Skip to content Skip to navigation

Policies and Procedures

Organization Conduct Board Policies and Procedures for All Student Organizations

Effective Winter Quarter 2009

These policies and procedures are subject to change with approval of the associate vice provost and dean of students.

View Organization Conduct Board Policies and Procedures (PDF).

Purpose

The Organization Conduct Board (OCB) serves as an advisory committee to the associate vice provost and dean of students. It reviews cases involving alleged violations by Registered Student Organizations (RSOs) of university policies, practices and, in some situations, California and U.S. law. The OCB provides peer and community review of a RSO when conduct problems are reported. The OCB conducts hearings, determines facts, and makes recommendations to the associate vice provost and dean of students with respect to possible administrative actions to be taken.

Philosophy

The Fundamental Standard has set the standard of conduct for individual students at Stanford since 1896 and embodies the values and definition of good university citizenship. By extension, these guiding principles of acceptable behavior and civility are applicable to every RSO. In addition, the university policies that have grown out of the original Fundamental Standard apply not only to individuals, but also to RSO groups and their members in the spirit of collective responsibility.

The OCB process is intended to be educational and administrative in nature. Each panel will identify behavioral problems and issues in the case before it, thereby reinforcing institutional expectations, and will provide advice and guidance to help the RSO self-correct behavioral problems.

Jurisdiction

The OCB is a committee, run by the Office of Community Standards, under the auspices of the associate vice provost and dean of students. It conducts hearings regarding incidents of alleged misconduct by any registered student organization (RSO) (including voluntary student organizations, fraternities and sororities). Each OCB Panel will review the investigative reports and the RSO responses and in the hearing may ask questions of individuals who have knowledge of the alleged misconduct.

While many conduct issues involving a RSO will be forwarded to the OCB, there may be occasions when the matter is referred to another, more appropriate, university entity for resolution, including to the associate vice provost and dean of students. The OCB’s jurisdiction includes both on- and off-campus RSO activities and events.

Formal Process

The goal is to complete a case within a reasonable time frame after a complaint is filed. This time frame does not include the summer term, intercessions, or the end of quarter period, and may be extended for reasonable cause. The procedural steps are as follows:

  1. The process is initiated by a written complaint, which can be filed by an individual or group, with the belief that a RSO has violated either the letter or spirit of the Fundamental Standard or applicable laws/regulations.
  2. The complaint is submitted (physically or electronically) to the Office of Community Standards (OCS), whether originating from an individual, group, or Stanford office.
  3. As soon thereafter as reasonably feasible, the OCS notifies the leadership of the RSO of the nature of the complaint, the name of the person who will conduct the investigation, and an estimated time within which the investigation will be completed.
  4. The investigator(s) conducts interviews with and/or requests responses to written questions regarding the issues and allegations raised in the complaint from any individual reasonably believed to have relevant information.
  5. The investigator(s) completes review and provides an Investigative Report to the OCS.
  6. After receiving the Investigative Report, the OCS determines (1) whether there is sufficient cause and evidence of a violation to warrant a referral of the matter to a formal, regularly-constituted five member OCB Panel [see below] or (2) whether to refer the matter to a more appropriate university office for action.
    • In either case, the OCS shall notify the RSO as soon thereafter as reasonably feasible as to the decided course of action and will provide it with a copy of the Investigative Report.
  7. The RSO submits its written response to the OCS within 10 business days or as soon after notification as reasonably feasible.
    • If an OCB review is deemed unnecessary or inappropriate, the associate vice provost and dean of students and/or OCS will decide on a course of action after reviewing the Investigative Report, and notify the complainant and RSO of the decision.
  8. The OCS sets a review date, time, and place for convening an OCB panel as soon as possible following receipt of the RSO’s response, and notifies all relevant participants that their presence will be required.
  9. Panelists review the Investigative Report, question or hear from all witnesses they deem necessary and relevant, and decide by majority vote whether it is more likely than not that the RSO violated university policy. Panel deliberations shall be conducted in closed session.
    • In the event that the RSO disputes the investigative findings, the panel will be asked to consider: a) areas of agreement/disagreement in the findings, and b) the “reasonable person standard.”
    • In the event that the RSO does not dispute the findings of the case, the panel will be asked to determine whether or not the facts presented constitute a violation of university policy and practices or group conduct standards. If the Panel determines that a violation has occurred, the Panel will move to the recommendation phase.
  10. If panelists conclude a violation occurred, they submit written recommendations to the associate vice provost and dean of students regarding administrative action(s) commensurate with the violation and in accordance with precedent. Recommendations to the associate vice provost and dean of students are advisory in nature, not prescriptive.
    • The associate vice provost and dean of students may accept, reject, and/or modify the recommendations in whole or in part. The associate vice provost and dean of students shall notify the RSO in writing of his/her decision as soon thereafter as reasonably feasible.
    • The RSO shall have the right to petition the vice provost for student affairs (VPSA) for reconsideration of the administrative actions imposed by the associate vice provost and dean of students, but may not contest the finding of a violation(s). The RSO must submit such a petition as soon thereafter as reasonably feasible. The petition must give reasons why the RSO believes the administrative action are incorrect, and may not be based on dissatisfaction with the university policy.
    • The VPSA may agree or decline to entertain the petition. In either case, this decision shall be transmitted to the RSO, Complainant, associate vice provost and dean of students, and the OCS within 10 business days or as soon thereafter as reasonably feasible. If the petition is rejected, the matter is closed, subject to #12 below. If the petition is accepted, the VPSA may designate a staff member unassociated with the underlying matter to review the case, and, if necessary, interview witnesses to clarify ambiguities. The OCS shall have the opportunity to respond in writing to the petition. The review shall be done as expeditiously as possible, and the VPSA’s decision communicated to the RSO, associate vice provost and dean of students, and the OCS as soon thereafter as reasonably feasible. The matter is then closed, subject to #12 below.
  11. Prior to close, subject to #12 below, if OCS staff or other university staff should be made aware of additional information a case may be re-opened for further investigation.
  12. The case closes officially when the RSO has completely satisfied the administrative actions imposed against it and submitted documentation to this effect to the associate vice provost and dean of students and OCS.

Examples of Conduct Problems for Registered Student Organizations

Situations that have been and/or should be reported to the OCB include (but are not limited to):

  1. Incidents of hazing.
  2. Poorly planned and/or poorly executed parties that go beyond their original scope.
  3. Serving alcoholic beverages to minors or allowing the consumption of alcohol without providing proper identification of proof of age.
  4. Having parties that do not conform to University and Party Planning Guidelines.
  5. Damage and/or theft of services and/or property.
  6. Forging signatures on Purchase Orders, Check Requests, Journal Transfers, Payroll Requests and other university forms.
  7. Deliberately listing a non-student as an Authorized Representative or Financial Officer.
  8. Issuing invalid Purchase Orders to vendors.
  9. Signing the name of another Stanford student on behalf of the organization without specific prior consent.
  10. General violations of university policies, including campus posting and distribution regulations, noise complaints, course disruption, alcohol and/or illegal substance violations, etc.

Administrative actions recommended by the OCB and/or imposed by the associate vice provost and dean of students have included mandated training and orientation activities; loss of event privileges such as parties (with or without alcohol); probation; fines; and loss of university recognition for RSO.

Adopted 01/2009