Title IX in Athletics and Addressing Campus Issues

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
TITLE IX ADMINISTRATORS
NETWORK
Elizabeth Trayner, Ed. D., Title IX 
Coordinator
, University of the Pacific
(She, her, Hers)
November 29, 2021
DISCUSSION ITEMS
How are the case loads in your offices?
Any trends you are seeing?
Are you seeing an increase or decrease in
reporting?
Any pressing issues on your campus you’d
like to discuss with the group?
TITLE IX AND ATHLETICS
 
WHAT’S REQUIRED
Provide equal opportunities for female and male students to become
intercollegiate athletes (Three-part test or Prongs)
Provide equitable treatment of participants in the overall women’s program
as compared to the overall men’s program (13 program components or
Laundry List)
WHAT’S NOT REQUIRED
Provide the same funding to the overall women’s and men’s programs
Provide the same funding to men’s and women’s teams for the same sport
Provide specific benefits to the teams
Offer the same number of teams for men and women
Offer the same sports for men and women
Provide the same benefits to men’s and women’s teams in the same sport
Compete at a specific level
THREE-PART TEST
Proportionality
Program Expansion
Full Accommodation
TWO-PART TEST
Equivalent levels of competition
Upgrade competitive levels
13 PROGRAM COMPONENTS
Accommodation of interests and abilities (Three-part Test and Two-Part Test)
Athletic Scholarships
Equipment and supplies
Scheduling of games and practice times
Travel and per diem allowances
Tutoring
Coaching
Locker rooms, practices, and competitive facilities
Medical and training facilities and services
Housing and dining facilities and services
Publicity
Support services
Recruitment of student athletes
NCAA
 
SEXUAL VIOLENCE POLICY
Changes become effective in the 2022-2023 academic year
On an annual basis collect info from all incoming, current, and transfer
student athletes regarding whether “their conduct resulted in an
investigation, discipline through a Title IX proceeding, or a criminal
conviction for sexual, interpersonal, or other acts of violence.”
Take reasonable steps to confirm the information provided by student-
athletes and provide information to other member institutions that are
attempting to confirm same
Implement policies to gather and conduct-related information from former
schools attended by recruited prospects and transfer student-athletes
PENALTIES
Failure to make a full and accurate disclosure could result in penalties,
including loss of eligibility to participate in athletics as determined by the
member institution.
Failure to have a written policy in place to gather information from recruited
incoming athletes or transfer athletes and to actually gather the information
consistent with that procedure could result in “
penalties.”
If a school is not able to attest their compliance with the above
requirements, it will be prohibited from hosting any NCAA championship
competitions for the next applicable academic year.
DETAILS TO CONSIDER
When will your campus be collecting this information (e.g. after an official
visit or after recruitment?)
Will this information be collected on an on-going basis or at a set time each
year?
How will your campus verify the information received and its accuracy?
What happens if a student was found responsible?
Is your campus planning to include incidents of sexual harassment in
addition to sexual assault?
Is your campus planning to be in full compliance by the 2022-2023 school
year?
CASE UPDATES
 
TAYLOR ANDERS, ET AL V. CSU
FRESNO ET AL (2021)
October 2020 – FSU announces it will no longer sponsor womens lacrosse
(among others)
Lacrosse team brought a class action suit in February 2021 alleging the
following claims under T9:
Effective accommodation
Equal treatment
Financial aid
Almost brought preliminary injunction barring FSU from eliminating their team
while the action was pending (court did not bar but did require equal
treatment)
TAYLOR ANDERS, ET AL V. CSU
FRESNO ET AL (2021)
Complaint was amended twice but ultimately FSU files motion to dismiss for
“failure to state a claim”
Failed to state financial aid claim because they could not show an “imbalance
of cumulative financial” received between males and females
Plaintiffs also could not show that any imbalance was based on discrimination
Effective accommodation and equal treatment claims are still to be
litigated…
DOE V. TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY
Doe is seeking TRO to enjoin the University from expelling him after he was
found responsible for sexual misconduct
Argues T9 hearing resulted in erroneous outcome and involved selective
enforcement
Doe alleges the hearing process deprived him of an adequate opportunity
to conduct discovery and to provide accurate evidence
Denied access to original interview materials
Hearing was conducted on the basis of a university representative’s summary of
2 witness statements (himself and complainant)
Denied full opportunity to correct his own statement or test the accuracy of
other statements
Prevented from offering evidence related to the criminal complaint
DOE V. TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY
Test for TRO:
1.
Substantial likelihood of success on the merits
2.
Substantial threat that the movant will suffer irreparable injury if injunction is
denied
3.
The threatened injury outweighs any damage that the injunction may cause
the defendant
4.
The injunction will not disserve the public
1. – Court agrees it is likely Doe would prevail on his erroneous
outcome/selective enforcement claims
2. – Court agrees expulsion would result in immediate and long term
irreparable harm
DOE V. TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY
3. – University argued it had an interest in safeguarding the University
population and its own integrity. Court disagrees that this is enough because
Doe was attending classes entirely remote
4. – “It is in the public interest to punish those who perpetrate sexual assaults
and, consequently, to deter such acts and protect others. At the same time,
it is in the public interest to ensure that life-altering judgments are not
inflicted wantonly and irretrievably when not properly supported.”
TRO granted.
CASE STUDIES
 
