Workplace Harassment & Culture Compliance Self-Assessment

1
1. Comprehensive Policy & Information Hub
Have we published a single comprehensive source of information covering all harassment and sexual misconduct policies and procedures?
Does the source comply with minimum content requirements, content principles, and prominence principles (E6.2–E6.3)?
Is the policy accessible without login, well-signposted on the university website, and communicated annually to staff and students?
Have we made historical versions of our policies available and logged changes transparently?
Do all other internal documents align with the comprehensive source without contradiction?
2
2. Reporting Mechanisms
Have we clearly explained how students, staff, and third parties can report incidents (including anonymous and third-party reporting)? (E6.11n.ii)
Do we offer multiple reporting methods (in-person, online, anonymous)?
Are barriers to reporting, including fear of reprisal, uncertainty, or access, explicitly addressed and removed?
Do our reporting systems uphold confidentiality, comply with GDPR, and explain how information will be used? (E6.11n.iii)
Is there a clear and survivor-centred response process after a report is submitted (triage, support, investigation)?
3
3. Managing Reports & Investigation Outcomes
Do we provide support to all students involved, including complainants, respondents, and witnesses? (E6.11n.v)
Are our investigation and decision-making processes transparent, fair, and consistent with natural justice? (E6.11n.vii & §32)
Are those involved in cases (victims and respondents) informed of the outcomes and reasons for decisions? (E6.11n.viii & §33)
4
4. Preventative Steps & Institutional Culture
Have we taken multiple credible steps to reduce the likelihood of harassment and sexual misconduct? (E6.11n.i & §23–25)
Have we gathered or analysed prevalence and reporting data, and used it to inform action? (E6.11n.i & §23b)
Are we evaluating the effectiveness of our interventions and adjusting as needed? (E6.11n.i & §23c)
5
5. Staff-Student Relationships
Have we implemented a ban or mitigation strategy to manage staff-student intimate relationships? (E6.5–E6.6)
If a ban is not in place, do we have mandatory disclosure, safeguards, and disciplinary provisions?
Are all disclosures managed confidentially and fairly?
6
6. Training for Staff and Students
Is training mandatory for students and staff (e.g. induction, consent, bystander, case handling)? (E6.11n.iv & §26–28)
Is staff training specialised and role-appropriate, e.g. for responders, investigators, panel members?
Is training evidence-based, regularly updated, and inclusive of freedom of speech guidance?
7
7. Freedom of Speech Safeguards
Do our policies respect the Freedom of Speech Principles (E6.8–E6.9), including academic content exemptions?
Is there a rebuttable presumption that academic materials and debate do not constitute harassment?
8
8. NDAs and Restrictive Clauses
Have we ceased use of NDAs or any clause that restricts students from disclosing experiences of harassment? (E6.10)
Are legacy contracts and third-party arrangements also under review for compliance?
9
9. Capacity and Resources
Have we assessed whether our capacity and resourcing match our risk level and prevalence rates? (E6.7 & §54–55)
Do we have trained personnel with the time and expertise to manage disclosures, investigations, and student support?
10
Enter your name and email to receive your score instantly!
11
Name* This field is required.
First Name
Last Name
12
Email* This field is required.
example@example.com
13
Phone Number
Please enter a valid phone number.
14
Calculation25–28: Excellent – Highly compliant and proactive. 19–24: Good – Mostly compliant, with some areas for improvement. 12–18: At Risk – Significant gaps that could lead to legal or reputational issues. Below 12: High Risk – Urgent action required to meet basic compliance standards.
Should be Empty: