text:
Q: How to validate 4 digit USA zip code? I want to validate USA zip codes and I have used these regex:
/(^\d{5}$)|(^\d{5}-\d{4}$)/.test(value); //First
/^\b\d{5}(-\d{4})?\b$/.test(value); //Second
/^\d{5}(-\d{4})?(?!-)$/.test(value); //Third
/^\d{5}(?:[-\s]\d{4})?$/.test(value); //Fourth

I tested here, here, and here that the USA zip codes start at 1001. Apparently, using either of the regex above accepts "00000" because it has 5 digits?
Ultimately, I want it to accept 4 digits zip code that starts in 1001. Is my regex correct?

A: A ZIP code is not a number. 01001 and 00501 are valid ZIP codes. 1001 and 501 are not valid ZIP codes. A three- or four-digit number is never a valid ZIP code.
It seems like you're trying to solve the problem of validating a ZIP code after its leading zeroes have been dropped because it was converted to a number, when the problem you should be solving is preventing the ZIP code from being converted to a number in the first place. Leading zeroes in a ZIP code are significant, and if some part of your app strips them, that's the part you need to fix. A ZIP code is not a number.
As @Ultimater wrote above, if the user enters fewer than five digits, it should be rejected, with a gentle reminder that they need to enter either five or nine digits. If for some reason part of your app is converting ZIP codes to numbers and you can't fix that part, then when you do validation you should first convert the number to a string and pad it with zeroes until you have five digits. Don't try to make your validation work with three- and four- digit numbers, because those are never valid ZIP codes.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Bruno Kernen may refer to:

Bruno Kernen (born 1961), Swiss alpine skier who won the Kitzbühel downhill race in 1983
Bruno Kernen (born 1972), world champion Swiss alpine skier

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Kim Jong-un bans leather coats to stop citizens stealing his drip
Police are cracking down on an 'impure trend' of imitating the North Korean leader, following the country's ban on mullets and skinny jeans
Once again, North Korea's fashion police are out in force, as Kim Jong-un bans the country's citizens from wearing leather coats in efforts to imitate his personal style (KKW isn't the only Kim that's been making waves with her leather lewks, it seems).
In case you haven't been keeping up with what's hot or not in North Korea, the new crackdown follows a blanket ban on mullets and skinny jeans brought into effect earlier this year. That itself was part of a broader pushback against the "exotic and decadent" influence of capitalism (which also saw the leader declare K-pop a "vicious cancer"). This time around, however, the reasons behind the ban appear to be more personal.
Though leather jackets have been popular in North Korea since at least the early 2000s, the trench coat variation became popular among the masses when Kim Jong-un wore one for a TV appearance back in 2019. According to Radio Free Asia, rich people quickly snapped up real leather coats imported from China, before North Korean garment makers began making cheaper copies out of faux leather.
This year, another TV appearance by Kim and a selection of leather-clad officials cemented the trend, a Pyongsong resident tells RFA in an anonymous statement. "During the military parade at the 8th Party Congress in January of this year, the Highest Dignity and all the high-ranking officials were shown wearing leather coats," they say.
Ugly Big Thing: fast fashion brand PLT introduces a 100% discount
George at Asda announces a sale of… archival Gucci?
Of course Wednesday Addams is a Marc Jacobs girl
Timberland's innovative GreenStride Edge Boot is ready for anything
This gathering of officials reportedly included several powerful women, such as Kim Jong Un's sister (and potential successor) Kim Yo-jong. "So now the leather coat has become a symbol for powerful women too." Apparently, the Supreme Leader isn't a fan of of ordinary citizens stealing his fave look, however — hence, the countrywide ban.
Authorities say that wearing clothes designed to look like Kim Jong-un's is an "impure trend to challenge the authority of the Highest Dignity", according to the North Korean source. "They instructed the public not to wear leather coats, because it is part of the party's directive to decide who can wear them."
A second source explains that police have targeted both the designers of the coats and citizens that are seen showing off their Kim Jong-un-inspired drip. "When these leather coats became popular, the law enforcement authorities went after the companies that made the coats that look too much like the Highest Dignity's," they say. "They also go after people wearing them in public."
"Residents protest against the crackdown asking how there could be anything impure about the choice to wear a leather coat."
Earlier this week (November 23), it was also reported that North Korean authorities have sentenced a man to death for smuggling copies of the Netflix hit Squid Game into the country on illegal flash drives. Several students who were caught watching the series also face jail time, RFA reports, though some experts doubt that the show could have breached the country's borders amid a harsh foreign media crackdown.
opinions about him aside, kim jong un is without a doubt the best dressed leader of any country right now, just absolute levels of drip pic.twitter.com/cCjsGwJJXe
— meuw (@meowmeowmia) November 26, 2021

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Profoto's B2 Off-Camera Flash System Goes to the Oscars
Written by: Harley Anderson
LA-based celebrity, portrait and editorial shooter Matt Sayles has for the last years been photographing the three days of the Oscar pre-show rehearsals and all the events leading up to the big night. What was unique this year was that he was the first photographer at the Oscars with the brand new B2 Off-Camera Flash in his hands.
Long before opening night, Broadway shows are typically rehearsed and previewed out-of-town in order to work the bugs out of the in cities that social and mass media aside, are well beyond the eyes, ears, and lights of Broadway. Wedding ceremonies and similar social venues are also often rehearsed in advance of the big day.
Same holds true for the Academy Awards despite the fact they invariably run overtime. During the three days leading up to the evening of the award ceremonies, every word and body movement is rehearsed and camera positions are figured out for among other things, where each of the possible winners in each category are seated in the audience.
Before Profoto officially introduced its new compact B2 Off-Camera Flash system, they offered a group of wedding, portrait, and location photographers an opportunity to try the new flash system out and see how it performs out in the real-world.
Matt Sayles, an LA-based celebrity, portrait, and editorial shooter was one of Profoto's chosen B2 test pilots. For several years running Sayles has photographed the three days of Oscar pre-show rehearsals and all of the related events leading up to the big night. This year he used the opportunity to put Profoto's B2 Off-Camera Flash, the smallest-ever off-camera flash, through its paces before and during the Oscar ceremonies.
Just as professional wedding and press event shooters understand they have a small window of time to grab the shot and get out of the way, same goes for shooting on the red carpet at the Academy Awards ceremonies. It's basically shoot and retreat.
On Oscar night Sayles job is to capture images of the stars and assorted celebrities as they arrive, smile, and wave to all of the fans and flashing lights as they walk the red carpet into the theater. Having full-access to the event, Sayles captures some of his best images while shooting backstage the attendees as they schmooze with one another in a less-guarded manner compared to the assault-like cacophony of shouting and flashing lights that goes on when they walk the carpet.
Understandably, tripods aren't allowed anywhere they can prove hazardous, which is pretty much everywhere. This makes on-camera flash the default route for lighting the action before and during Oscar night.
Seizing upon the size and weight factor of the B2 flash heads, Matt decided to shoot two-fisted by holding one of two Canon EOS 5D Mk III's in one hand and a B2 flash head in the other. Matt hung the B2 flash head holster-style from his belt on a carabiner that he wore alongside the B2 battery pack. Whenever he needed flash, all he had to do was reach for it, hold it aloft and start shooting.
Unlike the harsh, dead-on look of on-camera flash common to on-camera flash – which is what everybody else was using, Sayles was able to model his light by holding it off-camera, slightly off to the side. By shooting off-camera he also had the option of selectively lighting specific individuals in a group, which is far more difficult to do with an on-camera flash.
Though he often refers to TTL readings when establishing flash exposures (and in Sayles opinion the accuracy of the B2's TTL system is far better than other off-camera flash systems he's used in the past), Sayles prefers minimal fill-flash and typically keeps his power settings as low as 1/64th-power in Manual mode once the action begins.
Shooting movie stars and celebrities can be a blast. For Matt Sayles, Profoto's new B2 Off-Camera Flash system not only made his job that much easier, but as he puts it – "… the b2 gave me an advantage that took my pictures to another level".
To see more of Matt Sayle's work, visit his website. He also has Instagram.
Learn more about the B2 Off-Camera Flash here:
Off-Camera Flashes


As we enter the New Year, Lego usually update their systems with many of the upcoming sets. Among the hundreds of inventories and instructions there are the names and inventories of several new polybags due out in 2014. There are several from the new Lego movie theme as well as the usual Star Wars, City, Friends, Superheroes and Legends of Chima. There look like several interesting ones that I'm sure people will be eager to add to their collections.


