Administrative Review

The initial order will include information on how to request an administrative review. Keep in mind that the opportunity to request administrative review is time-limited. An administrative review must be requested within 21 days of the issuance of the initial order. If one is not requested, the initial order becomes final.

Administrative review may be requested for any or all of the following reasons:

• To determine whether there was a material error that substantially affected the outcome of the fact-finding or sanctioning;
• To consider newly discovered evidence, not reasonably available during the fact-finding, that could substantially impact the outcome; or
• To determine whether the sanction(s) imposed were appropriate for the violation committed and were not excessively lenient or excessively severe;
• If a full hearing has been held, an administrative review can be requested for any other grounds that would warrant modification, withdrawal, or reversal of the order; or
• If a full hearing has NOT been held, an administrative review can be requested to determine whether the issue and interests involved warrant a full hearing.

When allegations in a conduct proceeding include Department of Education federal regulations (EDFR) of prohibited conduct, administrative review may also be requested for two additional reasons:

• To determine whether a procedural irregularity affected the outcome of the matter; or
• To determine whether a university official involved in the formal complaint investigation or adjudication has a conflict of interest or bias.

The purpose of the request is to explain to the administrative review panel why you believe one or more of the grounds, or reasons, listed above apply and how you would like the order changed. You can contact the conduct officer (or the hearing officer if a full hearing occurred) for a copy of the case file to prepare your request if you do not have it. Your request should:

1. Specifically, address the reasons you are requesting review. These can be any or all of the above reasons, and your request can be organized to help the review panel understand how your arguments align with one or more of these reasons.
2. Include references to any specific documents in the case file that support your request for review. This will help the review panel better understand and assess your request.
3. If you are arguing that there is new evidence, you should explain why this was not reasonably available during the fact-finding, and how it would change the outcome. Include all new documents or pieces of evidence you would like to include as an attachment to your request.

A few suggestions for formatting your request:

• No more than 10 pages, double-spaced, with 1-inch margins.
• Addressed to the Reviewing Officers conducting the review
• Submitted as a Word document or PDF attachment via email

If you have questions about your review, you can contact a Respondent Resource at cssc@uw.edu (if you are a respondent) or a Confidential Advocate (if you are a complainant). These are resources for your information and support but are not legal counsel. You remain responsible for tracking time deadlines and making sure to submit your request in a timely manner. You may email the Review Coordinator for logistical or code questions at revcoord@uw.edu. However, the Review Coordinator will not be able to speak to you about your specific case.

When you are ready to submit your request for administrative review, you should follow the directions listed in your initial order. The Conduct Officer or Hearing Officer (in a full hearing) will then provide that request to the Review Coordinator, who will work on initiating the administrative review.

If an administrative review is requested, the Review Coordinator will provide the parties with a notice of administrative review. This notice will include a timeline for when a response to the request is due, identify the reviewing officers, and describe the process.

Once the University provides notice of a request for administrative review, the parties who did not submit the request will be told how many days they have to respond. A response should:

• Address arguments made in the initial request for administrative review;
• Cite documents and evidence in the case file;
• Be organized to address the grounds for administrative review listed above;
• Only include the names or individuals involved in this specific matter.

A response to a request for administrative review is not an opportunity to introduce new or more evidence or to request changes to the initial order. New evidence submitted with a response will not be considered.

After the parties have provided their responses, the Review Coordinator will provide the request for administrative review, the responses, and the case file to reviewing officers (also referred to as the “review panel”). The reviewing officers include faculty and students who have been trained to engage in administrative reviews. Cases involving allegations of sexual misconduct only involve faculty reviewing officers.

When the reviewing officers conduct an administrative review, they review the record and any evidence a party submits as newly discovered, if that is the basis for the request for review. The review panel meets to discuss the case and considers the evidence cited and arguments that were made in the request and responses. Review panel decisions are by majority vote.

Timelines for the completion of an administrative review depend on who issued the initial order.

• When an initial order is issued by a conduct officer (i.e. when no full hearing occurred), then the review panel must issue a decision within 20 days of the request for administrative review.
• When an initial order is issued by a hearing officer following a full hearing, then the review panel must issue a decision within 30 calendar days of receipt of all responses submitted by the parties or oral argument (if any), whichever is later.

If the review panel does not issue a decision within these timelines, the request for administrative review is deemed to be denied.

The review panel may reach one of the following results:

• Conclude there is no basis for remand or alteration of sanctions, affirm the initial order, and issue a final order disposing of the proceeding;
• Remand the case for further fact-finding or review if newly discovered evidence may have impacted the result or if the record demonstrates material error with instructions to the officer who entered the initial order;
• Increase or reduce the sanction(s), and issue a final order disposing of the proceeding;

• If a full hearing was not held and the review panel believes one is warranted, the review panel may initiate a full hearing; or
• If a full hearing has been held, in addition to the second bullet point above, the review panel may remand the case for further proceedings on any other grounds that would warrant modification, withdrawal, or reversal of the initial order, with instructions to the officer who entered the initial order.

Orders from an administrative review will include the outcome, any sanction, and a brief statement of the reasons for the outcome.  The Review Coordinator will send the order from the review panel via email to all parties at the same time.

If the case is remanded, the initial order will be rescinded and the review panel will state the reasons for the remand. Following remand, the conduct officer (or hearing officer, if a full hearing occurred) will address the reasons for the remand.

At the conclusion, the conduct officer or hearing officer will issue another initial order. If a party requests a second administrative review, a review panel will consider that request along with the order for remand. The review panel may include the reviewing officers from the prior review and will consider whether the conduct officer or hearing officer responded to the instructions from the order for remand.

More information can be found in Student Governance and Policies, Chapter 209 Section 13 and Student Governance and Policies, Chapter 209 Section 15.