What is Hazing?

SUNY Delhi Defines Hazing as:

Hazing is a serious violation of College policy and New York State law. SUNY Delhi policy specifically prohibits students from engaging collectively or individually in any non-accidental, costly aspect(s) of group induction activities for recognized or unrecognized organizations, or athletic teams that: a) do not appear to be group-relevant assessments/preparations, and/or b) are excessive, dangerous, or degrading in their application or constitute violations of local, state or federal law or any other SUNY Delhi policy regardless of the consent of the participants. Group induction activities are those tasks formally or informally required to obtain or maintain membership and/or participatory legitimacy for new, prospective or current members and/or to attain progressive membership status and/or leadership positions within the organization.

This includes, but is not limited to:

Forced or required participation in physical activities such as calisthenics, exercises or games;
Any form of tattooing or branding;
Forced, coerced or required consumption of alcohol or other drugs;
Any form of physical brutality, including paddling, striking with fists, open hands or objects;
Participation in illegal activities;
Intentional or reckless engagement in conduct which creates a substantial risk of physical injury to another person;
Forced, coerced or required consumption of any food or other substance;
Creation of excessive fatigue or sleep deprivation;
Any act that causes psychological harm, embarrassment, ridicule or emotional distress to any individual;
Forced or required inappropriate dress, or full or partial nudity in any situation for any reason;
Any violation of NYS Hazing Law or Greek Council Hazing regulations.

SUNY Delhi will take disciplinary action against any individual, group or organization found to be in violation of this policy.

How to report Hazing?

You can call the SUNY Delhi Hazing Hotline: 607-746-4294.

Please make sure to use enough information that we can investigate if you choose to report anonymously.

You can also use the Hazing Concern form.

How do we investigate reports of hazing?

The following are the procedures found in the Organizational Code of Conduct:

Procedures: Notice to the College

The institution may receive notice of an allegation or potential violation of this or other related policies in a number of ways, including, but not limited to:

The filing of an incident report with the appropriate College department or official, including self-reporting.
Any Responsible Employee is made aware of any potential violation of this or other related policies.
Any Responsible Employee observes any potential violation of this or other related policies.
Any Responsible Employee is aware of an RSO’s climate or culture that may indicate a probability of violations of this or any other related policies.

Self-Reporting of Individual Misconduct and Amnesty

RSO leadership are encouraged to immediately report any violations committed by members of the RSO of this or other College policies to the Office of Student Rights & Responsibilities. This report should provide a detailed description of the events that transpired, the names of any individuals involved, and a description of any internal disciplinary actions taken by the RSO. If RSO chooses to self-report behavior in this manner, the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee will only investigate the individual(s) implicated in the report. Unless information discovered in the investigation suggests that the incident was aided, abetted, sanctioned or organized by the RSO, the investigation will be limited to the individuals implicated in the self-report and not the RSO. However, if information is uncovered in the investigation that suggests that the RSO aided, abetted, sanctioned or organized the event/incident, the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee may launch a formal investigation of the RSO.

Students who make a complaint under this policy or who participate in an investigation related to this policy will not be charged with other minor College policy violations that are brought to light in the course of the investigation that arose out of, or were committed as a direct result of, the incident(s) under investigation (i.e. students forced to consume alcohol as part of a hazing incident will not be charged with violations of the University’s alcohol policy) as long as those behaviors do not represent a threat to the health, safety or well-being of others. The College reserves the right to follow up with students related to those issues as appropriate in a non-disciplinary setting.

Preliminary Inquiry

Upon receiving notice of an alleged violation of this or other College Policies involving a RSO, the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities (or designee), in consultation with the appropriate College departments, will conduct a preliminary assessment to determine if there is a reasonable basis for conducting an investigation into the alleged violations of College Policies. This initial assessment will include a review of the information reported. This may include, but is not limited to:

interview(s) with the person(s) who made the report.
review prior conduct history of the RSO and relevant members.
gather information that would corroborate elements of the report.
review of any materials related to the report.

Once a determination has been made that the alleged violations warrant a more comprehensive investigation or response, the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee will notify the RSO in writing to outline the alleged violations, the resolution options based on alleged violations, and to schedule an educational conference (if applicable). This notification will also be sent to RSO Advisor(s), any relevant College departments, and if applicable, the RSO inter/national governing body.

