More Likely Than Not: An ATIXA Podcast

More Likely Than Not, an ATIXA podcast, is for general information, educational, and discussion purposes only. It’s not legal advice. If you’re dealing with a specific issue, consult your institution’s general counsel or a qualified attorney familiar with Title IX and applicable state laws. Facts, policies, and jurisdiction matter.

In Episode 20 of More Likely Than Not, Kayleigh and Joe discuss a recent Title IX court decision involving allegations of sexual assault, inappropriate sexual touching, and an interesting legal wrinkle: What obligations might an institution have when the alleged harasser is not an employee, student, or formal volunteer?

At first, this seems like an athletics case. It involves a women’s basketball team and the coach’s husband, who provided physical treatment to the student-athletes despite having no official role with the university. But as Kayleigh and Joe explain, the Tenth Circuit’s ruling raises questions that reach well beyond athletics. The central question is one of control, and the opinion lays out a path for the institution’s Title IX obligations to extend to third parties outside its traditional disciplinary authority.

What could this mean for experiential learning environments like clinical placements, student teaching, internships, externships, and practicums? Why did the Tenth Circuit reject a bright-line rule for determining control, and why did “they don’t work here” not settle the Title IX jurisdiction question?

If it involves a legal wrinkle that complicates the analysis, we are more likely than not ironing it out in this week’s episode.

More Likely Than Not, an ATIXA podcast, is for general information, educational, and discussion purposes only. It’s not legal advice. If you’re dealing with a specific issue, consult your institution’s general counsel or a qualified attorney familiar with Title IX and applicable state laws. Facts, policies, and jurisdiction matter.

In Episode 19 of More Likely Than Not, Kayleigh and Joe welcome TNG and ATIXA colleagues Alisha Carter Harris, M.S., and Lauren Starnes, J.D., to discuss the skills Title IX practitioners need to get stuff done.

Are snacks the answer? Maybe. But knowing the key players and understanding your institution’s politics (with a lowercase “p”) is where the real work begins.

Alisha and Lauren remind listeners that not everyone will “like” the Title IX Coordinator, and that isn’t the goal. Advocating for the autonomy and authority to do the work, practicing good customer service, having difficult conversations that leave people feeling heard, understanding the audience, and building credibility across the institution are enduring skills that remain essential even as regulations change. Just as important is building relationships with the people whose partnership makes the work possible, like those you may need to call on to implement supportive or safety measures, navigate institutional barriers, or leverage their own authority and influence to move necessary action forward.

They also walk listeners through how to explain the “why” behind compliance expectations, connect Title IX work to institutional priorities, communicate complex requirements in ways different audiences can understand, and make a stronger case for additional resources.

If you’ve had to relearn how to get stuff done through multiple regulatory environments, or you’re looking to strengthen the skills that endure through all of them, we are more likely than not covering it in this week’s episode.

More Likely Than Not, an ATIXA podcast, is for general information, educational, and discussion purposes only. It’s not legal advice. If you’re dealing with a specific issue, consult your institution’s general counsel or a qualified attorney familiar with Title IX and applicable state laws. Facts, policies, and jurisdiction matter.

In Episode 18 of More Likely Than Not, Kayleigh and Joe unpack the Supreme Court’s decision to hear Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia and Joseph v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, two cases that may decide whether employees can bring sex discrimination claims under Title IX or whether Title VII is the exclusive avenue for those lawsuits.

Their conversation explores the circuit split that prompted Supreme Court review and how changes in the litigation landscape could affect institutional compliance efforts.

The Court’s decision is still many months away, but Title IX Coordinators and administrators need to understand why this case could become one of the most consequential decisions impacting the intersection of Title IX and employment law in decades.

If you’ve ever wondered whether school employees can sue their institutional employers under Title IX, we are more likely than not covering it in this week’s episode.

More Likely Than Not, an ATIXA podcast, is for general information, educational, and discussion purposes only. It’s not legal advice. If you’re dealing with a specific issue, consult your institution’s general counsel or a qualified attorney familiar with Title IX and applicable state laws. Facts, policies, and jurisdiction matter.

Safety and well-being are shared institutional responsibilities, and Title IX and Behavioral Intervention Teams (BITs) work best when they communicate rather than operate in silos.

