“The resolution agreement doesn’t have teeth,” Bruno said. “It’s an enforcement mechanism, but it’s a letter—and it’s a letter that comes out four plus years later, when 50 percent or more of the things have been changed.”
OCR investigators came to campus in the fall of 2014 to conduct a series of interviews. In an emailed statement Thursday, members of Our Harvard Can Do Better declined to disclose whether they have communicated with investigators since then.
Department of Education spokesperson Jim Bradshaw declined to comment on the progress of the investigation, which he said is ongoing. “As a policy, OCR does not discuss the details of its current investigations,” he wrote in an email this week.
Bruno said OCR investigations often drag on for years—one looking into a complaint she worked on against Tufts University lasted four.
“They drag on so long that it no longer benefits an individual complainant to file—unless the complainant is interested in the grand scheme of the policy,” Bruno said. “If the complainant is interested in individual remedies, then filing a Title IX complaint with OCR is futile.”
The two students who filed the complaint—and as well as the 10 students who provided testimony—have likely since left Harvard. And some of the charges in the complaint have essentially become moot as the University has reformed its practices.
But Our Harvard Can Do Better members Amelia Y. Goldberg ’19, Sarah M. Ryan ’20, and Julia M. Huesa ’20 pointed to several grievances in the complaint that Harvard has yet to address—specifically, the need for additional accommodations for students who have been sexually assaulted, the lack of “affirmative consent” standard, and adhering to the 60-day timeline for investigations.
A committee chaired by Biology professor and former Dean of the College Donald H. Pfister has been reviewing the current policy since Jan. 2016. Last spring, Pfister said the group had discussed the “affirmative consent” standard.
Harvard spokesperson Tania DeLuzuriaga declined to comment on the substance of the 2014 complaint, referring The Crimson to the University’s Title IX FAQs and resource guide.
As the federal probe continues, though, federal Title IX guidelines could change under Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, who announced last week that she intends to review existing policies. Onyeka-Crawford said that current OCR investigations should, theoretically, continue as usual.
Goldberg, Ryan, and Huesa said that a decision by DeVos to scrap the 2011 Dear Colleague letter should not lessen the University’s duty to mitigate sexual assault.
“Even if Betsy DeVos rejects these guidelines, Title IX remains federal law, and it is our understanding that Harvard has an obligation under this law to improve its policies and practices regarding sexual and gender-based violence,” they wrote in a statement.
Pfister said his committee is watching federal developments “closely.”
—Staff writer Claire E. Parker can be reached at claire.parker@thecrimson.com. Follow her on Twitter @ClaireParkerDC.