Iowa Admin. Code r. 161-3.12 - Administrative review and closure
(1)
Preliminary screening.
a.
Questionnaire. As soon as practicable after receipt of a
complaint, the commission may draft and mail to the parties written
questionnaires. Respondent and complainant may respond via regular, certified
or local mail, electronic mail, or online via the commission's case management
system. Complainant and respondent will receive different sets of questions as
the complainant and respondent typically have different items of information
and different interpretations of the facts. The questionnaire will be as
specific as practicable to the particular complaint.
b.
Responses to the
questionnaire.
(1) Respondent and
complainant are required to respond in writing to their respective
questionnaires. The answers ordinarily should be responsive to the questions
asked, though elaboration is encouraged. If a question does not apply, the
responder can so indicate. In lieu of answers responsive to the particular
questions, the commission will accept written position statements, provided the
statements respond to the allegations. The position statements should cover the
same general subject areas covered by the questionnaire. Accompanying
supportive evidence is required, including application materials, job
descriptions, organizational charts, selection procedures, policies,
procedures, employee handbooks, job descriptions, signed statements from
witnesses, performance evaluations, discipline records. E-mails, photographs,
internal investigation records, and other documents that are relevant. The
documents should encompass how the complainant was treated and how persons
similarly situated to the complainant were treated.
(2) Responses are due 30 days from the
mailing of the questionnaire. Extensions will be granted on an informal basis.
Requests for extensions may be oral and may be granted or denied orally. No
notice of the request for an extension or of the disposition of that request
need be given to the nonrequesting party. A requesting party may assume the
extension is approved unless otherwise notified. Requests for extensions may be
granted for 30 days or less. Extensions greater than 30 days may be subject to
review by the executive director or designee. The legislature encourages
preliminary screening to be completed within 120 days of the filing of the
complaint; therefore, requests for extensions are strongly discouraged. A
request for an extension by a party shall constitute a waiver by that party of
any objection to the commission taking longer than the 120-day period to screen
the complaint.
c.
Failure to respond.
(1)
Complainant. A complaint may be administratively closed when a complainant
fails to respond to the questionnaire.
(2) Respondent. A complaint may be screened
in and assigned to investigation when a respondent fails to respond to the
questionnaire. Also, information may be sought pursuant to the commission's
subpoena procedures.
d.
Suggested procedure in answering questionnaire. Answers should
be as clear and as precise as possible. Answers too long to be placed on the
questionnaire itself should be numbered by part and question number and placed
on a separate sheet. The parties are encouraged to submit as much supporting
documentation as possible including affidavits of witnesses and documentation
of treatment of individuals comparable to the complainant. Where not readily
apparent, the significance of the submitted supporting documentation should be
explained. This may be done through an answer that refers the commission to a
particular item of the submitted supporting documentation.
e.
Preliminary screening
process. As soon as practicable after the receipt of all materials
responsive to the questionnaires, the executive director or designee shall
review the submitted answers and materials. The executive director or designee
shall then determine whether the case will be "screened in" as warranting
further processing or "screened out" as not warranting further
investigation.
f.
Standard
for screening. A case will be screened in when further processing is
warranted. Further processing is warranted when the collected information
indicates a reasonable possibility of a probable cause determination or the
legal issues in the complaint need development.
g.
Effect of screen out. A
complaint determined not to warrant further processing shall be
administratively closed.
h.
Effect of failure to follow screening procedure. Preliminary
screening is a tool to remove from the commission's active complaints those
cases which the collected preliminary information indicates do not warrant
further processing. Irregularities in the preliminary screening of a complaint,
failure to complete preliminary screening within 120 days of the filing of the
complaint, or failure to follow the preliminary screening procedure altogether
shall not, by itself, in any way prejudice the rights of either
party.
(2)
Periodic review and administrative closure.
a.
Periodic evaluation of
evidence. The executive director or designee may periodically review
the complaint to determine whether further processing is warranted. Where the
periodic review occurs prior to the determination of whether there is probable
cause, then processing is warranted when the collected information indicates a
reasonable possibility of a probable cause determination or the legal issues in
the complaint need development. A complaint determined not to warrant further
processing shall be administratively closed.
b.
Uncooperative complainant.
A complaint may be administratively closed at any time if the
complainant cannot be contacted after diligent efforts or is uncooperative,
causing unreasonable delay in the processing of the complaint.
c.
Involuntary satisfactory
adjustment. A complaint may be closed as satisfactorily adjusted when
the respondent has made an offer of adjustment acceptable to the executive
director or designee but not to the complainant. Notice of intended closure
shall state reasons for closure and shall be mailed to the complainant. The
complainant shall be allowed 30 days to respond. The response shall be in
writing and state the reasons why the complaint should remain open. The
executive director or designee shall review and consider the response before
making a closure decision.
d.
Litigation review. The complaint may be administratively
closed after a probable cause determination has been made where it is
determined that the record does not justify proceeding to public
hearing.
(3)
Purpose and effect of administrative closures. An
administrative closure need not be made as a result of the procedures governing
a determination of whether there is probable cause. Unlike a "no probable cause
determination" an administrative closure is not a final determination of the
merits of the case. An administrative closure resulting from preliminary
screening is merely an estimation of the probable merits of the case based on
the experience and expertise of the commission. An administrative closure does
not have the same effect as a determination of "no probable cause."
Notes
State regulations are updated quarterly; we currently have two versions available. Below is a comparison between our most recent version and the prior quarterly release. More comparison features will be added as we have more versions to compare.
No prior version found.