Frequently Asked Questions

For community members who are evaluating whether a given situation falls under Berklee’s equity policy, the Equity Leadership Team first wants you to know that, when in doubt, community members should report incidents so the specific situation can be evaluated. Berklee employees are required to report information to the chief equity officer/Title IX coordinator, unless the employee who received the information is acting as a licensed mental health clinician.

If you’re trying to determine if a specific incident might be under Berklee’s equity policy, this guide can help. For people with impaired vision, a written narrative of the chart’s content is below the chart.

Download "Is It Equity?" (947kb PDF)

Written narrative for those who are visually impaired or others who prefer this format:

In determining whether or not a particular incident is equity related, an initial question is, “Does the incident involve discrimination, harassment, or sexual misconduct, including sexual assault/harassment, relationship abuse, or stalking?” If not, then the incident is probably not equity. The incident may violate laws or other Berklee regulations, however. In these cases, we refer the matter to Student Affairs or Human Resources for the most appropriate follow-up.

If the incident, as reported, does involve discrimination, harassment, or sexual misconduct, then it’s important to ask, “Did the behavior occur or appear to occur because of a characteristic protected under Berklee’s equity policy?” If not, then the incident probably doesn’t fall under the equity policy. Again, we would refer the matter to another venue for the most appropriate follow-up.

If the incident, as reported, may have occurred because of a protected characteristic, then we consider, “Did the incident involve a Berklee student, faculty, staff member, program, or event, either as the affected party or as the accused?” If not, it’s probably not an equity case. Again, we would still review it and make a referral for the most appropriate follow-up.

If the answer to all three of these questions is yes, then the incident likely should be addressed through the equity policy. Community members should report this incident to the chief equity officer. The report should be taken seriously, and resources (including those listed here) should be offered to all those involved. The information should be reported to:

Community members should remember the following points:

• Don’t ask questions of the person who disclosed; just help them and report what you know.
• Berklee’s policy does not limit when someone can file a report on an incident.
• Berklee’s policy addresses incidents that occur off-campus and online.

Berklee’s equity policy lists the following protected characteristics: age, ancestry, color, disability, gender, gender identity, genetic information, marital status, mental illness, military/veteran status, national origin/ethnicity, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, transgender status, and any other characteristic protected by law, whether that characteristic is actual or perceived.

It is against the law and/or Berklee policy to discriminate against someone based on the following:

• Age
• Ancestry
• Disability
• Ethnic/national origin
• Gender
• Gender identity/expression
• Genetic information
• Marital status
• Military/veteran status
• Pregnancy
• Race
• Religion
• Sex
• Sexual orientation
• Transgender status
• Any other characteristic protected by law, whether that characteristic is actual or perceived

Berklee’s equity system responds to all reports of discrimination, harassment, or sexual misconduct that occur on the basis of any legally protected characteristic.

Whether you experienced an equity incident or are reporting about someone else’s experience, you may wonder what will happen after the chief equity officer/Title IX coordinator receives the report. Every report is assessed and responded to individually, and this chart provides an outline of how Berklee’s equity leadership team generally responds to and reviews such reports. For people with impaired vision, a written narrative of the chart’s content is below the chart.

Download "How Berklee Addresses Equity Reports" (955kb PDF)

Visit the equity system Resources page to learn about what incidents might be equity-related, what resources are available, and more details about Berklee’s equity system.

Written narrative for those who are visually impaired or others who prefer this format:

When an equity report is submitted, every report is evaluated individually. What’s described here is Berklee’s typical method for assessing and responding to reports.

All reports go to the chief equity officer/Title IX coordinator for that person’s initial review to determine, among other matters, whether or not the report is actually equity related. At Berklee, the chief equity officer/Title IX coordinator is Kelly Downes, who can be reached at equity@berklee.edu and 617-747-3156.

Even if the report is not equity related, it still receives an appropriate response and follow-up, which is evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

If the initial review indicates the case is probably equity related, then the deputy for intake, support, and advising assigns an intake officer. That intake officer reaches out to the reporting party via email and invites that person to an intake meeting, in which the reporting party can learn more about support resources and options. The accused person (respondent) may also receive an intake invitation, depending upon the nature of the initial report and whether the respondent has already been contacted.