KINK CULTURE
Alex and Jo have been dating for a few months. Jo regularly initiates sex by
rubbing her butt against Alex’s genitals while they are spooning in bed. Over
the last few weeks, Alex and Jo, have begun to experiment with their sex life
by acting out role plays and fantasies. One role play that they discussed and
negotiated, involved Alex “breaking into” Jo’s room and penetrating her
while she said no and pretended to fight Alex off. They did act out the role
play one time. Alex and Jo both enjoyed the thrill of it. A few nights ago
while in bed, Jo began rubbing her butt against Alex’s genitals. Alex
performed oral sex on Jo and then went to penetrate her. Jo said “no” and
tried to push Alex off but Alex thought she was role playing again and held
her down and penetrated her until he orgasmed. They both went to sleep
but the next morning Jo contacted the Title IX Coordinator saying her
partner raped her.
What would you do as the Title IX Coordinator?
FACULTY SEXUAL HARASSMENT
A female faculty member in a predominantly male
department comes to you and begins to share some of her
experiences over the past 6 years. It starts with her interview
process where she was asked if she was planning on having
children because it would negatively impact the rest of the
department and their teaching loads. She then describes a
time when she was invited to the department chair’s home
which she thought would be having dinner. Instead she
found herself in an apron serving everyone and washing the
dishes after the fact. She continues to share additional
experiences and the impact it has had on her physical and
mental health.
What steps would you take?
DOUBLE JEOPARDY?
Jordan accuses Xander of sexually assaulting her based on her incapacity to
consent due to alcohol consumption on August 1, 2021 in her on campus residence
hall. An investigation and hearing takes place and Xander is found not responsible.
No appeals are filed and the case is considered closed on November 1, 2021.
On November 8, 2021, Jordan learns that Xander videoed the encounter and
shared the video with several of his fraternity brothers telling them how hot this video
is. Jordan is good friends with one of his brothers so he tells Jordan about the video.
The video shows that Jordan was stumbling as she comes into the room and Xander
has to help her to the bed. She is slurring her speech and passed out at least 3 times
during the sexual encounter. It also shows the entire sexual encounter between the
two of them.
On November 9, 2021, Jordan shows up in the Title IX Coordinator’s office to discuss
options.
What, if anything, can be done?
EMPLOYEE RIGHTS
The Title IX Coordinator sends out a notice to an employee that an
investigation will be taking place. The notice of investigation outlines all the
required information as outlined within the 2020 regulations.
The employee responds to the Title IX Coordinator requesting a Lybarger or
Spielbauer warning prior to participating in an interview. This is not a typical
part of your process.
A typical Lybarger warning states: “You are advised that under 
normal
circumstances you have the right to remain silent and to not incriminate
yourself
, but this is an administrative investigation and, as such, you are
ordered and required to give a statement and answer all questions truthfully.
What would be your approach?
THANK YOU
These materials and all discussions of these materials are for instructional
purposes only and do not constitute legal advice. If you need legal advice,
you should contact your attorney.
All attendees at the November 29, 2021 virtual meeting of the Northern
California Title IX Administrators Network are hereby granted permission to
post a copy of these materials to their institution’s website solely for purposes
of compliance with 34 CFR §106.45(b)(10)(i)(D). These materials are not
intended to be used by anyone for their own training purposes. Use of this
material for proprietary reasons is strictly prohibited.
Slide Note
Embed
Share

Explore the requirements and non-requirements of Title IX in athletics, including the three-part test and 13 program components. Discuss recent trends in reporting, funding disparities, and pressing campus issues within the Northern California Title IX Administrators Network. Delve into the impact of Title IX on intercollegiate sports and the equitable treatment of male and female athletes.

