
    • Decide that the case merits a new Formal Hearing. This hearing will be conducted in accordance with the original hearing procedures. In this case, the Hearing Committee will be composed of faculty and students who did not take part in the original Hearing Committee.
  3. Within three business days of the Appeal Hearing’s close, the Appeal Committee will inform the Executive Associate Dean for Educational Affairs in writing of its decision and recommended sanctions. The Executive Associate Dean for Educational Affairs may:
    • Affirm the prior decision.
    • Recommend that the Appeals Committee revise the sanctions.

The Executive Associate Dean for Educational Affairs will send recommendations for revisions
to the Appeal Committee within three business days of receiving the committee’s decision
and recommended sanctions. If revisions are recommended, the Executive Associate Dean for
Educational Affairs will communicate their proposed modifications to the Appeal Committee within
three business days of receiving the Appeal Committee’s decision and recommendations. The Appeal
Committee will collaborate with the Executive Associate Dean for Educational Affairs to reach a
consensus on the appropriate sanctions. The Executive Associate Dean for Educational Affairs will
write a letter with the final determination. The student charged with a violation shall be notified in
writing of the decision and recommended sanctions within five business days. A copy of the letter
will be placed in the student’s file. If the Appeal Committee overturns the original finding, previous
letters of notification will be removed from the student’s file as appropriate.

In the case of significant or extreme violations of the conduct code, Rollins school administration
may act outside the protocols listed herein in order to take necessary, protective action to ensure that
members Rollins’ committee are not subject to imminent harm. Significant or extreme violations
include, but are not limited to, instances of physical assault, sexual assault, sexual harassment, breaking
and entering, brandishing a weapon or other situation in which the administration perceives a likely
imminent threat of physical harm to a member of the Rollins community. Such significant violations
will be referred to the Emory University Threat Assessment Team and managed by the Executive
Associate Dean for Educational Affairs.


Nothing in this document constitutes a contract or creates a contractual obligation on the part of the
Rollins School of Public Health and/or Emory University. The Rollins School of Public Health reserves
the right to interpret and apply its policies and procedures, and to deviate from these guidelines, as
appropriate in the particular circumstances and in accordance with the mission and goals of the Rollins
School of Public Health and/or Emory University. The Rollins School of Public Health further reserves
the right to alter or modify any statement contained in this document without prior notice.


Cases that involve sexual misconduct, sexual harassment, stalking, and/or sexual violence will be
reported to the Emory University Title IX Coordinator in compliance with federal regulations as
outlined in Title IX. Because of the sensitivity of such cases and depending on the nature of the alleged
incident, the case may be investigated by the University Title IX Coordinator and/or designee and may
be heard by a centralized hearing process.


In addition to the reporting of the incident to the Central Office, the basis of the hearing is
preponderance of evidence which is based on patterns of behavior as opposed to undisputed factual evidence. Additionally, both the accused and the accuser are advised of the findings of the case, and both have the right to appeal the decision.