If that email receives no reply, then the intake officer follows up with one additional email. That second email says that the invitation to an intake meeting exists indefinitely. That email also provides some basic information about resources and options, as well as the equity policy. All of this is documented in case the reporting party decides to pursue the case in the future.

If the person does respond to the intake invitation, the intake meeting occurs. During this meeting, the intake officer provides more information about resources and support options, as well as potential responses and follow-up to the case. The reporting party can use this as a chance to provide more information about the incident, but they don’t have to.

Following that intake meeting, appropriate support measures are provided to all parties. Those support measures can include counseling; no-contact orders; adjustments to work, living, or academic arrangements; and so on. The goal of these measures is to help people involved in an equity case focus on their day-to-day routine and goals.

During and after the intake meeting, people can request particular steps from Berklee, including informal resolution, formal resolution (investigation), support measures only, and/or assistance reporting to law enforcement.

Intake information, support measures, and requests for particular steps from Berklee are all documented and submitted to the chief equity officer/Title IX coordinator. That person determines appropriate next steps based on the nature of the report, the reporting party’s wishes, the risk to the community, and other factors.

Once those next steps are determined, the equity team communicates the steps back to the involved parties, who can then choose their level of participation in those next steps.

Finally, the Equity Leadership Team monitors trends in reports (without identifying details) to evaluate the need for systemic prevention and education.

For Berklee, reports of discrimination, harassment, and sexual misconduct, handled through the equity system, are among the most serious issues we address. These are also very challenging for both those accused (respondents) and those who make reports (complainants), and Berklee takes seriously our obligation to provide support and resources to anyone who is involved in an equity process.

When we provide these support measures, Berklee’s equity team always considers the following factors:

• What will help the complainant and respondent focus on their day-to-day routine and larger goals during what may be a difficult time? Our focus is always on maintaining as much normalcy as possible and requested for the complainant and respondent following the report. We evaluate these needs individually in every case.
• In what ways can we provide support measures to people while preserving as much privacy as possible, based on their requests? Often, complainants and respondents receive support measures that no one else knows about, including the other people involved with the case.
• In what ways can we provide support resources that minimally disrupt all daily routines and goals while at Berklee? We take seriously our responsibility to consider the impact of support measures, and we strive to implement support measures that don’t negatively or unfairly impact anyone.
• How can we implement support measures that take seriously reports of discrimination, harassment, and sexual misconduct while still preserving due process for everyone concerned? Support measures are often implemented very quickly after a report is made and before any investigation occurs or determination is made. We want to be sure that everyone’s rights are maintained during this period before Berklee reaches any conclusion about whether or not policy was violated.
• What steps can we take to stop the reported behavior, minimize the effects, and prevent the behavior from happening again? Whether or not the behavior occurred as described in the report, Berklee can often take systemic steps to reduce the incidents in the present and future.
• How long should support measures continue? Some support measures continue indefinitely, even if the outcome of an investigations does not find evidence that a violation occurred. Others are very brief. As always, we evaluate these on a case-by-case basis.

When someone reports an equity violation, Berklee’s equity team reaches out to them and offers an initial intake meeting. This meeting is a chance to learn more about resources and options. These are some of the support measures that are typically discussed during these meetings. They are instituted if appropriate and if requested by someone in an equity process.