text:
EVALUATING ROBBERS CAVE
EVALUATING SHERIF ET AL. (1954)
Gina Perry (2014) offers fascinating insights and fresh evaluations in this article. She also features in this radio documentary, 'Inside Robbers Cave', which looks at all the studies but Robbers Cave is at 21:00
Perry - View from the Boys
Generalisability
22 boys is not a large sample. In a sample this small, any anomalies (boys with unusual characteristics, like violent bullies) skew the results. However, Sherif went to lengths to screen the boys beforehand, removing any from troubled backgrounds or with antisocial behaviours.
Only boys were used, so the results may not generalise the girls or mixed sex groups. Crucially, they were all children, so the results may not generalise to adults.
The boys were supposed to be "all American" types: white, bright and sporty. This wasn't entirely representative of young Americans back in the '50s and it certainly isn't representative of America today, where whites make up 50% of school intake, with the other 50% being Hispanic, African American and Asian American.
Since it involves observation, there are problems with reliability in this study. The observers were only with the boys for 12 hours a day and could not see or overhear everything that went on.
Despite this, Sherif took pains to make the study more reliable. He used a numbered scoring system for the boys' friendship patterns, which collected quantitative data. He also used multiple observers on occasions, creating inter-rater reliability. Where possible, he tape recorded the boys' conversations, so they could be played back and analysed later.
Certain aspects of this study could be replicated, such as the bean-counting test along with the tournament and the prizes. However, other procedures were developed by Sherif "on the fly" as events developed (for example, the boys themselves requested the baseball match and Sherif had to intervene to prevent a fight). These things might happen differently if the study was replicated again.
In the light of the findings by Frances Cherry (1995) about the mutiny in the 1953 study, Sherif's reliability is put in doubt, since he got different results on different occasions.
The study shows how competition and frustration creates hostility towards outgroups. In society, this suggests that discrimination and violence could be reduced if jobs, housing, education and other opportunities were shared more fairly between different groups, such as ethnic groups or social classes. This is the basis for a lot of Left Wing political thinking.
The study also shows that hostility can be reduced if groups are made to interact and work together towards common goals. It is not enough for them to be "mere presences" living alongside each other. This suggests ghettos should be discouraged and immigrants should be made to take up the host culture's language, education and pastimes. This is the basis for a lot of Right Wing political thinking.
These ideas may be applied to your Social Key Question.
Sherif claimed that, by using several different research methods (observing, tape recording, tests, quantitative as well as qualitative data), he was making his study more valid.
The study has ecological validity, because these were real boys at a real summer camp, doing real activities. Even the specially created tasks (fixing the broken water pipe, pulling the truck) seemed real to the boys. There were some unrealistic features, such as the camp counselors not intervening until the boys were actually ready to fight each other.
Although this is a field experiment, it lacked a Control Group. Sherif does not have a "normal" summer camp to compare his camp to. It may be perfectly normal for food fights and raids to happen in summer camps where the counselors aren't imposing much discipline. It may be normal for such boys to end up as friends after 3 weeks, regardless of whether they are given special tasks to carry out. In other words, Sherif may have exaggerated how much of the boys' behaviour was due to intergroup factors.
If Michael Billig (1976) is correct, Sherif misunderstood the findings of his own study, because he hadn't realised the experimenters made up a third group in the camp, the group with the most power. This casts doubt on the validity of Sherif's conclusions.
Gina Perry (2014) also argues that the observers had a much bigger influence on the boys than Sherif intended. She points out that the Rattlers took their name from an incident where a senior counselor pulled out a gun and shot two snakes, which very much impressed the boys.
The boys did not give valid consent to be in this study and do not seem to have been debriefed afterwards – they never realised they were being experimented on. This certain fails to respect their autonomy (because they had no choice) and dignity (because they were tricked and put through some upsetting conflicts).
They were deceived about the broken water pipe being an accident and the food truck breaking down. They were also subjected to risk (because there was vandalism, theft and nearly a serious fight) which the experimenters did little to mitigate. However, the researchers dropped their professional detachment when a serious fight nearly broke out and intervened to prevent it; this is an example of scientific integrity.
However, the boys' parents were aware that this camp was some sort of psychology project and they did give presumptive consent on their sons' behalf. However, they were asked not to visit the camp and check up on their sons, so they couldn't be informed about everything that was going on.
The boys could withdraw from the study and in fact two of them did go home in the first week.
It's debatable whether the boys were harmed by this study. There were raids and food fights. One boy had his comics stolen. A fight with weapons very nearly broke out. However, these might be typical events in American summer camps, especially in the rough-and-ready culture of the 1950s (knives were used as prizes, which would never happen today). The boys seemed to enjoy themselves, which suggests the harm they were exposed to was no greater than what they would be exposed to in their normal lives. However, Gina Perry (2014) argues that the boys had unhappy experiences because the camp counselors did not intervene to protect or guide them and that some of them still look back on their time at Robbers Cave will bad feelings.
Sherif could also be defended by pointing to the common good served by this sort of research. By understanding intergroup conflict, we are better able to prevent it or defuse it. This is social responsibility in research.
Evaluate the Classic Study from social psychology. (8 marks)
A 8-mark "evaluate" question awards 4 marks for AO1 (Describe) and 4 marks for AO3 (Evaluate). You must include a conclusion to be awarded top band (7-8 marks).
Sherif's study has high ecological validity. The 22 boys were at a real summer camp (Robbers Cave in Oklahoma) and had no idea anything unusual was going on. Activities like pulling the truck seemed real to them.
Sherif's study is also valid because he used different methods, like observing and tape-recording the boys. He collected quantitative and qualitative data about their behaviour. For example, he scored their outgroup friendships at the end of the friction and integration phases and found the Rattlers went from 6.4% to 36.4%.
However, some parts of the study were unrealistic, like the bean-counting test, asking questions about their friendship choices and camp counselors not imposing discipline. Gina Perry (2014) describes the counselors doing unusual things, like photographing the boys raiding cabins rather than putting a stop to it. The boys would have sensed how odd this was and this may have made them react strangely to the situation.
Because the boys didn't realise they were in an experiment, this means they couldn't give informed consent. Sherif also deceived them (eg telling them the truck was broken when it wasn't really). However, it might be that nothing went on at Robbers Cave that wouldn't happen at any summer camp for boys in the 1950s. It's natural enough for boys to form gangs, fall out then make up over 3 weeks.
In conclusion, Sherif tried to observe the boys without influencing them in any way. Its debatable whether he succeeded. On the one hand, his observers did nothing to prevent bullying and violence, which created an unusual atmosphere and put the boys at risk. On the other hand, the adults couldn't help influencing the boys. Gina Perry claims the Rattlers took their name from watching one adult shoot snakes with a gun.
Notice that for a 8-mark answer you don't have to include everything Sherif did. I haven't mentioned the "friction" condition or the prizes in the tournament. I haven't mentioned the way Sherif screened the boys beforehand. I haven't described his conclusions. But I have tried to make the two halves – Description and Evaluation – evenly balanced.


