UCLA

This study sought to add to limited existing literature regarding higher education institutions which offer restorative justice (RJ) as an alternative response to student sexual misconduct. Through sixteen interviews with Title IX Coordinators and other administrators at nine institutions as well as document analysis, the research provides information about how early adopter institutions assess readiness for implementation of RJ practices for sexual misconduct and evaluate their practices following implementation. My research documents the challenges faced by administrators in implementing evaluation and why some campuses implementing RJ are not currently engaging in evaluation. Support from stakeholders, staff capacity and institutional foundation in restorative justice were key indicators of readiness. Administrators also considered policy language and potential legal issues. While evaluation is not a formal part of the implementation process in many settings, some campuses are assessing how students feel about the process itself and about outcomes of the process. Administrators named fear of causing harm to students as a challenge of implementing evaluation in addition to lack of time and staff capacity. Results from this study provide administrators interested in implementing restorative practices for student sexual harm on their campus with an outline of factors to consider in their own readiness. They may also prove fruitful in moving the conversation about evaluation forward among those considering implementing and those who have already implemented alike.