Frequently
Asked Questions

An Administrative Closure is one of three types of resolutions used by the Center, the other two being Informal Resolutions and Formal Resolutions. It is a broad category that encompasses several different reasons a matter may be closed by the Center without a formal or informal resolution.[1]

[1] https://uscenterforsafesport.org/response-and-resolution/

The Center’s decision to administratively close a matter can be made for several reasons. The most common reason a matter is administratively closed is because the Claimant(s) decided not to participate in the Center’s Response & Resolution Process. The Center places great weight on a Claimant’s decision of whether to participate in its process, and it is difficult to proceed with the investigative process in these scenarios, as the Center’s ability to conduct a thorough investigation and collect evidence is limited. An administrative closure allows the Center to reopen the matter if the Claimant(s) decides to participate in the process in the future.

Example:

• An assistant coach files an incident report that alleges the head coach (the individual alleged to have engaged in misconduct is referred to as a Respondent) of a swim program sexually assaulted one of his then-minor athletes, who is now an adult. After receiving the report, the Center immediately contacts local law enforcement, then it reaches out to the Claimant (the athlete in the report) to let them know about the report and explain the Center’s process. After the explanation, the Claimant indicates that they are not ready to speak with Center staff. Center staff explains that the Claimant has the right to decide whether to participate and that the matter will be closed, for now, because the Center staff is unable to get additional information related to the allegations, identify witness, and/or obtain available evidence, and that the matter will be reopened any time in the future if the Claimant decides to move forward.

The second most common reason a matter is administratively closed is that there isn’t enough information available to engage in a full investigation. This happens most often when the Center determines early in its process that there is not enough information to show, by a preponderance of evidence, that a violation occurred. Because the Center does not adhere to a statute of limitations, it is particularly challenging to collect information and evidence on decades-old cases. Using an administrative closure in these situations allows the Center to direct resources to areas of identified risk and allows Response & Resolution staff to focus on other matters.

Example:

• The Center receives an incident report that alleges an athlete (Respondent) physically assaulted a minor athlete (Claimant) from an opposing team. Early in its process, Center staff speak with the Claimant’s parent, who relays to the Center staff that no assault occurred. Based on this information, the Center explains to the minor athlete’s parents that the matter will be administratively closed and can be reopened if additional information becomes available.

There are a few additional reasons why the Center may administratively close a matter other than the two most common reasons listed above. These include: when a report is filed but the Claimant(s) identity is not known; when a Respondent is unknown or deceased and a Center matter has not been informally or formally resolved prior to the Respondent’s death; and when a matter has been previously resolved by a National Governing Body or one of its Local Affiliated Organizations. In many instances, an administrative closure is accompanied by a Letter of Admonishment.

One of the primary goals of the Center is to educate Participants to help foster a safe and respectful sport environment. In furtherance of this goal, the Center may send Letters of Admonishment to notify Respondents of allegations, to remind them of their obligation as a Participant to adhere to the Code and other relevant policies/standards, and to provide them an opportunity to reflect upon and adjust their behavior moving forward.

Example:

• The Center receives an incident report that alleges an athlete (Respondent) made a snide comment to a fellow teammate about that teammate’s recent performance. The Center talks to the teammate (Claimant), and they confirm this was the first and only time the Respondent has ever behaved this way. Based on this information, the Center explains to the Claimant that this conduct would not constitute a violation and the matter will be administratively closed. The Claimant is then encouraged to let the Center know if similar conduct happens again.
  
  The Center then issues a Letter of Admonishment to the Respondent explaining that continuation of such behavior could constitute Emotional and Physical Misconduct and a violation of the SafeSport Code subject to sanctions.

When a matter is administratively closed, it is considered resolved. Notices of the closure are provided to the Claimant(s), NGBs, and the Respondent, if they are aware a report has been made alleging they engaged in misconduct. Importantly, the matter can quickly be reopened and proceed through a full investigation.

Another important note is that an NGB or an LAO, per its own policy and procedures, can still implement Temporary Measures or a Safety Plan, so long as such temporary measures do not result in a de facto suspension.

Any time the Center receives additional information about a closed matter, it thoroughly reviews the new information to determine whether additional investigation is needed. In the matter of administrative closures, the Center will evaluate the new information or evidence and determine whether the matter should be re-opened and continue through the Response & Resolution process.

Yes. To date, the Center has reopened more than 200 matters of alleged abuse within the Olympic and Paralympic Movement.

An administrative closure can happen at any stage in the Response & Resolution process. Most commonly, it occurs in early in the investigative process. The matters that close in the early stages have typically gone through preliminary investigative steps, meaning Center staff have spoken to witnesses, third-party reporters, and even law enforcement or have conducted interviews with Claimant(s), witnesses, and potentially the Respondent.