  • Title IX
  • Athletics
  • Campus Issues
  • Gender Equity
  • Northern California

Uploaded on Sep 14, 2024 | 2 Views


Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. NORTHERN CALIFORNIA TITLE IX ADMINISTRATORS NETWORK Elizabeth Trayner, Ed. D., Title IX Coordinator, University of the Pacific (She, her, Hers) November 29, 2021

  2. DISCUSSION ITEMS How are the case loads in your offices? Any trends you are seeing? Are you seeing an increase or decrease in reporting? Any pressing issues on your campus you d like to discuss with the group?

  3. TITLE IX AND ATHLETICS

  4. WHATS REQUIRED Provide equal opportunities for female and male students to become intercollegiate athletes (Three-part test or Prongs) Provide equitable treatment of participants in the overall women s program as compared to the overall men s program (13 program components or Laundry List)

  5. WHATS NOT REQUIRED Provide the same funding to the overall women s and men s programs Provide the same funding to men s and women s teams for the same sport Provide specific benefits to the teams Offer the same number of teams for men and women Offer the same sports for men and women Provide the same benefits to men s and women s teams in the same sport Compete at a specific level

  6. THREE-PART TEST Proportionality Program Expansion Full Accommodation TWO-PART TEST Equivalent levels of competition Upgrade competitive levels

  7. 13 PROGRAM COMPONENTS Accommodation of interests and abilities (Three-part Test and Two-Part Test) Athletic Scholarships Equipment and supplies Scheduling of games and practice times Travel and per diem allowances Tutoring Coaching Locker rooms, practices, and competitive facilities Medical and training facilities and services Housing and dining facilities and services Publicity Support services Recruitment of student athletes

  8. NCAA

  9. SEXUAL VIOLENCE POLICY Changes become effective in the 2022-2023 academic year On an annual basis collect info from all incoming, current, and transfer student athletes regarding whether their conduct resulted in an investigation, discipline through a Title IX proceeding, or a criminal conviction for sexual, interpersonal, or other acts of violence. Take reasonable steps to confirm the information provided by student- athletes and provide information to other member institutions that are attempting to confirm same Implement policies to gather and conduct-related information from former schools attended by recruited prospects and transfer student-athletes

  10. PENALTIES Failure to make a full and accurate disclosure could result in penalties, including loss of eligibility to participate in athletics as determined by the member institution. Failure to have a written policy in place to gather information from recruited incoming athletes or transfer athletes and to actually gather the information consistent with that procedure could result in penalties. If a school is not able to attest their compliance with the above requirements, it will be prohibited from hosting any NCAA championship competitions for the next applicable academic year.

  11. DETAILS TO CONSIDER When will your campus be collecting this information (e.g. after an official visit or after recruitment?) Will this information be collected on an on-going basis or at a set time each year? How will your campus verify the information received and its accuracy? What happens if a student was found responsible? Is your campus planning to include incidents of sexual harassment in addition to sexual assault? Is your campus planning to be in full compliance by the 2022-2023 school year?

  12. CASE UPDATES

  13. TAYLOR ANDERS, ET AL V. CSU FRESNO ET AL (2021) October 2020 FSU announces it will no longer sponsor womens lacrosse (among others) Lacrosse team brought a class action suit in February 2021 alleging the following claims under T9: Effective accommodation Equal treatment Financial aid Almost brought preliminary injunction barring FSU from eliminating their team while the action was pending (court did not bar but did require equal treatment)

  14. TAYLOR ANDERS, ET AL V. CSU FRESNO ET AL (2021) Complaint was amended twice but ultimately FSU files motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Failed to state financial aid claim because they could not show an imbalance of cumulative financial received between males and females Plaintiffs also could not show that any imbalance was based on discrimination Effective accommodation and equal treatment claims are still to be litigated

  15. DOE V. TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY Doe is seeking TRO to enjoin the University from expelling him after he was found responsible for sexual misconduct Argues T9 hearing resulted in erroneous outcome and involved selective enforcement Doe alleges the hearing process deprived him of an adequate opportunity to conduct discovery and to provide accurate evidence Denied access to original interview materials Hearing was conducted on the basis of a university representative s summary of 2 witness statements (himself and complainant) Denied full opportunity to correct his own statement or test the accuracy of other statements Prevented from offering evidence related to the criminal complaint

