Harvard Investigated 10 of 48 Discrimination Complaints, Found No Violations, Report Shows

Harvard opened investigations into just 10 of 48 formal discrimination complaints filed between September 2023 and December 2025, finding no policy violations in the eight that reached a determination, according to a long-awaited University report quietly posted online in September.

The report — the first publicly released under Harvard’s University-wide Non-Discrimination and Anti-Bullying Policy — detailed 48 formal discrimination complaints. Of those, 16 alleged antisemitism or anti-Israeli bias, four alleged anti-Muslim, anti-Arab, or anti-Palestinian bias, and 28 involved other protected characteristics, including gender, race, disability, ancestry, religion, and age.

Of the 10 investigations Harvard launched, eight resulted in findings of no policy violation. One ended after the complainant withdrew their complaint, while another closed after the accused individual left Harvard for unrelated reasons.

The report offers a rare look into how Harvard handles allegations of discrimination and how complaints move through the University’s review process. It includes anonymized summaries of the 48 formal discrimination complaints but does not provide comparable summaries of bullying complaints.

The report was quietly posted in September to a subpage of the Office for Community Support, Non-Discrimination, Rights and Responsibilities’ website, without a public announcement from the University.

Thirty-eight discrimination complaints did not proceed to investigation. In 23 cases, Harvard determined that the allegations did not meet the policy’s threshold for discrimination. Thirteen complaints fell outside the policy’s jurisdiction and were referred to other University offices or partner institutions, while two had already been addressed through other University proceedings.

In total, Harvard received 204 reports and 77 formal complaints of discrimination or bullying during the period. The University distinguishes between reports, which bring alleged misconduct to Harvard’s attention and can result in supportive measures like no-contact orders, and formal complaints, which request an investigation. Formal complaints are not included in the report category.

Among the 16 antisemitism-related complaints, five involved protests. Two alleged harassment at campus protests, including one that alleged assault, while another concerned offensive language at an out-of-state protest. A fourth alleged that a student made an antisemitic comment during a class discussion and participated in protests, while a fifth alleged harassment through another student’s involvement in protests and statements made in media publications and emails.

Harvard determined that three of the protest-related complaints did not meet the University’s threshold for discrimination. The complaint alleging assault had already been considered by another University disciplinary body, while the complaint involving statements in the media proceeded to an investigation that found no policy violation.

Three other antisemitism-related complaints involved employees or student employees, including a former staff member who alleged unjust termination, an employee at a partner institution who alleged discrimination by another employee, and a student who alleged discrimination by a student employee.

Harvard referred the complaint over termination to Human Resources, which did not substantiate the allegations, and directed the complaint involving employees at a partner institution to that institution for review. The comment involving a student employee proceeded to investigation, but the complainant withdrew it before a determination was reached.

In another case, a student alleged that a professor made offensive statements during class. Harvard opened an investigation, which ultimately found no violation of its non-discrimination policy.

Of the four complaints alleging anti-Muslim, anti-Arab, or anti-Palestinian bias, two proceeded to investigation. One involved an instructor who alleged they were denied a promotion because of discrimination, while another concerned a student who alleged that a course instructor withheld classroom materials and gave them a failing grade. Neither investigation found a policy violation.

The other two complaints included a junior faculty member who alleged that another faculty member made discriminatory comments and a student worker, who alleged that she was discriminated against for wearing a keffiyeh.

Harvard determined that neither complaint met the policy’s threshold for discrimination. Still, managers introduced several measures in response to the student’s worker’s complaint, including ensuring that student workers did not work alone during daytime hours and offering the complainant a non-public-facing position. Staff were also given guidance on handling uncomfortable workplace interactions and contact information for police and security personnel.

The report also detailed complaints involving other protected characteristics. In one case, a student alleged that staff members made negative generalizations about people of their national origin and ethnic background during the interview and selection process for a fellowship.

Though Harvard determined that the allegations did not meet the policy’s threshold for discrimination, a University official met with the student to discuss potential changes to the selection process. Following a review, the office introduced applicant exit surveys, adapted University guidance on addressing interview bias, and created a rubric to ensure greater consistency in fellowship evaluations.

Another complaint came from a junior faculty member who alleged discrimination after being denied tenure. Harvard determined that some of the conduct predated the policy’s implementation and that the remaining allegations did not meet its threshold for discrimination. The University referred the faculty member’s disability-related concerns to University Disability Resources and provided information about filing a sex-based discrimination complaint with its Title IX coordinator.

The report does not identify the complainants, accused individuals, or schools involved in the cases. Harvard said it did not publish school-level breakdowns because the small number of complaints could raise student and employee privacy concerns.

The report was required under Harvard’s January 2025 settlement with the Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, which sued the University over allegations that it failed to adequately address antisemitism on campus.

Under the agreement, Harvard committed to publishing annual reports for five years detailing its response to discrimination or harassment based on Title VI-protected characteristics, including a retrospective account of disciplinary responses to antisemitism complaints dating back to October 2023.

But in April, more than a year after the settlement, Harvard had yet to release the required report, The Crimson reported. Brandeis Center founder and chairman Kenneth L. Marcus said at the time that the organization was still awaiting its publication and had been in discussions with Harvard over “compliance concerns.”

At the time, the University declined to comment on the status of the report.

The settlement also required Harvard to incorporate the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s controversial definition of antisemitism into its non-discrimination guidance, appoint an official to oversee Title VI complaints, and implement mandatory staff training.

The newly released report detailed training led by the Anti-Defamation League on discrimination based on ancestry, the National Association of College and University Attorneys on Title VI and shared-ancestry discrimination, and law firm Saul Ewing on civil rights compliance.

The report comes after Harvard consolidated its discrimination and Title IX offices. In September 2023, the University adopted its Non-Discrimination and Anti-Bullying Policies and created the Office for Community Conduct to oversee their implementation.

In August 2025, Harvard brought that office’s staff together with the Office for Gender Equity together under CSNDR. A team within the office now oversees the University’s discrimination and bullying policies.

Harvard is currently reviewing those policies, with a focus on consolidating them with its procedures governing sexual harassment and other sexual misconduct, as it pledged to do every three years when NDAB was adopted in 2023.

—Staff writer Caroline G. Hennigan can be reached at [email protected] and Signal at carolinegh.53. Follow her on X @cghennigan.