You are here: Home / Parenting / A Day Full Of Cardiologists, EKGs, Hearts, And Praise!
A Day Full Of Cardiologists, EKGs, Hearts, And Praise!
Today is a day that the majority of parents of children with Down syndrome will encounter. It is our day to visit the cardiologist. One of the most common medical concerns for children born with Down syndrome is congenital (being born with it) heart defects. This encompasses a variety of different conditions.
The most common for children with Down syndrome are atrial septal defects and ventricular septal defects, and there is a third type that is seen significantly more in children with Down syndrome as compared to the general public and that is the atrioventricular canal defect. There are a variety of others but these are the most common.
When I was in medical school I was convinced I was going to be a pediatric cardiologist. I was obsessed with the career path and did everything I possibly could to get exposure. I got extremely lucky in landing a preceptorship with one of the top pediatric cardiothoracic surgeons in Houston who taught me the basics. It was the first time I got to see a beating heart the size of a strawberry. I know a heck of a lot more about pediatric cardiology then the average pediatrician thanks to my experiences.
I started to reconsider during residency and finally decided that it did not hold my interest the way a career should. I also knew that my family (and future family members) were a priority to me and I was not willing to sacrifice my time with them to follow a career that I was only somewhat interested in. Which leads me to today, where I know a lot about cardiology but am living it up doing shift work in the emergency room and spending the majority of my time with the cutest little man I know, happy as could be.
I will never forget when our cardiologist visited us in the hospital. After our pediatrician told us Noah had features consistent with Down syndrome, I remember clutching my chest and trying to get the words out "how is his heart?". She reassured me, but said the cardiologist would be by in the morning.
It was torture waiting because I was contemplating all of the possibilities. He walked in during the mid morning and started with excellent bedside manner trying to get to know my family and then explaining to us the normal heart. All I wanted to do was shout "stop making small talk and spit out some acronyms so I know what is going on". He finally cut to the chase and told us that Noah had a patent ductus arterious (PDA) and an atrial septal defect (ASD).
Umm, Guys? What Are They Doing To Me?
His PDA was closed by his first check up, 2 months after he was born, praise the Lord! Today's appointment was to check on his ASD. At his last visit we were given a 50/50 chance for it to close on its own. When we go to our visits they start with an EKG (electrocardiogram). This is when Noah looks like he is jump starting a car or in a torture device of some sort. I promise those are just stickers and they don't hurt at all.
An EKG looks at the electrical forces the heart makes. It can show arrhythmias, if certain areas are larger than normal or if areas are not getting enough blood supply (like heart attacks) and that is just a few of its purposes. There are certain changes that are seen with ASD's so you can get hints that it is still open with just this test.
Is That My Heart Mom?
The next step is getting an echocardiogram. This is a fancy word for an ultrasound of the heart. They use the same machine as what is used when you were pregnant to look at the baby. They can get detailed views of all of the chambers and vessels, tell which way blood is flowing (blue and red colors are directions not oxygen) as well as how the heart is pumping. If you knew your child had Down syndrome prior to delivery there is a chance your little one had this even before they were born. I don't like to fess up about a lot of my knowledge as I could always be wrong and I don't know everything, but I was fairly certain I saw the little jet go from his left atrium to his right atrium during his echo. This meant that his ASD was still open.
We then waited for our cardiologist. I think it was only 5 minutes, but it felt a lot longer. She's very nice and does an excellent job of explaining things. She confirmed that Noah's ASD was still open. HOWEVER it was ONLY 2MM!!!! The last time we got it measured it was 5mm. It is shrinking and that is fantastic news. We were told the last time that if it were smaller or the same size chances would improve that it would close without intervention. Being only 2mm was such good news that we don't even have to be seen until next year. She told us if he had been born with one that size she would not have even followed him as it would almost always close on its own.
We were doing some serious praising after this!!
Why Were You So Worried?
What's The Big Deal With A Small Hole?
You may wonder why do we want these holes to close so badly. Surgery would be indicated if the holes were not able to close on their own. They are closed to protect the heart from volumes of blood and pressures it was not meant to experience. An ASD puts increase blood volume on the right side of the heart and can in 20-30 years cause the lung vessels to get stiff causing pulmonary hypertension.
I promise you this is not something you want. It would require not just a heart transplant but a lung heart transplant to fix the problem. So that is why we worry about a hole that allows more blood on the right side of the heart. Granted no cardiologist who is following your child will let it get to the point where you need a heart transplant which is why an ASD is repaired between the ages of 3-5 years old if needed You can imagine how relieved we were to hear this news.
Rick and I had been praying daily that Noah's ASD would be closed or getting smaller and God came through for us in a big way. We are beyond grateful for all of our answered prayers. I can't even begin to list them all as the list is too long. But we say thanks every day for what He is doing in our lives.
Our little man is pretty tough as his day did not stop there, he continued on into therapy as if it were no big deal. He worked out just like he always does, even doing push ups on the ball. I don't know how he does it all at 8 months old as his parents were sure exhausted.
What good news have you had lately? Is there anything we can pray about for you?
I'm so glad that Noah's ASD is closing on its own! Owen (who is 2 1/2 years old now) was born with AV canal defect and had that repaired when he was just 4 months old. It was the scariest moment of my life to hand him over to the anesthesiologist and pray that the surgery go well. Today Owen is doing great–we don't have to see his cardiologist for another year. I am very glad that we had the surgery so early in his life because the recovery was easily 6 weeks then and would probably be longer now. God is Good!
That is so awesome..! Thanks for sharing.
Excellent post! You explained why so many of us parents hate the dreaded cardiology visit . We actually got Ellie's diagnosis of Ds at the cardiologist as the lab failed to send the results of the pediatrician. The cardiologist assumed we knew the test results and went on and on about Down syndrome. Imagine his shock and horror as I said "so it is true then that she has Ds and is it the trisomy 21 type?". What a relief that Noah's ASD is shrinking in size. That is good news!
Uggg..I'm so sorry Anna. I can't imagine what that must had been like….for you, or the cardiologist!
So glad to hear that everything is going well now. You guys rock!
Our little one went through the same thing. She had a hole in her lower left ventricle and was operated on at 10 months. Except for the zipper (scar) down her chest, she is a happy, active 6 year old today. The surgery was a miracle for after she had it, boy, did she ever make up for lost time… there's just no stopping her…. We are very thankful.
That's so awesome to hear! It sounds like you guys have a blast!
Praise God! And thank you for the nice short yet clear version of the medical info you contributed to this blog!!!! It helps tons!!!
No problem! Thanks for all your support Vanessa!
Why do you say that ASVD is almost "exclusively" seen in children with down syndrome? The article you linked to said that 1/3 of children with this defect have DS, which would mean more than half do not, right?
Good catch!! I was quoting our cardiologist when I wrote that 🙂 ask Rick he was there. I am going to try to interpret what she meant and I will update the post to say accurate information. If a syndrome is associated with AV Canal it is almost always Down syndrome. AV Canal Defects occur in only 2.9% of the general population but in 20% of children with DS which is quite a jump. It is fairly common to test children for Down syndrome if they have an AV Canal Defect. I hope this makes sense. I will be reading my links (before quoting my doctors) thanks for asking your question and keeping us honest!
Thanks for the information and explanation of the affects of an untreated ASD. My son Easton, now 3 months old, was also born with an ASD and PDA. At his 6 wk follow up with his cardiologist, we were informed that his PDA was closed, and his ASD was showing signs that it would most likely close without any intervention. What a relief!
On a side note, I was introduced to your site by a friend of a friend. I've been reading your stories and love them. I kind of did the opposite of what you and your wife did. I only looked up one medical site after our son was born, and hadn't looked anything else up. The increased risk of lukemia scared me and I didn't want to read anymore negative things. It took me some time for the shock of Easton's Ds diagnosis to wear off, as blood tests and sonograms were "normal". It was weeks before I could talk about it without crying. I still get emotional, but at least can talk without breaking down completely. Like Noah, Easton's a champ!!! He was rolling over from tummy to back on his 1 month birthday! 🙂 We have our first appt at the Down's Clinic here in Dallas tomorrow. Finding your site has been such a blessing. I'm looking forward to finding more tidbits of information in your stories, seeing how Noah's progressing, and learning what we have to look forward to.
My Benji (18 months today!) has an ASD as well as persistent Pulmonary Hypertension (~60mmhg). (He was born at 26 weeks and has COPD. The PH presented itself after an episode of RSV shortly after his NICU discharge) He is on continuous Oxygen and Sildinifil for treatment of the PH. We have seen 3 Cardiologists (seeing a 4th in April) and they have all had differing opinions on closing the moderate to large ASD. So confusing as the parents! I am hoping for some good news come April at his next echo. Hoping for decreased PH and an answer on the ASD closure. So wonderful to hear such an encouraging report about Noah! Thanks for sharing!


text:
🎧 The Walls That Made Wales
For thousands of years, the building of walls has played an essential role in shaping the world as we know it; from being used to monitor populations to controlling trade, they have often acted as borders of entire nations. In this episode, Howard Williams takes us through some of the most famous walls in medieval history and explores how two of the best-known linear earthworks in western Britain, Offa's Dyke and Wat's Dyke, have served to separate England and Wales. Howard Williams is a Professor of Archaeology at the University of Chester.
Taxes are now an established aspect of our lives, but scattered across Britain's countryside are reminders of their earliest days, when farmers were obliged to offer 10 percent of their produce to the church: these are tithe barns. In this episode, Joseph Rogers explains how we can spot a tithe b...


text:
Bernd Römmelt (* 1968 in München) ist ein deutscher Fotograf und Autor.

Laufbahn

Nach seinem Studium in Völkerkunde begann Römmelt als Fotograf und Reisejournalist zu arbeiten. Dabei fokussiert er sich auf die Alpen sowie die nördlichen Regionen wie Alaska, Kanada, Grönland, Island, Spitzbergen, Lappland und Russland.
Mehr als 30 Bildbände sind von Römmelt bereits erschienen. Seine Bilder erscheinen zudem regelmäßig in Magazinen, Zeitschriften und Kalendern.

Römmelt stellt seine Arbeiten leidenschaftlich in Live-Multivision-Vorträgen vor Ort, als auch online, vor.

Seit 2008 ist Römmelt auch im Auftrag von Greenpeace unterwegs und dokumentiert dabei auch die dramatischen Veränderungen, welche die Arktis aufgrund der globalen Erwärmung bedrohen.

Auszeichnungen (Auswahl)

 2002 und 2003 wurden zwei seiner Bilder von der BBC beim Naturfotowettbewerb Wildlife Photographer of the Year ausgezeichnet.

Veröffentlichungen (Auswahl)
 Nordland: Die letzte Wildnis Europas Bruckmann Verlag, 2005, ISBN 978-3-7654-4142-4
 Fünfseenland und Pfaffenwinkel. Traumblicke im Münchner Süden Rosenheimer Verlagshaus, 2006, ISBN 978-3-475-53759-2
 Hurtigruten: Die schönste Schiffsreise der Welt Bruckmann Verlag, 2006, ISBN   978-3765443756
 Die Bayerischen Alpen Rosenheimer Verlagshaus, 2007, ISBN 978-3-475-53875-9
 Oberbayern Rosenheimer Verlagshaus, 2008, ISBN 978-3-475-53932-9
 München Rosenheimer Verlagshaus, 2008, ISBN 978-3-475-53930-5
 Bildschöne Hurtigruten Bruckmann Verlag, 2008, ISBN 978-3-7654-4783-9
 Inside Passage: Along the Wild Pacific Coast from Seattle to Alaska, 2008, ISBN 978-3765816420
 Südtirol  Rosenheimer Verlagshaus, 2010, ISBN 978-3-475-54023-3
 Herrliches Alpenvorland – Paradies im Süden Deutschlands Rosenheimer Verlagshaus, 2010, ISBN 978-3-475-54050-9
 Die Zugspitze und das Wettersteingebirge Rosenheimer Verlagshaus, 2012, ISBN 978-3-475-54151-3
 Die Allgäuer Alpen Rosenheimer Verlagshaus, 2013, ISBN 978-3-475-54209-1
 Südtirol Rosenheimer Verlagshaus, 2013, ISBN   978-3475541711
 Traumreise durch Alaska Rosenheimer Verlagshaus, 2014, ISBN 978-3-475-54004-2
 Sagenhafte Alpen Knesebeck Verlag, 2014, ISBN 978-3-86873-658-8
 Faszinierendes Tölzer Land Rosenheimer Verlagshaus, 2015, ISBN 978-3-475-54420-0
 Bezauberndes Blaues Land Rosenheimer Verlagshaus, 2016, ISBN 978-3-475-54521-4
 Meine Münchner Hausberge   Rosenheimer Verlagshaus, 2016, ISBN 978-3-475-54575-7
 Polarlichter: Sonnenzauber am Nachthimmel Knesebeck Verlag, 2016, ISBN 978-3868739435
 Im Bann des Nordens: Abenteuer am Polarkreis Knesebeck Verlag, 2017, ISBN 978-3-86873-988-6
 Heimat – Das bayerische Alpenvorland: Fotografie vor der Haustür Tecklenborg, 2019, ISBN 978-3-944327-70-9
 Naturwunder Bayerische Alpen Knesebeck Verlag, 2021, ISBN 978-3-95728-411-2
 Jäger des Lichts: Leidenschaft Naturfotografie Knesebeck Verlag, 2023, ISBN 978-3-95728-713-7

Einzelnachweise

Reisejournalist
Naturfotograf
Fotograf (21. Jahrhundert)
Fotograf (Bayern)
Deutscher
Geboren 1968
Mann


text:
Meet the man behind that famous voice
By Judith van Berkom –
Many people in the area – especially those of a certain age – might already be familiar with Bill Luxton. He's been entertaining audiences nearly his entire life, and at 89 years-of-age he's still involved in many aspects of the Ottawa arts and culture scene.
Bill Luxton has been a broadcaster, actor, performer, for over 50 years. One of his earliest jobs was at CJOH-TV when the station first operated out of a building at the corner of Somerset Street and Bayswater Avenue. Photo by Judith van Berkom
A broadcaster, actor, singer, volunteer reader at Broadview Public School, Bill Luxton graduated from the Lorne Greene Academy of Radio Arts in Toronto in 1950, but his broadcasting career started much earlier than that.
His father was a builder, a carpenter, who brought his family to Canada from England after World War I because there was no work for him there. Later, they returned to England and stayed throughout World War II. When he was enlisted in the army at the age of 18 there was a call for volunteers for the Forces Broadcasting Service. Officials were setting up small stations all over the world to entertain the troops.
"I volunteered and got accepted," explains Bill. "I ended up in North Africa, in Libya for two years – my introduction to radio. My parents moved back to Canada in the meantime and when I got back, with all my radio experience, I tried all the stations in Toronto with no luck."
But as luck would have it, Port Arthur (now Thunder Bay) needed a junior announcer.
"I got hired and that's where I started in 1948," says Bill. "One of the staff, Bruce Marsh, who later became a very well-known CBC announcer, had been to Lorne Greene's Academy of Radio Arts. The academy was established after the war for veterans who wanted to be in radio. With my army credits and an allowance, I was accepted and moved to Toronto for a six-month course."
Bill's job in Kingston with CKWS was his real beginning and he was with the station for six years. When Canadian broadcaster, Ernie Bushnell, formed his own company in 1961 and got a license for CJOH-TV, Bill got a call for an audition.
"I took the bus to Ottawa. They were opening the station the following Sunday," recalls Bill. "I had a wife and two kids. But this was a golden opportunity to start with a brand new station. My wife said, 'Let's go for it'. Because the two children were still in school, I worked for six months going back and forth to Kingston, then we found this house, the kids went to Broadview Public School and I started in TV here."
Bill was part of the local scene at CJOH-TV – now CTV Ottawa – for 27 years as an host and actor. He started in 1961, when the station operated out of a small building at 29 Bayswater Ave. Six months later operations shifted to a $2 million complex at 1500 Merivale Road.
Bill Luxton worked with many people over the years, including two famous women. Margaret Trudeau auditioned in 1981 and was Bill's co-host for the next two years.
"Everyone said it wouldn't last, but it did," says Bill. Bill also worked with Charlotte Whitton, the City of Ottawa's first female mayor from 1951 to 1956. After she lost the election, they worked together on a 15-minute show in which Bill would ask a political question and she'd spend the next 15 minutes answering it.
"[CJOH was] a production house for 10 years. Our first big show was The Galloping Gourmet [with Graham Kerr]," recalls Bill. "We taped 500 shows which went worldwide. We had a reputation for being a producer. I was the announcer for the [The Amazing Kreskin]. He was a mentalist who could read minds. He would sit down and sense something in the audience and start to tell the person things only that person could have known. I don't know how he did it. I worked with him for three years. We spent five weeks in England taping 13 shows in the 1970s."
When he retired, Bill read to children at Broadview Public School for ten years. He visited different classes every week. One day, he was asked to read Hans Christian Anderson's stories to three different classes in the library.
"I came dressed up like him," recalls Bill. "As the children were going back to class, a boy came up to me, 'You're not Hans Christian Anderson,' he said. 'Why would you say that,' I asked. 'You're wearing Adidas shoes,' he said. So much for my disguise!
"They dropped the library program, and I never did get back to it. I'd like to read in the new school."
On stage, Bill has performed with the Ottawa Little Theatre, Orpheus, Just for Kids theatre, the Perth Academy of Musical Theatre and Upper Canada Playhouse in Morrisburg. He has played leading roles in The Sound of Music, The Music Man, The King and I, Gigi, Oliver, Annie and My Fair Lady. One of his favourite roles was Alfred Dolittle in My Fair Lady.
How is this well-known radio and TV announcer keeping busy today? He is the male vocalist with the Grey Jazz Big Band, a 16-person band who performed at the Canadian War Museum just after it opened in 1995, singing wartime favourites by Vera Lynn, Cole Porter, Irving Berlin amid surrounding tanks. They perform in retirement homes for seniors.
Bill and his wife, Toots, as he fondly calls her, have been married for 66 years. They have lived in their house in Westboro for 55 years. It's one of those lovely old homes that Westboro is so famous for, with gardens all around and lots of space between neighbours. A cozy home where two children grew up and now have children of their own.
Posted in The latest scoopTagged Bill Luxton, Judith Van Berkom, Senior profile
Prev Collectable Treasures: This silverware might be 100 years old,
but what is it worth?
Next HOK #38: Karen Secord
Dave Allston says:
Great article Judith; a well-deserved profile of a treasure of the Westboro community. I was one of those kids who were fortunate enough to have Mr. Luxton read to our class at Broadview. It was a highlight for me at the time, since the then-new YTV network was airing 'Willy & Floyd' episodes often. Mr. Luxton was one of the first celebrities I'd met, and the memories of him spending his time with our class are appreciated, not to mention the years he contributed to local TV. Whenever I speak with someone about our community in the 1950s or 60s, his name inevitably comes up. Well done on a great article!


text:
Q: Unable to install Robot framework with python 2.7.15 i installed Eclipse 2018-09 and python 2.7.15
then i tried to install robot framework with python using command pip install robotframwork
it returns:
Microsoft Windows [version 10.0.17134.1006]
(c) Microsoft Corporation, 2018. Tous droits réservés.

C:\WINDOWS\system32>python --version
Python 2.7.15

C:\WINDOWS\system32>pip install robotframework
Collecting robotframework
  Retrying (Retry(total=4, connect=None, read=None, redirect=None, status=None)) after connection broken by 'ConnectTimeoutError(<pip._vendor.urllib3.connection.VerifiedHTTPSConnection object at 0x00000000044D0A90>, 'Connection to pypi.python.org timed out. (connect timeout=15)')': /simple/robotframework/
  Retrying (Retry(total=3, connect=None, read=None, redirect=None, status=None)) after connection broken by 'ConnectTimeoutError(<pip._vendor.urllib3.connection.VerifiedHTTPSConnection object at 0x00000000044D0940>, 'Connection to pypi.python.org timed out. (connect timeout=15)')': /simple/robotframework/
  Retrying (Retry(total=2, connect=None, read=None, redirect=None, status=None)) after connection broken by 'ConnectTimeoutError(<pip._vendor.urllib3.connection.VerifiedHTTPSConnection object at 0x00000000044D0C50>, 'Connection to pypi.python.org timed out. (connect timeout=15)')': /simple/robotframework/
  Retrying (Retry(total=1, connect=None, read=None, redirect=None, status=None)) after connection broken by 'ConnectTimeoutError(<pip._vendor.urllib3.connection.VerifiedHTTPSConnection object at 0x00000000044D0FD0>, 'Connection to pypi.python.org timed out. (connect timeout=15)')': /simple/robotframework/
  Retrying (Retry(total=0, connect=None, read=None, redirect=None, status=None)) after connection broken by 'ConnectTimeoutError(<pip._vendor.urllib3.connection.VerifiedHTTPSConnection object at 0x00000000044D06D8>, 'Connection to pypi.python.org timed out. (connect timeout=15)')': /simple/robotframework/
  Could not find a version that satisfies the requirement robotframework (from versions: )
No matching distribution found for robotframework

C:\WINDOWS\system32>


this can shove our energy all the way down into the basement of our spiritual systems. we relegate our minds and hearts to suffering the effects of baser, fearful instincts and purely reactive head-spaces; everything becomes about survival.
we tend to project into the world our pains and shortcomings, to flesh them out and, hopefully, to gather more emotional intelligence, life experience (wisdom), maturity, and self-awareness.
there is truth to the idea that our challenges are always equal to the student; we can resist it all we want, but on some level, we invited it.
there will be those who show up to push us upward and forward, or, we'll choose to gravitate to those who will keep us in limbo and mutual dysfunction — or, we'll assume the responsibility ourselves and start paying attention.
the further we get from our natural state, the more we starve ourselves. the more extreme the starvation, the more extreme the rebalancing is bound to be.
emotional and psychological fragmentation is rampant in our world. don't be too quick to judge yourself or others. but, don't be a fool either. i have found it terribly difficult to remain innocent and open and empathic while still being a "productive member" of society.
but, society, well… it's a bit fucked. i don't hold much regard for the mass delusional state of things (and yes, cynicism is such an easy out). we are so much more than this.
do the work and recalibrate your sensitivities as needed. your body and your environment is constantly giving you feedback.
life happens beyond the speed of light, and time is merely a social agreement. here, now, is where you are exploring, learning, teaching, dancing, and writing your story.


10. To enter into agreements with any public body or Government Department for the delegation to the Council of any of the functions of that public body or Department: Provided that any such delegation shall only come into effect after the Minister s made the relevant order in the Gazzette.
Do you know who St Publius Patron Saint of Floriana is?
SAINT PUBLIUS Patron Saint of Floriana and Malta, the Maltese born Publius received the Apostle Paul during his shipwreck on the island as recounted in the Acts of the Apostles. He is also venerated as the first Bishop of Malta. St. Publius is Malta's first acknowledged saint. Publius' conversion led to Malta being the first Christian state in the West, and one of the first in the world.


text:
Tulsa Ready To Finish Season Strong In Monday's Myrtle Beach Bowl
Sunday, December 19th 2021, 11:47 pm
By: News On 6, News 9, Daniel Hawk, John Holcomb, Dean Blevins
MYRTLE BEACH, South Carolina -
The start of the season for Tulsa didn't look promising after a loss to FCS UC Davis and starting 1-4 after the first five games, but the Golden Hurricane grinded their way to an appearance in the Myrtle Beach Bowl.
The University of Tulsa had to battle all kinds of adversity to make it to this point. TU had to win 3 in a row just to play in this game. If you ask the team, just finishing is all that's left for them to do.
Tulsa is set to take on Old Dominion at 1:30 p.m. on ESPN.
News On 6 The start of the season for Tulsa didn't look promising after a loss to FCS UC Davis and starting 1-4 after the first five games, but the Golden Hurricane grinded their way to an appearance in the Myrtle Beach Bowl.