In this episode, TNG Consulting and NABITA colleagues Tim Cason, M.Ed., and Makenzie Schiemann, Ph.D., M.S., join Kayleigh and Joe to explore how campuses can coordinate across Title IX and BIT/CARE teams to assess risk, support students, and respond more holistically to complex situations.

The conversation examines when Title IX Coordinators should loop in the BIT/CARE team, how institutions can share information appropriately without compromising privacy, and why early coordination matters. Tim and Makenzie also discuss the risks of isolated decision-making, the role of FERPA in information sharing, and how campuses can build stronger systems of support before concerns escalate.

If you have ever wondered how institutions can balance compliance, care, and campus safety responsibilities effectively, we are more likely than not covering it in this week’s episode.

More Likely Than Not, an ATIXA podcast, is for general information, educational, and discussion purposes only. It’s not legal advice. If you are navigating a specific issue, always consult with your institution’s general counsel or a qualified attorney familiar with Title IX and applicable state laws. Your specific facts, policy, context, and, of course, state laws matter.

After what felt like a torrential downpour of Title IX-related developments, practitioners may be enjoying a brief reprieve. But the landscape is anything but calm. The Department of Education’s functions are being distributed to other federal entities, including the Department of the Treasury. This raises a key question: what does this fragmentation mean for enforcement?

For some, states are filling the gaps. Following New York’s lead in enacting a law requiring a Title VI coordinator and other mandates, states like Georgia, Missouri, and Colorado are introducing similar legislation. This signals a shift toward state-driven civil rights enforcement. Ongoing litigation, such as the federal government suing Harvard, California suing the federal government, and continued legal battles in Maine, continues to complicate the push-and-pull over authority.

Against this backdrop, we turn to a lively ATIXA listserv debate: should victim advocates serve as advisors in the Title IX grievance process? Under the 2020 regulations, parties have the right to choose an advisor of their choice. On one hand, advocates bring trust, familiarity, and a strong understanding of institutional processes. At the same time, the advisor role can become adversarial, raising concerns about confidentiality, dual roles, and how advocacy support is perceived. The conversation explores three main schools of thought and lands, unsurprisingly, somewhere in the middle.

If you have ever wondered whether an advocate can step into the advisor role without creating confusion, conflict, or unintended harm, we are more likely than not covering it in this week’s episode.

More Likely Than Not, an ATIXA podcast, is for general information, educational, and discussion purposes only. It’s not legal advice. If you are navigating a specific issue, always consult with your institution’s general counsel or a qualified attorney familiar with Title IX and applicable state laws. Your specific facts, policy, context, and, of course, state laws matter.

In this episode of More Likely Than Not, Kayleigh and Joe welcome Dr. Mikiba Morehead of TNG Consulting, and Adam Dodge, J.D., founder of endtab.org, an organization dedicated to ending technology-facilitated abuse. Together, they explore the rapidly evolving landscape of sexual misconduct in online spaces, from non-consensual intimate image (NCII) sharing and sextortion to AI-generated “undressing” apps and synthetic nudes.

They underscore a critical point: the harm is real, even when the images are not.

Though the tools have changed, the behaviors of coercion, humiliation, stalking, harassment, and abuse persist. Adam and Mikiba examine Title IX implications, jurisdiction challenges when conduct occurs off campus or on personal devices, and how to evaluate escalation in digital contexts. They also share practical prevention strategies centered on bodily autonomy, digital consent, and institutional preparedness, reminding practitioners that you do not need to be a tech expert to respond effectively.

If you have ever wondered whether you are overreacting or not reacting quickly enough, we are more likely than not covering it in this week’s episode.

More Likely Than Not, an ATIXA podcast, is for general information, educational, and discussion purposes only. It’s not legal advice. If you are navigating a specific issue, always consult with your institution’s general counsel or a qualified attorney familiar with Title IX and applicable state laws. Your specific facts, policy, context, and, of course, state laws matter.

Winter temperatures and news headlines set the tone as Kayleigh and Joe discuss current events affecting K-12 and higher education, with a familiar sense that chaos and uncertainty may be sticking around for a few more weeks this season.

They also dig into a new Government Accountability Office (GAO) report examining the financial impact of the Department of Education’s efforts to reduce staffing at the Office for Civil Rights (OCR), along with recent developments in DEI program litigation and the Trump administration’s ongoing, high-profile conflict with Harvard University.

Kayleigh and Joe break down two recent appellate court decisions with potential implications for practitioners, including a First Circuit case examining what constitutes “actual knowledge” under Title IX in a K-12 setting and a Fourth Circuit case addressing First Amendment and religious accommodation challenges related to pronoun and gender identity policies in schools.

On Overheard on the Listserv, they discuss the risks and requirements of practitioners possessing explicit material, particularly when minors may be involved, and practical ways to manage evidence while minimizing exposure and unintended consequences, including the use of written descriptions and tightly controlled access.

If you’ve ever read a listserv question and thought, “I really hope this never happens to me,” we’re more likely than not covering it in this week’s episode.

More Likely Than Not, an ATIXA podcast, is for general information, educational, and discussion purposes only. It’s not legal advice. If you are navigating a specific issue, always consult with your institution’s general counsel or a qualified attorney familiar with Title IX and applicable state laws. Your specific facts, policy, context, and, of course, state laws matter.

In this episode of More Likely Than Not, hosts Kayleigh and Joe break down recent U.S. Supreme Court oral arguments in Little v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J., two cases challenging state laws that restrict transgender girls from participating in girls’ and women’s athletics across both higher education and K-12 settings.

TNG Consulting colleagues Kim Pacelli, J.D., M.Ed., and Dan Fotoples, J.D., M.A., join the team to talk through the high-level legal questions at the center of both cases, including an Equal Protection Clause analysis and the “what level of scrutiny applies” debate. For B.P.J., they also explore the additional question of how Title IX athletics regulations may factor into the Court’s approach.

Oral arguments generate headlines, speculation, and anxiety, but they rarely provide reliable answers about what the Court will ultimately do. The attorneys and even several justices appear to be signaling interest in a narrow ruling, and the safest move for practitioners is to stay steady, stay informed, and avoid reacting to guesses disguised as certainty.

If you’re looking for clarity while waiting for the Court’s decision, we’re more likely than not covering it in this week’s episode.

More Likely Than Not, an ATIXA podcast, is for general information, educational, and discussion purposes only. It’s not legal advice. If you are navigating a specific issue, always consult with your institution’s general counsel or a qualified attorney familiar with Title IX and applicable state laws. Your specific facts, policy, context, and, of course, state laws matter.

In the first episode of 2026, More Likely Than Not returns with a candid look at the familiar chaos facing compliance professionals. Kayleigh and Joe set the tone for a year where adaptability, judgment, and institutional awareness are expected to be essential to maintaining a steady compliance program.

They start by digging into early indicators of federal enforcement priorities. Recent comments from U.S. Department of Education Secretary Linda McMahon signal a potential pivot from higher education to elementary and secondary education, which could reshape how institutions across sectors approach risk.

Kayleigh and Joe emphasize that Title VI compliance and infrastructure remain key priorities. They discuss proposed federal legislation from U.S. Representative Jerry Nadler and others that would require a Title VI coordinator on every college campus, and a recent California case addressing whether schools can restrict teachers from informing parents when a student is transgender.

The hosts offer three New Year’s resolutions for practitioners: spend 30 minutes daily on the ATIXA Listserv, build relationships with key school stakeholders, and reread the 2020 Title IX regulations and preamble to reconnect with their guiding principles.

If you’re trying to stay grounded while enforcement priorities and legal signals shift, then we’re more likely than not covering it in this week’s episode.

In this year-end episode, Kayleigh and Joe welcome TNG Partner and ATIXA President Saundra K. Schuster, J.D., M.S., whose decades of expertise have shaped the Title IX field’s approach to pregnancy protections. Together, they visit the ghost of regulations past, examining the original 1975 Title IX framework and its foundational protections for pregnant students.

Saundra discusses why institutions should continue to offer modifications and support for pregnant and parenting students, sharing best practices from the now-rescinded 2024 rule. She explains how pregnancy-related needs differ from disability accommodations and why she doesn’t expect significant federal changes soon. Even so, Saundra notes a major update from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regarding support animals in shared living spaces.

If you are wondering what compliance looks like in 2026, we are more likely than not covering it in this week’s episode.

This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only. It's not legal advice and shouldn't be relied on as such. If you're navigating a specific issue, always consult with your institution's general counsel or a qualified attorney familiar with Title IX and applicable state laws.