  16. DOE V. TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY Test for TRO: 1. Substantial likelihood of success on the merits 2. Substantial threat that the movant will suffer irreparable injury if injunction is denied 3. The threatened injury outweighs any damage that the injunction may cause the defendant 4. The injunction will not disserve the public 1. Court agrees it is likely Doe would prevail on his erroneous outcome/selective enforcement claims 2. Court agrees expulsion would result in immediate and long term irreparable harm

  17. DOE V. TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY 3. University argued it had an interest in safeguarding the University population and its own integrity. Court disagrees that this is enough because Doe was attending classes entirely remote 4. It is in the public interest to punish those who perpetrate sexual assaults and, consequently, to deter such acts and protect others. At the same time, it is in the public interest to ensure that life-altering judgments are not inflicted wantonly and irretrievably when not properly supported. TRO granted.

  18. CASE STUDIES

  19. KINK CULTURE Alex and Jo have been dating for a few months. Jo regularly initiates sex by rubbing her butt against Alex s genitals while they are spooning in bed. Over the last few weeks, Alex and Jo, have begun to experiment with their sex life by acting out role plays and fantasies. One role play that they discussed and negotiated, involved Alex breaking into Jo s room and penetrating her while she said no and pretended to fight Alex off. They did act out the role play one time. Alex and Jo both enjoyed the thrill of it. A few nights ago while in bed, Jo began rubbing her butt against Alex s genitals. Alex performed oral sex on Jo and then went to penetrate her. Jo said no and tried to push Alex off but Alex thought she was role playing again and held her down and penetrated her until he orgasmed. They both went to sleep but the next morning Jo contacted the Title IX Coordinator saying her partner raped her. What would you do as the Title IX Coordinator?

  20. FACULTY SEXUAL HARASSMENT A female faculty member in a predominantly male department comes to you and begins to share some of her experiences over the past 6 years. It starts with her interview process where she was asked if she was planning on having children because it would negatively impact the rest of the department and their teaching loads. She then describes a time when she was invited to the department chair s home which she thought would be having dinner. Instead she found herself in an apron serving everyone and washing the dishes after the fact. She continues to share additional experiences and the impact it has had on her physical and mental health. What steps would you take?

  21. DOUBLE JEOPARDY? Jordan accuses Xander of sexually assaulting her based on her incapacity to consent due to alcohol consumption on August 1, 2021 in her on campus residence hall. An investigation and hearing takes place and Xander is found not responsible. No appeals are filed and the case is considered closed on November 1, 2021. On November 8, 2021, Jordan learns that Xander videoed the encounter and shared the video with several of his fraternity brothers telling them how hot this video is. Jordan is good friends with one of his brothers so he tells Jordan about the video. The video shows that Jordan was stumbling as she comes into the room and Xander has to help her to the bed. She is slurring her speech and passed out at least 3 times during the sexual encounter. It also shows the entire sexual encounter between the two of them. On November 9, 2021, Jordan shows up in the Title IX Coordinator s office to discuss options. What, if anything, can be done?

  22. EMPLOYEE RIGHTS The Title IX Coordinator sends out a notice to an employee that an investigation will be taking place. The notice of investigation outlines all the required information as outlined within the 2020 regulations. The employee responds to the Title IX Coordinator requesting a Lybarger or Spielbauer warning prior to participating in an interview. This is not a typical part of your process. A typical Lybarger warning states: You are advised that under normal circumstances you have the right to remain silent and to not incriminate yourself, but this is an administrative investigation and, as such, you are ordered and required to give a statement and answer all questions truthfully. What would be your approach?

  23. THANK YOU These materials and all discussions of these materials are for instructional purposes only and do not constitute legal advice. If you need legal advice, you should contact your attorney. All attendees at the November 29, 2021 virtual meeting of the Northern California Title IX Administrators Network are hereby granted permission to post a copy of these materials to their institution s website solely for purposes of compliance with 34 CFR 106.45(b)(10)(i)(D). These materials are not intended to be used by anyone for their own training purposes. Use of this material for proprietary reasons is strictly prohibited.

Related


More Related Content

giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#