Information presented below provides a brief summary of OSARP processes. To access the full, accurate, and current versions of our policies and processes, refer to the JMU Student Handbook:

• Standards of Conduct and Policies
• Determining/Notification of an Alleged Violation
• Administrative Case Review
• Accountability Board Case Review
• Interim Suspension Process
• Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process
• Title IX Sexual Harassment Adjudication Process

Every OSARP process will provide a prompt, fair, impartial, and unbiased resolution. A Responding Party has the right to a presumption of not responsible for a violation until proven responsible using a preponderance of the evidence in the Accountability Process, Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process, or Title IX Sexual Harrassment Adjudication Process. For more information regarding student rights in these processes, please use the above links.

OSARP approaches student conduct from an educational, developmental, and restorative perspective. Inherent in the University’s accountability process is the commitment to serve, equally, all involved parties in an unbiased and fair manner. It is important to every staff member in OSARP that a student feels their perspective is heard and incorporated into the decision-making process. We want our processes to feel accessible and transparent not scary and intimidating.

From data obtained during the 2021-2022 academic year, students reported the following:

• 97% of students describe their experience as expected or better than expected
• 97% of students describe their experience as fair
• 92% of students found responsible for a policy violation received education
• Top three words student use to describe their experience in OSARP:
  • Conversation, Education, Accountability
• Top three words student would NOT use to describe their experience in OSARP:
  • Negative, Uncomfortable, Condescending
• Student comments:
  • “I was given clear information and treated kindly and fairly.”
  • “I believe my experience with OSARP was very fair and they made decisions based on evidence and gave me a chance to speak to them personally about my case.”
  • “I was treated well, allowed to voice my opinion, and was able to give my side of the story before a decision was made.”

*Based on 565 total responses to an assessment completed after an Administrative Case Review

Upon receiving relevant details of an alleged violation(s), OSARP will determine whether there are grounds for notification of an alleged violation(s) and the initiation of the Accountability Process or Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process, or Title IX Sexual Harassment Adjudication Process. 

If the information produced provides sufficient cause that an alleged violation(s) may have occurred, the Responding Party will be notified of the alleged policy violation(s). In accordance with JMU Policy 1209, proper notification of an alleged policy violation(s) shall consist of an email to the student’s official JMU e-mail address. The notice will be considered received the day after the notice is sent via email.

The email notification will include details about the alleged violation(s), information about the applicable Case Review process, and the Case Administrator who will adjudicate your case (for Administrative Case Reviews). Students are encouraged to read this email thoroughly and follow the directions within to contact our office with questions.

The notification email will also include information about the date, time, and location of the Administrative Case Review, which is set based on the academic schedule of the Responding Party. Appointments will typically occur in person in the OSARP offices, but may occur virtually as determined by OSARP. All in-person appointments will follow social distancing guidelines and the Responding Party and Case Administrator may be required to wear a mask/face covering during the appointment.

During the Administrative Case Review:

• Your Case Administrator will explain the Accountability Process, your rights as a student, and review information provided to OSARP regarding the alleged violation(s).
• You will be provided the opportunity to share any information you wish to share regarding the alleged violation(s). Please have this prepared and bring it to your Administrative Case Review.
• The Accountability Process will determine whether or not each policy listed above was violated, evaluating the totality of the information available by a preponderance of the evidence.
• You will be notified of the decision being made in your case, whether you are responsible or not responsible for each policy listed above, and any assigned sanctions to be completed (if applicable).

If found responsible, the Responding Party may indicate their acceptance to the Case Administrator and make a commitment to completing the required sanctions. Failure to complete, schedule, attend, or be on time for sanctioned programs/meetings, failing to complete related assignments, or failing to follow sanction guidelines may result in an alledged policy violation of  Failure to Comply with a Disciplinary Decision and a fine of $50 per program/meeting not completed by the deadline. The Responding Party may also choose to reject the decision and request a re-hearing of the case at an Accountability Board Case Review. Students who reject the decision made by their Case Administrator will be scheduled for an advising session to go over that process and those procedures.

Additional information is available in the JMU Student Handbook for students who choose not to attend their Administrative Case Review.

For more information on an Administrative Case Review, see the video below.  

The Accountability Board Case Review is comprised of faculty, staff, and students and reviews cases when a Responding Party in the Accountability Process has rejected their Case Administrator's decision.

Board Members assigned to conduct the Accountability Board Case Review may render a decision less severe, more severe, or the same as the decision rendered at the Administrative Case Review. The Board Members assigned to the Accountability Board Case Review will not be informed of the decision rendered for the case at the Administrative Case Review. A Responding Party may not choose to accept the decision rendered at the Administrative Case Review after a decision is rendered at an Accountability Board Case Review.  

To learn more about the Accountability Board Case Review, visit the JMU Student Handbook. The Responding Party will also be informed of the process and procedures during their advising session, which is scheduled after rejecting the decision made by their Case Administrator at the Administrative Case Review.

If the Director of OSARP or a designee determines that a student presents a risk to the orderly operation of the university or to the safety and welfare of members of the university community, the Director of OSARP or designee may initiate the Interim Suspension Process and place the Responding Party under an Interim Suspension Status.

To learn more about the Interim Suspension Process, visit the JMU Student Handbook.

The Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process is the process used to adjudicate alleged violations of the Sexual Misconduct policy.

To learn more about the Sexual Misconduct Accountability Process, visit the JMU Student Handbook.

The Title IX Sexual Harassment Adjudication Process is the process used to adjudicate alleged violations of the Title IX Sexual Harassment policy.

To learn more about the Title IX Sexual Harassment Adjudication Process, visit the JMU Student Handbook.