text:
College Online Policy and Procedure System
Category Listing
Search COPPS
About COPPS
Notice to Victims of Sexual Assault
Terrie Minner, Title IX Coordinator and Associate Dean of the Mental Health and Wellness Center
minnert@lanecc.edu
Responsible Executive Authority
Provost and Executive Vice President, Academic and Student Affairs
The purpose of this procedure is to ensure that victims of sexual assault receive necessary services and assistance. This procedure includes guidelines for reporting sexual assault, victims rights, privacy rights, resources for victims of sexual assault, and sanctions for staff and students who violate the College's Sexual Misconduct policy.
Applicability. This procedure applies to situations where the alleged victim is a college student and the alleged assault occurred on college property; or where the alleged perpetrator is a college student, faculty or staff member regardless of where the alleged sexual assault occurred.
Reporting Sexual Assault
LCC encourages members of LCC community to report sexual harassment. This procedure only applies to conduct defined sexual harassment under Title IX and applicable federal regulations and that meet Title IX jurisdictional requirements. LCC will respond to sexual harassment and sexual misconduct that falls outside that definition and outside the jurisdiction of the Title IX federal regulations using State law and applicable LCC policies and procedures. In implementing these procedures discussed below LCC will also provide supportive measures, training, and resources in compliance with State law, unless they are preempted by the Title IX regulations.
Questions concerning Title IX may be referred to the LCC Title IX Coordinator whose contact information is below:
Terrie Minner
LCC's Title IX Coordinator
4000 E. 30th Ave, Eugene Oregon (Main LCC Campus)
The Title IX Coordinator is required to respond to reports of sexual harassment or misconduct. The Title IX Coordinator will handle information received with the utmost discretion and will share information with others on a need-to-know basis. For example, the Title IX Coordinator may need to address public safety concerns on campus, comply with State and federal legal requirements, or share information to implement supportive measures.
A report of sexual harassment to the Title IX Coordinator does not necessarily lead to a full investigation, as discussed more fully below. However, the Title IX Coordinator will make an assessment to determine if there is a safety risk to the campus. If the Title IX Coordinator finds there is a continued risk, the Title IX Coordinator will file the formal complaint without the Complainant's consent or cooperation.
For sexual harassment under Title IX, Complainants must proceed under Title IX procedures. For other forms of sexual harassment or gender-based harassment, Complainants should use this procedure.
Complaints: Any person who has suffered harassment, discrimination, or retaliation may file a complaint of harassment, discrimination, or retaliation. Complainants are encouraged to report harassment before it becomes severe or pervasive. LCC strives to stop harassment before it rises to the level of a violation of state or federal law.
Jurisdiction: LCC is required under Oregon law to respond to complaints to any complaint received by the college, regardless of whether the incident occurred on the campus or elsewhere, that relates to: (A) Sexual harassment; (B) Sexual assault; (C) Domestic violence; (D) Dating violence; or (E) Stalking.
Retaliation: Persons who make complaints of harassment or provide information related to such complaints will be protected against retaliation. LCC will take all reasonable steps to protect the Complainant from further harassment or discrimination.
Employment-Related Complaints: The Title IX Coordinator is the person charged with receiving complaints of discrimination or harassment, and coordinating their investigation. The actual investigation of complaints may be assigned by the Title IX Coordinator to the Chief Human Resources Officer (CHRO) to outside persons or organizations under contract with LCC. At a minimum, the investigation will be assigned to other LCC staff or outside investigators whenever the Title IX Coordinator is named in the complaint or implicated by the allegations in the complaint.
Who May File a Complaint: Any student, employee, or third party who believes he/she/they has been discriminated against or harassed by a student, employee, or third party in violation of this procedure and the related policy.
Where to File a Complaint: An employee who believes he/she/they has been discriminated against or harassed in violation of these policy and procedures may make a complaint orally or in writing.
A Complainant may file a complaint against LCC with any of the following:
Deputy Title IX Coordinators
Complainants filing employment-related complaints shall be notified that they may file employment discrimination complaints with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) or through the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) complaint resolution process.
An employee or claimant must provide advance notice of a claim against the employer as required by the Oregon Tort Claims Act (ORS 30.275).
Any LCC employee who receives a harassment or discrimination complaint shall notify the Title IX Coordinator immediately.
Any individual may report sexual harassment to LCC's Title IX Coordinator.
LCC strongly encourages prompt reporting of sexual harassment. Prompt reporting allows for the collection and preservation of evidence, including physical evidence, digital media, and witness statements. A delay may limit LCC's ability to effectively investigate and respond.
Individuals have the opportunity to decide whether they want to pursue a formal Title IX complaint. Reporting sexual harassment to the Title IX Coordinator does not automatically initiate an investigation under these procedures. A report allows LCC to provide a wide variety of support and resources to impacted individuals and to prevent the reoccurrence of the conduct. A Complainant or the Title IX Coordinator filing a formal complaint will initiate an investigation.
If there are parallel criminal and Title IX investigations, LCC will cooperate with the external law enforcement agency and will coordinate to ensure that the Title IX process does not hinder legal process or proceedings.
LCC will document reports of sexual harassment in compliance with the Clery Act, a federal law requiring data collection of crime within the campus geography. Under the Clery Act, LCC does not document personal information; LCC reports the type of conduct, and the time, date, and location.
Filing a Timely Complaint: Since failure to report harassment and discrimination impedes LCC's ability to stop the behavior, LCC strongly encourages anyone who believes they are being harassed or discriminated against, to file a complaint. LCC also strongly encourages the filing of such complaints within 30 days of the alleged incident. While all complaints are taken seriously and will be investigated promptly, delay in filing impedes LCC's ability to investigate and remediate.
All supervisors and managers have a mandatory duty to report incidents of harassment and discrimination; the existence of a hostile, offensive or intimidating work environment, and acts of retaliation.
LCC will investigate complaints involving acts that occur off campus if they are related to an academic or work activity or if the harassing conduct interferes with or limits a student's or employee's ability to participate in or benefit from the school's programs or activities.
Communicating that the Conduct is Unwelcome: LCC further encourages, but does not require, students and employees to let the offending person know immediately and firmly that the conduct or behavior is unwelcome, offensive, in poor taste or inappropriate.
Intake and Processing of the Complaint: Upon receiving notification of a harassment or discrimination complaint, the Title IX Coordinator shall:
Undertake efforts to informally resolve the charges, including but not limited to mediation, rearrangement of work or academic schedules, obtaining apologies, providing informal counseling, training, etc.
Advise all parties they need not participate in an informal resolution of the complaint, as described above, and they have the right to end the informal resolution process at any time.
Advise student Complainants that they may file a complaint with the Office for Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Education and employee Complainants may file a complaint with the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). All Complainants should be advised that they have a right to file a complaint with local law enforcement, if the act complained of is also a criminal act. LCC must investigate even if the complainant files a complaint with local law enforcement. In addition, the LCC should ensure that Complainants are aware of any available resources, such as counseling, health, and mental health services.
Take interim steps to protect a Complainant from coming into contact with the alleged perpetrator, especially if the Complainant is a victim of sexual violence. The Title IX Coordinator should notify the complainant of his/her options to avoid contact with the alleged perpetrator. For instance, LCC may prohibit the alleged perpetrator from having any contact with the Complainant pending the results of the investigation. When taking steps to separate the Complainant and the alleged perpetrator, LCC shall minimize the burden on the Complainant.
Investigation of the Complaint: LCC shall conduct a prompt, thorough, and impartial investigation into every complaint and claim of harassment or discrimination. No claim of workplace or academic harassment or discrimination shall remain unexamined. This includes complaints involving activities that occur off campus and in connection with all the academic, educational, extracurricular, athletic, and other programs of the LCC, whether those programs take place in LCC's facilities, on a LCC bus, or at a class or training program sponsored by LCC at another location. LCC shall promptly investigate complaints of harassment or discrimination that occur off campus if the alleged conduct creates a hostile environment on campus.
LCC will keep the investigation confidential to the extent possible, but cannot guarantee absolute confidentiality because release of some information on a "need-to-know-basis" is essential to a thorough investigation. When determining whether to maintain confidentiality, LCC may weigh the request for confidentiality against the seriousness of the alleged harassment, the Complainant's age, whether there have been other harassment complaints about the same individual, and the alleged perpetrator's rights to receive information about the allegations if the information is maintained by LCC as an "education record" under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), 20 U.S. Code Section 1232g; 34 Code Federal Regulations Part 99.15.LCC will inform the Complainant if it cannot maintain confidentiality.
Investigation Steps: LCC will fairly and objectively investigate harassment and discrimination complaints. Employees designated to serve as investigators under this policy shall have adequate training on what constitutes sexual harassment, including sexual violence, and that they understand how LCC's grievance procedures operate. The investigator cannot have any real or perceived conflicts of interest and must be able to investigate the allegations impartially.
LCC will provide written notice of the date, time, location, participants, and purpose of all investigative interviews to a Party whose participation is invited or expected, with sufficient time for the Party to prepare to participate.
Trained investigators will use the following steps: interviewing the Complainant(s); interviewing the accused individual(s); identifying and interviewing witnesses and evidence identified by each Party; identifying and interviewing any other witnesses, if needed; reminding all individuals interviewed of LCC's no-retaliation policy; considering whether any involved person should be removed from the campus pending completion of the investigation; reviewing personnel/academic files of all involved Parties; reach a conclusion as to the allegations and any appropriate disciplinary and remedial action; and see that all recommended action is carried out in a timely fashion. When LCC evaluates the complaint, it shall do so using a preponderance of the evidence standard. Thus, after considering all the evidence it has gathered, LCC will decide whether it is more likely than not that discrimination or harassment has occurred.
If there are conflicting versions of relevant events, LCC's investigator will weigh each Party's credibility. Factors that will be considered in determining credibility include: inherent plausibility; demeanor; motive to falsify; corroboration; and past record.
LCC not the Parties, has the responsibility to gather information and interview witnesses. When the investigator evaluates the evidence, they will do so using the preponderance of the evidence standard. After considering all the evidence gathered, the investigator will decide whether it is more likely than not that reported conduct occurred.
Evidence Review
Both Parties have an equal opportunity to inspect and review any evidence obtained as part of the investigation that is directly related to the allegations raised in the formal complaint, including the evidence upon which LCC does not intend to rely in reaching a determination regarding responsibility and inculpatory or exculpatory evidence whether obtained from a Party or other source.
Prior to the investigator preparing an investigative report, LCC will send to each Party and the Party's Advisor, if any, the evidence subject to inspection and review in an electronic format or a hard copy. The Parties will have at least ten days to submit a written response. The investigator must consider this written response prior to completing the investigative report.
Timeline for Completion
LCC will undertake its investigation promptly and swiftly as possible. To that end, the investigator shall complete the above steps, and prepare a written report within 120 days of LCC receiving the complaint.
After completing an investigation and prior to completing a determination regarding responsibility, LCC will hold a live hearing to provide the Complainant and Respondent an opportunity to respond to the evidence gathered before a Decision-Maker. Neither Party may choose to waive the right to a live hearing, but the Parties can choose whether to participate in the hearing or answer some or all cross-examination questions.
If LCC proceeds to a hearing, LCC will provide all Parties written notice of the date, time, location, participants, and purpose of the hearing with sufficient time for the Party to prepare to participate.
LCC may provide a live hearing with all Parties physically present in the same geographic location or, at LCC's discretion if either Party requests, LCC may provide any or all Parties, witnesses, and other participants the ability to appear at the live hearing virtually, with technology enabling participants simultaneously to see and hear each other in real time.
LCC will make the information reviewed during the Evidence Review available at the hearing for reference and consultation. LCC will not restrict the ability of either Party to discuss the allegations under investigation or to gather and present relevant evidence.
LCC will create an audio or audiovisual recording, or transcript, of any live hearing and make it available to the Parties for inspection and review.
Presenting Witnesses
LCC will provide the Complainant and Respondent an equal opportunity to present witnesses, including fact and expert witnesses, and other inculpatory and exculpatory evidence. Witnesses, like Parties, are not required to participate in the live hearing process.
Only relevant evidence will be admissible during the hearing. Relevant evidence means evidence, including evidence relevant to the credibility of a Party or witness, having any tendency in reason to prove or disprove any disputed fact material to the allegations under investigation.