• Confidential Support: The Office of Health and Wellness, housing both Counseling Services and Survivor Advocacy Services, is available to all students, and the Employee Assistance Program is available to all employees. During intake meetings, we assist people in considering what counseling or survivor advocacy options, if any, will be helpful for them. 
• No-contact orders: Typically a directive from Berklee that applies equally to both complainants and respondents, no-contact orders require that they mutually avoid communication with each other, including by electronic and third-party means. This does not necessarily require that they maintain any physical distance from each other. On a case-by-case basis, we review whether people can work, take classes, or otherwise interact in the same physical space. If someone violates this order, they will be subject to additional policy violation processes.
• Alterations to work or class schedules/locations: Berklee’s equity team can assist with changes to work or class schedules and locations that help people avoid unwanted or prohibited contact while still pursuing academic and work goals.
• Changes to housing assignments: For students, we consider whether a change of housing assignment may be appropriate and helpful.
• Academic/workplace support: Berklee’s equity team can reach out to faculty, letting them know that a student is managing a difficult personal matter and may request some flexibility managing academic expectations. Following that, students and faculty usually directly interact to manage those issues while still preserving the integrity and fairness of academic expectations. For employees, a similar option exists to reach out to supervisors.
• Campus no-trespass orders and harassment prevention orders: These orders are issued by law enforcement and civil courts, respectively. Unlike no-contact orders, these are not typically mutually applied, and those who violate them may be arrested. Berklee Public Safety can assist complainants and respondents in navigating those systems and expectations.
• Interim removal: This is not a typical response, but Berklee does have the option to remove a respondent from campus temporarily while the case is being resolved. This is reserved for matters that indicate a serious, likely, and immediate risk to the community. In these instances, we strive to resolve the case as quickly as possible with a permanent outcome.
• Other measures: We consider any measure that people request to help them focus on their day-to-day routine and goals at Berklee.

For more information, visit our Equity and Title IX page.

Download "Berklee Equity Reporting and Support Process" (944kb PDF)

Written narrative for those who are visually impaired or others who prefer this format:

When an equity report is submitted, every report is evaluated individually. What’s described here is Berklee’s typical method for assessing and responding to reports.

All reports go to the chief equity officer/Title IX coordinator for that person’s initial review to determine, among other matters, whether or not the report is actually equity related. At Berklee, the chief equity officer/Title IX coordinator is Kelly Downes, who can be reached at equity@berklee.edu and 617-747-3156.

Even if the report is not equity related, it still receives an appropriate response and follow-up, which is evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

If the initial review indicates the case is probably equity related, then the deputy for intake, support, and advising assigns an intake officer. That intake officer reaches out to the reporting party via email and invites that person to an intake meeting, in which the reporting party can learn more about support resources and options. The accused person (respondent) may also receive an intake invitation, depending upon the nature of the initial report and whether the respondent has already been contacted.

If that email receives no reply, then the intake officer follows up with one additional email. That second email says that the invitation to an intake meeting exists indefinitely. That email also provides some basic information about resources and options, as well as the equity policy. All of this is documented in case the reporting party decides to pursue the case in the future.

If the person does respond to the intake invitation, the intake meeting occurs. During this meeting, the intake officer provides more information about resources and support options, as well as potential responses and follow-up to the case. The reporting party can use this as a chance to provide more information about the incident, but they don’t have to.

Following that intake meeting, appropriate support measures are provided to all parties. Those support measures can include counseling; no-contact orders; adjustments to work, living, or academic arrangements; and so on. The goal of these measures is to help people involved in an equity case focus on their day-to-day routine and goals.

During and after the intake meeting, people can request particular steps from Berklee, including informal resolution, formal resolution (investigation), support measures only, and/or assistance reporting to law enforcement.

Intake information, support measures, and requests for particular steps from Berklee are all documented and submitted to the chief equity officer/Title IX coordinator. That person determines appropriate next steps based on the nature of the report, the reporting party’s wishes, the risk to the community, and other factors.

Once those next steps are determined, the equity team communicates the steps back to the involved parties, who can then choose their level of participation in those next steps.

Finally, the Equity Leadership Team monitors trends in reports (without identifying details) to evaluate the need for systemic prevention and education.

To report an equity violation and request support, contact:

Berklee’s equity policy prohibits discrimination, harassment, and sexual misconduct that occurs on the basis of any one of 18 different protected characteristics. When in doubt about whether or not a particular situation is an equity violation, we encourage people to report that information so that we can learn more, make an assessment, and respond appropriately.

A key question in evaluating reports of harassment is whether the behavior that’s described goes beyond being offensive to also being harassment. Regardless, we address the report seriously and provide resources and follow-up. The difference is that offensive behavior, by itself, is not a violation of Berklee’s policy. That does not make offensive behavior okay, but it does involve a different response. The institution has many ways to address behavior that is separate from the equity process. Some matters can be addressed through the Office of Community Standards or through Human Resources.

