Small and midsize colleges face many of the same complicated institutional challenges as universities with tens of thousands of students. A discrimination complaint does not become simpler because it happens on a smaller campus. A Title IX investigation does not require less care because an institution has a lean administrative team. When allegations involve retaliation, harassment, employee misconduct, or other sensitive issues, the expectations surrounding fairness and thoroughness remain high regardless of enrollment.
What does change is the amount of internal capacity an institution may have available to respond.
A large university may have a sizable compliance office with employees who regularly handle investigations. Smaller colleges are more likely to have administrators wearing several hats at once. When a difficult complaint arrives, finding the right expertise can become a practical challenge. For these institutions, access to specialized outside investigators can provide another option without requiring them to maintain every type of expertise internally.
Smaller Does Not Mean Simpler
It is tempting to assume that smaller institutions encounter fewer complicated complaints simply because they have fewer students and employees. The reality is that many of the same issues can arise on campuses of every size.
The National Center for Education Statistics reports that the United States has thousands of degree-granting postsecondary institutions, including a substantial number of smaller public, private nonprofit, and private for-profit schools. These institutions vary tremendously in enrollment and resources, but all must manage policies and processes that affect their campus communities.
The investigative issues themselves can also be surprisingly broad. Experienced investigator Jeffrey Lamoureaux says CIXE Investigations has worked primarily with small and midsize higher education institutions. His investigative experience extends beyond sex-based harassment and discrimination to matters involving pay equity, workplace violence, bullying, retaliation, whistleblower concerns, theft, and general employee misconduct or professionalism.
That range illustrates why smaller institutions may occasionally need specialized help. An administrator who understands campus policy well may not routinely investigate every type of complaint that lands on their desk.
Start With the Expertise the Case Actually Requires
When resources are limited, it can be tempting to begin by asking, "What can we afford?"
A better first question is: "What does this particular investigation require?"
An institution should identify the nature of the allegations, applicable policies, potential complexity, and expertise necessary to conduct the investigation. Once those questions are answered, administrators can evaluate outside investigators based on what the case actually needs rather than choosing a provider solely because that person happens to be available.
Relevant experience matters because investigations are not interchangeable. Someone may be a capable general investigator without having extensive experience with Title IX procedures or civil rights complaints.
Lamoureaux has seen this distinction matter in practice. "A smaller institution may call because it doesn't have someone internally who handles that particular type of complaint every day," he says. "My first questions are about what happened, what policy applies, and what needs to be investigated. You have to understand the assignment before you can build the investigation around it."
That is a useful standard for institutions evaluating any outside professional.
Ask How the Investigator Will Approach the Case
Credentials can tell an institution where an investigator has worked and what training they have completed. They do not necessarily explain how that person will handle Monday morning when the investigation begins.
Colleges should ask.
Once CIXE receives a complaint, its process begins by identifying the type of matter involved and determining the applicable policies and procedures. The investigator then considers what information and evidence will be necessary and identifies who should be interviewed.
Those are practical questions institutions can use when interviewing potential outside investigators.
Ask how the investigator determines which evidence to collect. Ask how witnesses are identified and interviews are sequenced. Ask what happens when an interview produces unexpected information. Ask how follow-up questions are handled and what the final report will contain.
The answers provide a much better picture of investigative expertise than a résumé alone.
Communication Matters More When Internal Teams Are Lean
When an institution has a small administrative team, uncertainty can quickly create extra work.
If administrators do not know where an investigation stands, they may spend time requesting updates, trying to answer questions they cannot yet answer, or wondering whether a deadline is still realistic. That makes communication with an external investigator especially valuable.
CIXE maintains ongoing communication with institutional clients during investigations, providing status information and answering questions as the matter progresses.
The investigator must still maintain independence. Keeping an institution informed does not mean allowing administrators to influence interviews, evidence evaluation, or conclusions. Instead, practical status communication helps the institution understand what has been completed, what remains outstanding, and whether circumstances have changed.
Smaller colleges evaluating investigators should therefore ask about communication before an engagement begins. Who will be the institution's contact? How often will updates occur? What happens if the expected timeline changes? A five-minute conversation about expectations at the beginning can prevent considerable confusion later.
Efficiency Is Part of Resource Management
Limited resources make investigation timelines important, but institutions should be careful not to confuse "fast" with "efficient."
Lamoureaux reports that CIXE averages approximately 30 days to complete certain investigations involving matters such as sexual assault, dating or domestic violence, and stalking. In his experience, many institutions and outside investigation providers take 60 days or longer to complete similar investigations.
Not every investigation can or should be completed within 30 days. Witness availability, the amount of evidence, new allegations, institutional procedures, and other circumstances can legitimately require more time.
Instead of asking an outside investigator to promise a particular number of days, smaller colleges should ask how the investigator manages a case. Does evidence collection begin early? Are interviews scheduled proactively? Are outstanding items tracked? Will the institution be told quickly if something changes?
An organized process makes better use of everyone's time.
Look Closely at Reporting
The final report is another area where specialized expertise becomes particularly valuable.
CIXE emphasizes detailed investigative reports supported by the information gathered during the process. Lamoureaux says the company's smaller structure allows investigators to spend time ensuring necessary questions have been asked, relevant information has been gathered, and the resulting report reflects that work.
Institutions should ask potential investigators about their reporting approach before hiring them. They can request an explanation of how interview information is organized, how relevant evidence is incorporated, and what review process occurs before a report becomes final.
A strong report should make the investigation easier to understand, not create another puzzle for administrators to solve.
Build a Network Before You Need It
Perhaps the most practical step a smaller college can take costs nothing: identify potential outside resources before a serious complaint arrives.
Administrators can maintain a short list of investigators with different areas of expertise, review their qualifications, understand their availability, and determine how engagements would work. The institution can also establish an internal process for deciding when outside assistance makes sense.
That preparation removes some of the pressure from an already difficult situation. Instead of searching for expertise after a complaint arrives, administrators know where they can turn.
Smaller colleges do not need to replicate the staffing structure of the country's largest universities to conduct strong investigations. What they need is a realistic understanding of their internal capacity and a reliable way to access specialized expertise when circumstances require it.
The size of the institution may determine the resources available to manage an investigation, but it should not determine the care, neutrality, preparation, or professionalism brought to the process.