LCC will permit each Party's Advisor to ask the other Party and any witnesses all relevant questions and follow-up questions, including those questions challenging credibility. The Party's Advisor must conduct cross-examination directly, orally, and in real time. A Party may never personally conduct cross-examination.
Advisors may only ask relevant cross-examination and other questions of a Party or witness. Before a Complainant, Respondent, or witness answers a cross-examination or other question, the Decision-Maker must first determine whether the question is relevant and explain any decision to exclude a question as not relevant. The Decision-Maker need not provide a lengthy or complicated explanation in support of a relevance determination. If a Party or witness disagrees with a relevance determination, that individual has the choice of either (1) abiding by the Decision-Maker's determination and answering the question or (2) refusing to answer the question.
If a party or witness does not submit to cross-examination at the live hearing, or declines to answer a question, the Decision-Maker can still rely on other statements of that party or witness in reaching a determination regarding responsibility. A Decision-Maker cannot draw an inference about the determination regarding responsibility based solely on a Party's or witness's absence from the live hearing or refusal to answer cross-examination or other questions.
Determinations of Responsibility
When the Decision-Maker makes a determination of responsibility or non-responsibility, the Decision-Maker will issue a written determination regarding responsibility, no later than 20 business days after the date that the hearing ends.
When making a determination regarding responsibility, a Decision-Maker will objectively evaluate all relevant evidence, including both inculpatory and exculpatory evidence. A Decision-Maker may not make credibility determinations based on an individual's status as a Complainant, Respondent, or witness. In evaluating the evidence, the Decision-Maker will use the preponderance of the evidence standard. Thus, after considering all the evidence it has gathered, LCC will decide whether it is more likely than not that sexual harassment occurred.
The written determination will include:
Identification of the allegations potentially constituting Title IX sexual harassment as defined in these procedures;
A description of the procedural steps taken from the receipt of the formal complaint through the determination, including who conducted the investigation and gave notifications to the Parties. The determination will also state when, where, and the date the investigator interviewed the Parties and witnesses, conducted site visits, the methods used to gather other evidence. The procedural section should also discuss the dates and how the Parties were provided the opportunity to review and inspect evidence and the date of any hearings held and who attended the hearing;
Findings of fact supporting the determination. In making these findings, the Decision-Maker will focus on analyzing the findings of fact that support the determination of responsibility or non-responsibility;
Conclusions regarding the application of LCC's code of conduct to the facts;
A statement of, and rationale for, the result as to each allegation, including a determination regarding responsibility;
A statement of, and rationale for, any disciplinary sanctions LCC imposes on the Respondent;
A statement of whether LCC will provide the Complainant with remedies designed to restore or preserve equal access to LCC's education program or activity;
LCC need not disclose to the Respondent remedies that do not affect him/her/them as part of the written determination. LCC can inform the Respondent that it will provide remedies to the Complainant. However, LCC will inform the Complainant of the sanctions against the Respondent;
LCC's procedures and permissible bases for the Complainant and Respondent to appeal.
LCC will provide the written determination to the Parties simultaneously. The determination regarding responsibility becomes final either on the date that LCC provides the Parties with the written determination of the result of the appeal, if the Parties file an appeal, or if the Parties do not file an appeal, the date on which an appeal would no longer be timely.
Cooperation Encouraged: All employees will cooperate with a LCC investigation into allegations of harassment or discrimination. Lack of cooperation impedes the ability of LCC to investigate thoroughly and respond effectively. However, lack of cooperation by a Complainant or witnesses does not relieve LCC of its obligation to investigate. LCC will conduct an investigation if it is discovered that harassment is, or may be occurring, with or without the cooperation of the alleged victim(s) and regardless of whether a complaint is filed.
Written Report: The results of the investigation of a complaint shall be set forth in a written report that will include at least all of the following information:
A description of the circumstances giving rise to the complaint;
A description of the procedural steps taken during the investigation, including all individuals contacted and interviewed;
A summary of the testimony provided by each witness the investigator interviewed;
An analysis of relevant evidence collected during the course of the investigation including a list of relevant documents;
A specific finding as to whether there is probable cause to believe that discrimination, harassment, or retaliation occurred with respect to each allegation in the complaint;
A table of contents if the report exceeds ten pages; and
Any other information deemed appropriate by LCC.
Reaching a Determination: Once the Title IX Coordinator or the designee who makes the determination receives the investigative report, he/she/they, will make a determination as to whether harassment or discrimination occurred.
Discipline and Corrective Action
If harassment, discrimination or retaliation occurred in violation of the policy or procedure, LCC shall take disciplinary action against the alleged perpetrator and any other remedial action it determines to be appropriate consistent with State and federal law. The action will be prompt, effective, and commensurate with the severity of the conduct. Remedies for the Complainant might include, but are not limited to:
providing an escort for the Complainant between the parking lot and his/her/their workplace or classroom office;
ensuring that the Complainant and alleged perpetrator do not attend the same classes or work in the same work area;
preventing offending third parties from entering campus;
providing counseling services or a referral to counseling services;
providing medical services or a referral to medical services;
providing academic support services, such as tutoring;
arranging for a student-Complainant to re-take a course or withdraw from a class without penalty, including ensuring that any changes do not adversely affect the Complainant's academic record; and
reviewing any disciplinary actions taken against the Complainant to see if there is a causal connection between the harassment and the misconduct that may have resulted in the Complainant being disciplined.
If LCC imposes discipline, the nature of the discipline will not be communicated to the Complainant. However, LCC may disclose information about the sanction imposed on an individual who was found to have engaged in harassment when the sanction directly relates to the Complainant; for example, LCC may inform the Complainant that the harasser must stay away from the Complainant.
In the case of a crime of violence or a non-forcible sex offense, and the alleged perpetrator is a student, the final results of any disciplinary proceeding conducted by LCC against the alleged perpetrator may be disclosed to the complainant, if LCC determines as a result of the disciplinary proceedings, the student violated LCC's rules or policies. The final results of any disciplinary proceeding include only the name of the student, the violation committed, and any sanction imposed by the institution on that student.
Disciplinary actions against faculty, staff, and students will conform to all relevant statutes, regulations, personnel policies and procedures, including the provisions of any applicable collective bargaining agreement.
LCC will ensure that Complainants and witnesses know how to report any subsequent problems, and the Title IX Coordinator or a designee, should follow-up with complainants to determine whether any retaliation or new incidents of harassment have occurred.
If LCC cannot take disciplinary action against the accused individual because the Complainant refuses to participate in the investigation, it should pursue other steps to limit the effects of the alleged harassment and prevent its recurrence.
Supportive Measures
Supportive measures are non-disciplinary, non-punitive individualized services offered free of charge to the Complainant or the Respondent regardless of whether a formal complaint has been filed. LCC will provide the Complainant and Respondent with supportive measures as appropriate and as reasonably available to restore or preserve equal access to LCC's education program or activities. These measures are designed to protect the safety of all Parties, protect LCC's educational environment, or deter sexual harassment. LCC will provide supportive measures on a confidential basis and will only make disclosures to those with a need to know to enable LCC to provide the service. Supportive measures may include counseling, extensions of deadlines, other course-related adjustments, modifications of work or class schedules, campus escort services, mutual restrictions on contact between the Parties, changes in work or housing locations, leaves of absence, increased security and monitoring of certain areas of the campus, and other similar measures.
Removal of Respondent Pending Final Determination
Upon receiving a report regarding sexual harassment, the Title IX Coordinator will make an immediate assessment concerning the health and safety of the Complainant and campus community as a whole. LCC has the right to order emergency removal of a Respondent, or if the Respondent is an employee, place the employee on administrative leave.
Emergency removal
LCC may remove a non-employee Respondent from LCC's education program or activity on an emergency basis after it conducts an individualized safety and risk analysis and determines that an immediate threat to the physical health or safety of any student or other individual arising from the allegations of sexual harassment justifies removal.
LCC may not use emergency removal to address a Respondent's threat of obstructing the sexual harassment investigation or destroying relevant evidence. Emergency removal is only available to address health or safety risks against individuals arising out of sexual harassment allegations, not to address other forms of misconduct that a Respondent might commit pending the processing of a complaint.
LCC's Title IX Coordinator or designee will conduct the individualized safety and risk analysis.
If the Title IX Coordinator determines emergency removal is appropriate, they or designee will provide the person LCC is removing from campus on an emergency basis with a notice and opportunity to attend a meeting and challenge the basis of their removal. The Title IX Coordinator or designee will determine whether the emergency removal from campus order is warranted after considering information provided by the Respondent challenging the emergency removal.
Administrative leave
LCC may place a non-student employee Respondent on administrative leave during the pendency of a grievance process described in the formal complaint process below. LCC will follow any relevant policies, procedures, collective bargaining agreements, or State law in placing an employee on administrative leave.
Dismissal of Formal Complaint
LCC must investigate the allegations in a formal complaint. However, LCC must dismiss the formal complaint and will not process the complaint under these procedures if any of the following three circumstances exist:
If the conduct alleged in the formal complaint would not constitute Title IX sexual harassment as defined in this procedure;
If the conduct alleged did not occur in LCC's education program or activity;
If the conduct alleged did not occur against a person in the United States.
LCC has discretion to dismiss a formal complaint or any allegation under the following circumstances:
If at any time during the investigation or hearing: a Complainant notifies the Title IX Coordinator in writing that the Complainant would like to withdraw the formal complaint or any allegations;
If the Respondent is no longer enrolled or employed by LCC or
If there are specific circumstances that prevent LCC from gathering evidence sufficient to reach a determination regarding responsibility as to the formal complaint or allegations.
If LCC dismissed the formal complaint or any allegations, the Title IX Coordinator shall simultaneously provide the Parties with written notice of the dismissal and reason LCC will also notify the Parties of their right to appeal.
LCC may commence proceedings under other policies and procedures after dismissing a formal complaint.
Informal resolution
If LCC determines that a formal complaint is appropriate for informal resolution, it may provide the Parties with the opportunity to participate in an informal resolution process, including mediation, at any time prior to reaching a determination regarding responsibility.
LCC will provide the Complainant and Respondent written disclosure of the allegations, the requirements of the informal resolution process including the circumstances under which it precludes the Parties from resuming a formal complaint arising from the same allegations, and any consequences resulting from participating in the informal resolution process, including the records that will be maintained or could be shared.
LCC must obtain the Parties' voluntary, written consent to the informal resolution process. If the Parties reach an agreement, LCC does not have to complete a full investigation and adjudication of a report of sexual harassment. At any time prior to agreeing to a resolution, any Party has the right to withdraw from the informal resolution process and resume the grievance process with respect to the formal complaint.
The informal resolution process is not available to resolve allegations that an employee sexually harassed a student.
If LCC imposes discipline against a student or employee as a result of the findings in its investigation, the student or employee may appeal the decision using the procedure for appealing a disciplinary decision.
If the Complainant is not satisfied with the results of the administrative determination, he/she/they may, within 15 days, submit a written appeal to an administrator pre-designated by the Title IX Coordinator. The designated administrator shall review the original complaint, the investigative report, the administrative decision, and the appeal. The designated administrator shall issue a final decision in the matter within 45 days after receiving the appeal. A copy of the decision rendered by the designated administrator shall be forwarded to the Complainant.The Complainant shall also be notified of his/her right to appeal this decision.
File Retention
LCC will retain on file for a period of at least 7 (seven) years after closing the case copies of:
the original complaint;
the investigatory report;
the summary of the report if one is prepared;
the notice provided to the Parties, of LCC's administrative determination and the right to appeal;
any appeal; and
LCC's final decision.
Dissemination of Policy and Procedures
LCC's board policy and administrative procedures related to harassment will include information that specifically addresses sexual violence. LCC's board policy and administrative procedures will be provided to all students, faculty members, members of the administrative staff, and members of the support staff, and will be posted around campus and on LCC's website.