To determine whether reported incidents are only offensive or are also harassment, we consider the totality of the situation, with these key questions in mind:

• How serious was the behavior?
  In some ways, this question is problematic because what one person might perceive as very serious, another person might perceive as very minor. So this is not the only question that we ask. Generally speaking, verbal behavior will be considered less serious than harm to property, which will be considered less serious than physical harm to people. In general, the more serious an incident, the more likely that it will be viewed as harassment, even if it was only a one-time incident. On the other hand, a series of “less serious” incidents could meet the level of harassing behavior, even if no single incident would have done so. That leads to the next question.
• How persistent was the behavior?
  As noted above, even if only one incident occurs, if it’s serious enough (for example, physical and/or sexual assault), it might be considered harassment. If the behavior is less serious, it might still be considered harassment if it persisted. That could be true even if the person who experienced the behavior never asked the other person to change or stop.
• How pervasive was the behavior?
  In considering this question, we are trying to understand how thoroughly this impacted people. Could they reasonably avoid or ignore the behavior? For example, a comment someone overhears in passing is potentially an incident that does not interfere in their daily life in any pervasive way. On the other hand, a comment or type of comment made repeatedly in a classroom or work environment (where attendance and participation is expected) likely has a much more pervasive effect on someone’s life.
• What effect did the behavior have on people’s ability to pursue their educational, performance, and work opportunities?
  The civil rights laws on which Berklee bases its equity policy focus on providing equitable access to living, learning, and working environments. When behavior makes it harder for people to access or succeed in programs and opportunities at Berklee, that’s an indicator that the situation may have gone beyond offensive to become harassment and a violation of policy. For example, offensive behavior by a teacher or a supervisor is more likely to be harassing than identical behavior by a fellow student or colleague because the teacher and supervisor are more likely to be able to impact someone’s pursuit of work and education. However, behavior by a peer can still be harassing, as can behavior by someone in a position of less power (for example, a student can harass a teacher).
• Was any person or group of people directly targeted or affected by the behavior? If so, how did they perceive the behavior?
  People can report and receive a response to behavior that doesn’t directly target them, and we also always try and work with those most directly impacted. To a certain extent, harassment is in the eye of those affected. If, for example, two people are talking and a third person is overhearing the conversation, it’s possible that the third person would hear something and be offended and report that. In those situations, we would work with the person who made the report and also try to directly contact the person to whom the comment was directed. We would want to learn whether or not that person perceived the comment as harassing or offensive. If they didn’t perceive it as harassing, that makes it less likely that we would determine the behavior to have been harassment.
• How would a “reasonable" person in a similar situation to those who experienced the behavior perceive that behavior?
  Occasionally, people make a comment along the lines of “anyone can be offended by anything.” That may be true, and it’s one of the reasons that “harassment” as defined by Berklee’s equity policy goes beyond something being offensive. Part of that is asking not just what one person thinks, but also whether or not a theoretical “reasonable” person would have the same opinion.

Finally, sometimes an incident is harassment, but it doesn’t occur on the basis of a protected characteristic, which means that it doesn’t violate the equity policy. When we receive reports like that, they can still be addressed, but it's done through means other than the equity policy. We typically refer those to either the Human Resources Department or student conduct, depending upon the affiliation of the accused person.

To make an equity report, visit our Equity and Title IX page to learn more or contact:

Berklee takes seriously and responds to every reported equity violation we receive. However, that response does not always include a full, formal investigation. Every report is reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and Berklee considers many different ways of addressing the report.

Even if Berklee does not resolve a case by a full, formal investigation, we always seek to stop the reported behavior, minimize the negative impact that behavior has on others, and prevent that behavior from happening again. In working towards those goals, Berklee considers many options for responding, some of which can occur in addition to a full, formal investigation.

Below are some of the possible response methods, and multiple methods may be implemented in a given case:

• Support measures only
• Informal resolution (could include mediation, educational interventions, coaching, and other means of addressing the concerns)
• Formal investigation through Berklee
• Formal investigation through law enforcement (reporting parties can choose to work with Berklee, law enforcement, both, or neither)

In determining the methods for responding to the report, Berklee considers the following questions, the totality of the situation, and other factors specific to the report. Note that no list of questions could be comprehensive in outlining how we consider each case. This list is intended to help inform community members about some of the considerations that go into the decision about how to manage an equity report.