If the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee determines that no investigation is necessary, the report is documented and administratively closed. The Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee may, at their discretion, notify the RSO of the information received and that the matter is closed. In these cases, the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee may choose, at their discretion, to maintain the confidentiality of any reporting party(ies).

Interim Measures

In cases where it is determined that certain continued operations of a RSO constitute a reasonable threat of harm to individuals, damage of College premises, or disruption to the educational mission of the College, the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee may issue interim measures, up to and including an interim suspension of all RSO activities, pending final disposition of the matter. Upon issuance of an interim measure, the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee will notify the RSO representative and other appropriate parties in writing.

If a RSO wishes to seek a review of these interim measures, the RSO must submit a written request for an administrative review to the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee. This administrative review should happen within five (5) business days of the College’s receipt of the request. This administrative review is not a hearing on the merits of the underlying allegations, but is merely a review to determine what, if any, interim measures are appropriate. The review may lead to a continuance, revocation, and/or modification of the interim measures, including modifications that may be more restrictive than the initial measures. The College will notify RSO leadership of the outcome of the review in writing within three (3) business days of the review meeting. This notification will include the College’s decision and the rationale for that decision.

If the College investigation lasts beyond 30 days (as outlined below, beginning from the date of the Educational Conference), the RSO may request another review of the interim measures, which will be handled similarly to the initial request for review as outlined above.

Resolution Options

Upon notice of a potential violation, the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee will conduct an assessment of the allegations to determine the applicable resolution options available to address the alleged policy violations. In so doing, the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee may make use of a Violation Rubric [See Attachment A]. This Violation Rubric provides recommended adjudication models for various types of violations of this Code. The determination of resolution model will include consideration of the following:

the severity of the alleged violations
the risk of harm to other persons
the conduct history of the RSO
current status of the RSO
any other relevant factors.

The Violation Rubric provides three levels of process associated with resolving alleged violations of this Code: Prescribed Resolution, Partnership Process Resolution, and Formal Investigation. An Educational Conference will be used when the Partnership Process Resolution or Formal Investigation options are utilized. The Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee may, at any time, determine that a case should be moved from a lower tier to a formal investigation.

According to the Violation Rubric: Hazing falls under Tier 2 and 3.

Hazing (cases not involving substantial threat to physical/emotional harm, i.e. errand running/cleaning) is in Tier 2, Partnership Process

Hazing (cases involving substantial threat to physical/emotional harm, i.e. force/coerced alcohol consumption) is in Tier 3, Formal Investigation

The Educational Conference

In those cases where the Violation Rubric would suggest a Partnership or Formal Adjudication Process, or in those cases that began with a Prescribed Outcomes Process but the RSO elects to have the case adjudicated through the Formal Adjudication Process, the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee will schedule an Educational Conference with the RSO representative and RSO Advisor and other appropriate parties.

This meeting provides an opportunity for the leadership of the RSO, the RSO advisor(s) and the RSO inter/national governing body (if applicable) to discuss the nature of the allegations, the rights and responsibilities of the RSO, the resolution options available to the RSO based on the nature of the allegations, and the specific steps involved in the different resolution options. Participation in the Educational Conference is voluntary; however, the Director of Student Rights & responsibilities or designee, may proceed with the process in the absence of participation from the RSO.

In the event that the RSO needs additional time to select the preferred resolution option, the RSO will be given one business day following the Educational Conference to notify the Director of Student Rights & responsibilities or designee of the preferred resolution option. The Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee will make the final determination on the resolution option to be used in investigating and adjudicating the alleged violations.

Partnership Process

For this resolution process, the RSO is given the opportunity to conduct an internal investigation. The Partnership Process will include the following:

STEP 1. Meet with Director: The Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee will, in consultation with the RSO representative and RSO advisor and other appropriate parties, develop an investigation scope and timeline based on the nature of the allegations.

STEP 2. Conduct Internal Investigation: The RSO must conduct an investigation and submit a written investigative report within the agreed-upon timeline, barring exigent circumstances as determined by the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee, or as otherwise specified in writing by the College.

Report should be detailed and specific, including the names of specific individuals involved in the alleged violation and any internal disciplinary action the RSO has implemented relative to those individuals.

STEP 3. Report Review by Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or Designee: (note – the report should be submitted in writing electronically to the Director or Designee. The review process does not typically require an in-person meeting).

The Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee will review the RSO’s investigative report and will make one of the following determinations:

The Director or Designee agrees that the report is complete and will schedule a resolution meeting to discuss the report and findings and review next steps; or
The Director or Designee agrees that the report is complete, that the behavior in question is individual in nature, and the individuals implicated in the chapter report are forwarded for adjudication under the student code of conduct and the case involving the RSO is closed; or
The Director or Designee determines that the report is insufficient or incomplete, and provides feedback to the RSO and provides instruction for further investigation; or
The Director or Designee determines that the RSO has intentionally provided inaccurate or incomplete information, obstructed the process, or is otherwise non-compliant or uncooperative. The Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee will then determine whether to move forward with investigation and adjudication of the allegations under the Formal Resolution Process.

STEP 4. Partnership Process Resolution Meeting:

Once the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee has determined that the report is complete, the Director or designee will meet with the RSO representative and/or advisor (and other parties as appropriate i.e. inter/national governing body) and one of the following determinations will be made:

No Policy Violation: If the RSO report determines that no policies were violated by the RSO, and the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee accepts this determination, the process concludes for the RSO. Individuals implicated in the report may be forwarded for individual adjudication as outlined in the Student Code of Conduct.
Responsibility Fully Accepted: If the RSO report determines that the RSO was responsible for all policy violation(s) that were alleged, and the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee accepts this determination, the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee will initiate the Determination of Outcomes process.
Responsibility Partially or Not Accepted: If the RSO report determines that the RSO was responsible for some but not all, or for none of the policy violation(s) that were alleged, the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee will make one of the following determinations:
the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee may accept the determinations from the report and will move forward to the outcomes process solely on the allegations for which the RSO accepted responsibility if applicable; or
The Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee may not accept the determinations from the report and will move forward in investigating and adjudicating the matter under the Formal Investigation Process.

If individual students are identified at any point in the partnership process to have potentially violated any College policies, they may be individually referred to the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee for investigation and adjudication.

Determinations of responsibility through the Partnership Process are final and may not be appealed.

Formal Investigation Procedures

If the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or Designee determines at any point that a formal investigation is necessary, the Director or Designee may assign the case to an investigator(s) for a formal investigation. The Director or designee will notify the RSO, the RSO advisor, and other appropriate parties that a formal investigation is being initiated.

During the course of the investigation, up to and including the five (5) day review period, the RSO may request to enter information into the record and may recommend specific witnesses to the investigator. Ultimately, determinations of relevance of information or witnesses will be determined by the investigator.

In completing the investigation, the investigator(s) may:

Make contact (if possible) with the individual(s) who submitted the initial information.
Interview any individuals with relevant information.
Request relevant information from RSO members (i.e. screenshots of text messages or pictures/videos) and note whether or not RSO members were compliant in sharing requested information.
Provide relevant information at any point during the investigation to the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee related to interim measures.
Require RSO members, or a select group of RSO members (i.e. all new members of the RSO) to participate in an interview and may restrict communication between RSO members during the interview (for example, sequestering RSO members in a room and prohibiting interview participants from using their cell phone or other devices during the interview/sequestration).
Request students to undergo a physical examination by a campus health center staff member or other appropriate medical professional of the College’s choosing and to sign a waiver allowing that medical professional to share a summary of the relevant results of that examination (e.g., physical abuse, BAC, drug usage, etc.). When possible, personally identifying information will be limited or redacted.

Students participating in a formal investigation process are expected to participate in an active, cooperative and truthful manner. Failing to participate in any fashion, including failure to provide requested information or testimony, may constitute a violation(s) of the Code of Student Conduct. Additionally, the investigators will document these failures and the Hearing Officer(s) may make any inferences based on these failures.

The College will complete the initial investigation in a period of no more than 30 days, barring any exigent circumstances. In the event that exigent circumstances arise that will require a delay beyond 30 days, the College will notify the RSO representative of the delay, including the reasons for the delay and the anticipated timeline for completing the investigation.

At the completion of the investigation, the investigator(s) will provide a written draft of the investigation report to the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee. The Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee will review that report for accuracy or thoroughness and, once complete, will share the draft of the report (with necessary redactions) with the RSO representative, RSO advisor, and any other appropriate parties for review and comment. The RSO must provide any comments related to the investigative report in writing to the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee within five (5) business days of the receipt of the report, barring exigent circumstances as determined by the Director or designee. Upon receipt of these comments (if applicable) the Director or designee will generate the final report and share it with the RSO representative, advisor and any other appropriate parties at least five (5) days in advance of any formal resolution. The Director or designee will make the final determination of the relevance of any information gathered during the investigation.

Upon completion of the final report, the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee will schedule a meeting with the appropriate RSO representatives to determine the appropriate adjudication process. At this meeting, the RSO may choose one of the following options for adjudication:

Informal Resolution – the RSO may accept the findings of the investigation and determinations of the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee based on the investigation report. If this occurs, the process will move forward to the outcomes process.
Formal Resolution – the RSO may not accept the findings of the investigation and/or determinations made by the Director of Student Rights & Responsibilities or designee. If this occurs, the RSO may choose to have the matter resolved through either an Administrative or Formal Hearing. Regardless of the hearing body selected, the RSO will be given a notice of the time, date and location of the hearing at least seven (7) days in advance of the hearing.
- Administrative Hearing – IF AVAILABLE, the RSO may select to have the case adjudicated by a single administrator designated by the College.
  - The hearing officer may elect to call and question witnesses as necessary, including the investigator(s) who compiled the investigative report. The RSO may question any witnesses called by submitting written questions to the hearing officer.
  - The RSO will be given the opportunity, in person or in writing, to submit or give a statement to the hearing officer and to respond to any information provided by witnesses.
  - The hearing officer may question the RSO representative.
  - The RSO may bring an advisor of their choosing to the hearing. The RSO advisor may not speak on behalf of the RSO, question witnesses, or actively participate in the hearing other than to advise the RSO representative.
  - The hearing officer will make determination of responsibility using a preponderance of evidence (more likely than not) standard of evidence.
- Formal Hearing Before Student Conduct Council– the RSO may request to have the case adjudicated by the Student Conduct Council.
  - The hearing officer may elect to call and question witnesses as necessary, including the investigator(s) who compiled the investigative report. The RSO may question any witnesses called by submitting written questions to the hearing officer.
  - The RSO will be given the opportunity, in person or in writing, to submit or give a statement to the hearing officer and to respond to any information provided by witnesses.
  - The hearing officer may question the RSO representative.
  - The RSO may bring an advisor of their choosing to the hearing. The RSO advisor may not speak on behalf of the RSO, question witnesses, or actively participate in the hearing other than to advise the RSO representative.
  - The hearing officer will make determination of responsibility using a preponderance of evidence (more likely than not) standard of evidence.

Are there other laws or policies relating to hazing?

The SUNY Delhi Organizational Code of Conduct holds the following Hazing policy:

Hazing – The RSO aids, abets, incites, organizes, approves or otherwise participates in any behavior that would constitute a violation of the College hazing policy would constitute a violation of this policy. For the purposes of this policy, “approves or otherwise participates” would include observation of hazing activities by individuals in a position to intervene but who fail to intervene, including organization officers/leaders who are aware of planned hazing activities and condone or fail to prevent that hazing from occurring, regardless of their participation. (See Code 16 in the Student Code of Conduct).

‘Recognized Student Organization (RSO)’ – Any group that has been recognized by SUNY Delhi and/ Student Senate as a student organization or has applied for such recognition. This would include, but is not limited to, unchartered provisional chapters/interest groups.

NY Anti-Hazing Law:

120.16 Hazing in the first degree.

A person is guilty of hazing in the first degree when, in the course of another person’s initiation into or affiliation with any organization, he intentionally or recklessly engages in conduct which creates a substantial risk of physical injury to such other person or a third person and thereby causes such injury.

Hazing in the first degree is a class A misdemeanor.

120.17 Hazing in the second degree.

A person is guilty of hazing in the second degree when, in the course of another person’s initiation or affiliation with any organization, he intentionally or recklessly engages in conduct which creates a substantial risk of physical injury to such other person or a third person.

Hazing in the second degree is a violation.

The Stop Campus Hazing Act defines Hazing as:

‘Hazing’ means any intentional, knowing, or reckless act committed by a person (whether individually or in concert with other persons) against another person or persons regardless of the willingness of such other person or persons to participate, that—

(I) is committed in the course of an initiation into, an affiliation with, or the maintenance of membership in, a student organization; and

(II) causes or creates a risk, above the reasonable risk encountered in the course of participation in the institution of higher education or the organization (such as the physical preparation necessary for participation in an athletic team), of physical or psychological injury including—

whipping, beating, striking, electronic shocking, placing of a harmful substance on someone’s body, or similar activity;
causing, coercing, or otherwise inducing sleep deprivation, exposure to the elements, confinement in a small space, extreme calisthenics, or other similar activity;
causing, coercing, or otherwise inducing another person to consume food, liquid, alcohol, drugs, or other substances;
causing, coercing, or otherwise inducing another person to perform sexual acts;
any activity that places another person in reasonable fear of bodily harm through the use of threatening words or conduct;
any activity against another person that includes a criminal violation of local, State, Tribal, or Federal law; and
any activity that induces, causes, or requires another person to perform a duty or task that involves a criminal violation of local, State, Tribal, or Federal law.

‘Student Organization’ means an organization at an institution of higher education (such as a club, society, association, varsity or junior varsity athletic team, club sports team, fraternity, sorority, band, or student government) in which two or more of the members are students enrolled at the institution of higher education, whether or not the organization is established or recognized by the institution.

How does SUNY Delhi work to prevent hazing?

Hazing in any form is not permitted at SUNY Delhi and will not be tolerated. Students who are looking to join a fraternities or sororities, athletic groups, and/or clubs and organizations are to be treated with respect and dignity at all times. SUNY Delhi is committed to making sure we educate student organization leaderships, members, and the campus population on what hazing is, and active bystander intervention training. Leaders of organizations are trained on ethical leadership, and how to build group unity without the use of hazing. The college utilizes virtual training on hazing, in person basic training on hazing, and we cover “what is hazing?” during in person orientation for all new students. Organization membership must be trained annually. All new students are required to participate in a bystander intervention activity fair where they practice putting intervention choices and decisions into action. We also work of bystander intervention training with groups on campus, including athletics. Additional training is required for Greek executive boards (presidents, risk management, and new member roles) which covers hazing problem solving, table-top group skills practice, ethical leadership skills, and ideas for building healthy group dynamics.

Hazing Transparency Report, updated July 1, 2025

Violations for Spring 2025:

Name of organization: Kappa Omega Iota (KOI)

Dates of alleged incidents: Fall 2024, Spring 2025

Date the investigation began: April 28, 2025

Date of responsible finding: June 6, 2025

Date organization was informed of finding: June 13, 2025

Policy Violations: Organizational Code of Conduct charges, Alcohol and Hazing

Description of violation that resulted in finding of responsibility: Following an investigation where Kappa Omega Iota failed to participate actively beyond providing a written statement, the council found sufficient evidence to support that Kappa Omega Iota engaged in the following behaviors:

Underage new members during the new member process were given alcohol by current members.
New members were required to participate in pointless or embarrassing tasks such as:
- to wear particular clothing.
- to carry certain items on them at all times and keep the items hidden.
- to send degrading messages to alumni.
- to participate it potentially sexually harassing behaviors which included outlining members private parts.
Potential New members were locked in a bathroom while scary music was played.

Sanction: Removal of Recognition (may reapply after 1 year, if accepted must complete additional hazing education and overhaul their new member process and will be on org probation)

Violations Spring 2023:

Name of organization: Beta Delta Epsilon (BDE)

Date of alleged incidents: September 26, 2022

Date the investigation began: January 25, 2023

Date of responsible finding: February 17, 2023

Date organization was informed of finding: February 21, 2023

Policy Violations: Code of Conduct charges, Hazing, Greek Council Policy

Description of violation that resulted in finding of responsibility: Following an investigation where Beta Delta Epsilon cooperated, but did not acknowledge responsibility for hazing, the council found sufficient evidence to support that Beta Delta Epsilon engaged in the following behaviors:

New members were required or coerced
- to participate in physical activities such as squats, jumping jacks, mud angels, and running for extended periods of time in the cold.
- To go to the gym together.
- To wear “blacks”.
- To always wear their bookbag.
- Into controlling behaviors such as: being gps tracked, turning in car keys, limiting access to social media, not allowing new members to participate in school activities except for community service.
New members experience harassing behavior
- Such as yelling in their face and being grabbed.
New membership procedure wasn’t followed:
- Full schedules weren’t provided ahead of time.
- Activities ended after the mandated end time passed.

Sanction: Removal of Recognition