When hired, employees are required to sign that they have received the policy and procedures, and the signed acknowledgment of receipt is placed in each employee's personnel file. In addition, these policies and procedures are incorporated into the LCC's course catalogs and orientation materials for new students.
LCC will provide training to all employees. This includes counselors, faculty, health personnel, law enforcement officers, coaches, and all staff who regularly interact with students. Training for academic staff should emphasize environmental harassment in the classroom. LCC will also provide training to students who lead student organizations. LCC should provide copies of the sexual harassment policies and training to any LCC law enforcement unit employees regarding the grievance procedures and any other procedures used for investigating reports of sexual violence.
In years in which a substantive policy or procedural change has occurred, all LCC employees will attend a training update or receive a copy of the revised policies and procedures.
Participants in training programs will be required to sign a statement that they have either understood the policies and procedures, their responsibilities, and their own and LCC's potential liability, or that they did not understand the policy and desire further training.
Education and Prevention for Students
In order to take proactive measures to prevent sexual harassment and violence toward students, LCC will provide preventive education programs and make victim resources, including comprehensive victim services, available. LCC will include such programs in their orientation programs for new students, and in training for student athletes and coaches. These programs will include discussion of what constitutes sexual harassment and sexual violence, LCC's policies and disciplinary procedures, and the consequences of violating these policies. A training program or informational services will be made available to all students at least once annually.
The education programs will also include information aimed at encouraging students to report incidents of sexual violence to the appropriate LCC and law-enforcement authorities. Since victims or third parties may be deterred from reporting incidents if alcohol, drugs, or other violations of LCC or campus rules were involved, LCC will inform students that the primary concern is for student safety and that use of alcohol or drugs never makes the victim at fault for sexual violence. If other rules are violated, LCC will address such violations separately from an allegation of sexual violence. Resolution and remediation of sexual harassment complaints will be prioritized over Student Conduct Code violations.
Notice to Persons Who Report a Sexual Assault
Title IX Harassment Complaints, Investigations, and Hearings
These Title IX sexual harassment procedures and the related policy protects students, employees, applicants for employment, and applicants for admission.
Jurisdictional Requirements – Application of Procedures
These procedures apply if the conduct meets the following three jurisdictional requirements:
The conduct took place in the United States;
The conduct took place in an LCC "education program or activity." This includes locations, events, or circumstances over which LCC exercised substantial control over both the Respondent and the context in which the harassment occurred, including on-campus and off-campus property and buildings LCC owns or controls or student organizations officially recognized by LCC own or control.
The conduct meets the definition of Title IX "sexual harassment."
Advisor: Throughout the grievance process, both the Complainant and Respondent have a right to an Advisor of their choice. If a Party does not have an Advisor at the time of the hearing, LCC must provide the Party an Advisor of its choice, free of charge. LCC establish restrictions regarding the extent to which the Advisor may participate in the proceedings as long as the restrictions apply equally to both Parties.
Complainant: A Complainant is an individual who alleges he/she/they is the victim of conduct that could constitute sexual harassment.
Decision-Maker: The person who will oversee the live hearing and make a determination of responsibility. LCC may have one Decision-Maker determine whether the Respondent is responsible and another Decision-Maker determine the appropriate level of penalty for the conduct.The Decision-Maker cannot be the Title IX Coordinator or the investigator.
Formal Complaint: A written complaint signed by the Complainant or Title IX Coordinator, alleging sexual harassment and requesting an investigation. If the Title IX Coordinator signs the formal complaint, he/she/they will not become a Party to the complaint.
Parties: As used in this procedure, this means the Complainant and Respondent.
Respondent: A Respondent is an individual reported to be the perpetrator of conduct that could constitute sexual harassment.
Formal Complaint Grievance Process
Notice to Parties
Upon receipt of a formal complaint, the Title IX Coordinator will provide the following notice in writing, to the Parties:
Notice of LCC's Title IX grievance process;
Notice of the allegations of alleged sexual harassment with sufficient details known at the time and with sufficient time to prepare a response before any initial interview;
Statement that the Respondent is presumed not responsible for the alleged conduct and that a determination regarding responsibility is made at the conclusion of the grievance process;
Notice that the Parties may have Advisor of their choice, who may be, but is not required to be, an attorney;
Notice that the Parties may inspect and review any evidence obtained as part of the investigation that is directly related to the allegations raised in the formal complaint, including the evidence upon which LCC does not intend to rely in reaching a determination regarding responsibility, and inculpatory or exculpatory evidence whether obtained from a Party or other source; and
Inform the Parties of any provision in LCC's code of conduct that prohibits knowingly making false statements or knowingly submitting false information during the grievance process.
If, in the course of an investigation, LCC decides to investigate allegations about the Complainant or Respondent that are not included in the notice provided above, the Title IX Coordinator will provide notice in writing of the additional allegations to the Parties.
1. Victims Rights Sexual Assault Victims/Survivors Rights
Sexual assault victims/survivors have the following rights:
To be free from any suggestions that victims must report the crimes in order to be assured of any other right provided under this procedure and to have any allegations of sexual assault treated seriously;
To be treated with dignity;
To be free from any suggestion that victims are responsible for the commission of crimes against them;
To be free from pressure from campus personnel to:
Report crimes if the victim does not wish to do so,
Report crimes as lesser offenses than the victim perceives the crime to be,
Refrain from reporting crimes,
Refrain from reporting crimes to avoid unwanted personal publicity.
To be notified of existing campus and community-based medical, counseling, mental health and student services for victims of sexual assault whether or not the crime is formally reported to campus or civil authorities;
To have access to campus counseling under the same terms and conditions as apply to other students in their institution seeking counseling; and
To be notified of options for changing their academic situation and other interim measures.
Accuser and accused must have the same opportunity to have others present at any hearing.
Equitable Treatment of the Parties
LCC's determination of responsibility is a neutral, fact-finding process. LCC will treat Complainants and Respondents equitably. The procedures will apply equally to both Parties. LCC will not discipline a Respondent unless it determines the Respondent was responsible for sexual harassment at the conclusion of the grievance process.
Statement of Presumption of Non-Responsibility
The investigation is a neutral, fact-finding process. LCC presumes all reports are in good faith. Further, LCC presumes the Respondent is not responsible for the alleged conduct. LCC makes its determination regarding responsibility at the conclusion of the grievance process.
Bias or Conflict of Interest
LCC's Title IX Coordinator, investigator, Decision-Maker, or any person designated by LCC to facilitate an informal resolution process, will not have potential actual bias or conflict of interest in the investigatory, hearing, sanctioning, or appeal process or bias for or against Complainants or Respondents generally. Actual bias is an articulated prejudice in favor of or against one Party or position; it is not generalized concern about the personal or professional backgrounds, positions, beliefs, or interests of the Decision-Maker in the process. LCC will ensure that the Title IX Coordinator, investigator, Decision-Maker, and facilitator receive training on:
The definition of sexual harassment in this procedure;
The scope of LCC's education program or activity;
How to conduct an investigation;
The grievance process including conducting hearings, appeals, and informal resolution processes; and
How to serve impartially, including avoiding: prejudgment of the facts at issue; conflicts of interest; and bias.
2. Legal Options Available
Criminal legal options
Acts of sexual misconduct prohibited by College policy may also be a crime. While the College uses different standards and definitions than law enforcement, sexual misconduct often overlaps with the crimes of rape, stalking, sexual harassment and assault and domestic or dating violence.
Legal options for victims who report a crime to law enforcement include-
Victims have the right to file a criminal complaint, go to court and ask for a restraining order for protection against stalking and domestic, dating and repeat violence.
The restraining order may include requirements that-
Restrain the abuser from any contact or further acts of abuse
Direct the abuser to leave the household
Prevent the abuser from being within 500 feet of the victim's residence, school or place of employment
Award temporary custody of minor children
Direct the abuser to pay support to the victim and the minor child or children if the abuser has obligation to do so
Civil legal options
Individuals do not need to report a crime to request a restraining order, sexual abuse protective order or stalking protective order. See list of resources for contact information.
Those who believe their education institution has discriminated against them or someone else, or failed to follow Title IX laws, can file a complaint with the Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights (OCR).
A victim may also seek monetary damages through a civil lawsuit. A civil suit may be against the offender or others considered in some way responsible for the crime. Victims should seek the advice of a lawyer regarding their claims.
In addition, employees who are victims of domestic violence may be eligible for protected leave under the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) or Oregon Family Leave Act (OFLA). Individuals may also seek housing assistance, name and identity protection, as well as address confidentiality.
3. Services Available
Campus Based Services:
Education and Assistance
Information and assistance to advise and assist victims/survivors of these offenses is available through the following college offices, which also are available to present educational and risk-reduction programs for staff and students.
Title IX Coordinator - 541-463-3010
Counseling Center - 541-463-3600
Public Safety - 541-463-5558
Health Clinic - 541-463-5665
Gender Equity Center - 541-463-5353
Mental Health and Wellness Center - 541-463-5920
Victims of rape or any form of sexual assault are strongly encouraged to seek immediate medical assistance from Student Health or the nearest hospital. For assaults occurring on college property after hours contact Public Safety and they will contact emergency service personnel to respond and assist.
State and Community Based Services:
Sexual Assault Support Services - 541-343-7277 or 800-788-4727
Victims Assistance Program - 541-682-4523
McKenzie Willamette Hospital - 541-726-4400
Sacred Heart Hospital - 541-686-6931
Peace Harbor – Florence - 541-997-8412
Cottage Grove Community Hospital - 541-942-0511
4. Privacy Rights
To protect the privacy of those involved, the Parties and Advisors are required to sign a confidentiality agreement prior to attending an interview or otherwise participating in the LCC's grievance process. The confidentiality agreement restricts dissemination of any of the evidence subject to inspection and review or use of this evidence for any purpose unrelated to the Title IX grievance process. The confidentiality agreement will not restrict the ability of either Party to discuss the allegations under investigation.
Use of Privileged Information
LCC's complaint procedure does not require, allow, rely upon, or otherwise use questions or evidence that constitute, or seek disclosure of, information protected under a legally-recognized privilege (e.g., attorney-client privilege, doctor-patient privilege, spousal privilege, etc.), unless the person holding the privilege provides voluntary, written consent to waive the privilege.
With the exception of health care providers and licensed college counselors, all employees are required to inform the College's Title IX Coordinator of any and all reports alleging sexual misconduct by college students or employees. Sexual misconduct is defined in the College's Sexual Respect/Sexual Misconduct Procedure. Sexual Assault is defined in the College's Sexual Misconduct and Stalking Procedure. Employees must provide the Title IX Coordinator with all of the information a complainant shares with them.
Lane counselors and Health Clinic providers are confidential resources in their role as personal counselors or medical care providers and are not required to report any information about an incident to the Title IX Coordinator without the complainant's permission. This protection regarding counselor/client or doctor/patient communications applies only when counselors or medical care providers are supporting individuals in a personal counseling or medical care provider role and only to the extent authorized by state law.
When considering a request for confidentiality, the College must weigh its duty to protect the community from sexual misconduct/sexual assault against the individual's desire to remain anonymous. If the unwanted conduct can be stopped without disclosing the complainant's name, then the College will respect the complainant's wish to remain anonymous. When the conduct alleged, if true, presents a risk of future harm to the complainant or other members of the College community, for example in cases involving use of a weapon, predatory behavior, violence, or where there is a pattern of similar misconduct, the Title IX Coordinator may initiate an investigation, in which case the College cannot withhold the complainant's identity from the person they are accusing. Anytime the College makes the decision to move forward and must disclose the complainant's name, the complainant will be notified in writing of this decision.
LCC Employees and Officials with Authority
LCC Officials with Authority are not confidential resources and are required to report allegations of sexual harassment to the Title IX Coordinator promptly. All other employees are encouraged to report allegations to the Title IX Coordinator but are not required to do so.
LCC has designated that all employees with the exception of counselors, mental health counselors, and medical care providers are officials with authority.
Officials with Authority are required to report all relevant information they know about sexual harassment including the name of the Respondent, the Complainant, any other witnesses, and the date, time, and location of the alleged incident.
Date Adopted
Date Last Reviewed