What is the nature of the report?

This question encompasses a variety of issues, including the details of the reported behavior, how the people in the report are connected to Berklee (if at all), and how the report was received.

• If the report involves an act of violence, including sexual violence, that report will not be addressed through mediation.
• If the accused person is affiliated with Berklee, that gives Berklee a greater ability to address the matter through our own policies. If the accused person is affiliated with another college/university, we may be able to work with officials there to address the behavior. In both of those cases, the people who report can choose to work with law enforcement in addition to or instead of Berklee.
• If the accused is not affiliated with Berklee, we can still take steps to address the incident and support those reporting. In those circumstances, holding someone accountable might involve working with law enforcement processes rather than Berklee's internal processes.

Sometimes, the reported behavior is very concerning but not actually a violation of the equity policy. In that case, an investigation is not appropriate because investigations are designed to determine whether or not a policy violation occurred. In those situations, Berklee can still take corrective action to address the situation, just not from the perspective of a policy violation.

Finally, while Berklee does accept anonymous equity reports, anonymous reporting can significantly limit Berklee’s ability to take action on the report because we may not be able to follow up and learn sufficient information.

What are the wishes of the complainant/reporting party?

Ultimately, Berklee is responsible for making a determination about the most effective and appropriate response to any report. A significant factor in that determination is the wishes of those reporting and/or affected by the incident. For example, sometimes people make reports about people with whom they share a class, a living arrangement, a workplace, or an intimate relationship, and that connection impacts how people would like the incident addressed. In those situations, we work to address concerns about safety and retaliation in order to support the person who has reported. Sometimes the reporting party wants the opportunity to have a mediation and structured conversation so they can directly address their concerns. Sometimes the reporting party does not want the accused punished but wants to focus on steps that will stop the behavior. All of these are requests that Berklee can consider as we develop the best response to a particular situation.

How would the reporting party like to participate, if at all?

Regardless of the response Berklee chooses, those who report and those who are accused are not required to participate in our process. Sometimes reporting parties want to participate in a case. In other situations and for a variety of reasons, reporting parties decide not to participate in an investigation. Additionally, sometimes reporting parties don’t want to participate in an investigation, but they are willing to be identified to the responding party. Depending upon the nature of the case, it may be impossible to proceed with a formal investigation without the reporting party’s participation or without identifying them. If the reporting party chooses not to participate, the next two questions become particularly important.

What information is available?

Sometimes, we receive reports that are very detailed and provide a lot of evidence about the incident. In those situations, even if the reporting party doesn’t wish to participate in an investigation, we may have enough information to proceed. Other times, we receive more basic information. In those situations, Berklee might be able to support the reporting party but not conduct an investigation. We respond to every report as thoroughly as possible, but when key information is not available, that may make it impossible to proceed with an investigation.

Are others aware of the incident?

If the reporting party doesn’t want to participate, we often consider whether or not anyone else might have sufficient information about the incident. Sometimes incidents take place in very private settings when no one else would have information. In those cases, it’s very difficult to proceed without the participation of the reporting party. Other times, incidents take place in a relatively public setting, and lots of other people have information. In those situations, we consider whether or not we have enough information to proceed and how doing so would affect the initial reporting party.

What is the risk to the Berklee community, including the complainant/reporting party?

In addition to the issues above, one of Berklee’s obligations is to consider the likely risk to the larger community. In assessing this, we consider all the questions above as well as questions like how easily the accused can access the community, how likely they are to repeat the behavior with others, and other specifics of the report. Sometimes Berklee’s obligation to respond and uphold the safety of the community conflicts with the reporting party’s wishes that Berklee take no action. In the rare circumstances where we need to proceed against the wishes of the reporting party, we work with the reporting party to be sure that they receive support resources, can implement any safety plans, and are protected against future incidents, including retaliation.

Every case is different, so there is no absolute checklist of when we do and do not conduct a formal investigation of a report. If you would like to learn more or make a report, you can visit our Equity and Title IX page to learn more, or contact: