Templates by allegation type
Harassment Investigation Report Template & Example
Last updated 2026-07-30
A harassment investigation has to establish more than that the conduct occurred. Depending on the policy and the legal framework in play, it may need to address whether the conduct was unwelcome, whether it was based on a protected characteristic, whether it was severe or pervasive enough to matter, and — critically for the organization's own exposure — when the employer knew.
That last element is frequently the most consequential and the most overlooked. An investigation that establishes the conduct but never asks who in management knew and when has left out the fact that most affects the organization's position.
Jurisdiction
Written primarily against US federal standards — EEOC guidance, NLRB decisions and Title VII case law — and against general investigative practice. State law, sector rules (public employers, education, regulated industries) and collective agreements impose additional requirements this page does not cover. Where a page borrows a concept from another jurisdiction it says so explicitly. Outside the US, treat the structure as transferable and the legal references as not.
Harassment Investigation Report template
Free Word download, no email required. Or open it in Professional Drafter — it lands in your template library, ready to draft against.
When to use this document
- Any complaint alleging harassment, whether or not a protected characteristic is expressly named.
- Complaints framed as 'hostile work environment' or a pattern of conduct over time.
Worked example
Fictional scenario. Findings section from the dispatch-team matter, showing how the elements are addressed separately rather than collapsed into a single conclusion.
Unwelcomeness
I find the conduct was unwelcome. The complainant asked the respondent to stop in early April 2026 (see Conflict 1 in the credibility analysis), and told Witness A at the time that she had done so. The respondent's characterization of the comments as compliments goes to his intent, not to whether the conduct was welcome to her; the two are separate questions and a finding on the second does not require any finding about the first. I have given no weight to the fact that the complainant did not object to the earliest comments — a delay in objecting to a direct supervisor is unremarkable and does not indicate the conduct was welcome.
Policy basis
The complainant did not allege that the comments were based on a protected characteristic, and I make no finding that they were. That is not necessary here: section 4.1 of the Respectful Workplace Policy prohibits 'comments about a colleague's physical appearance that a reasonable person would find unwelcome', without reference to any characteristic. The finding is made under that provision. I express no view on whether the conduct would meet the legal definition of harassment under any statute — that is outside my scope and is a legal question.
Employer notice
I asked about prior reports because the complaint did not address them. The complainant states she mentioned the comments to the Shift Supervisor in March 2026 in passing, and did not make a formal report. The Shift Supervisor recalls a conversation but describes it as the complainant 'venting' and did not escalate it or record it. I find that a report was made to a member of management in March 2026 and that it was not escalated. I make no finding on whether the Shift Supervisor's handling breached policy, as that was outside the scope I was given; I have recorded it under Matters Outside Scope for the organization's attention.
Section-by-section guide
What each section is for, what a good one contains, and where they typically go wrong.
1.Matter identifiers
Parties, dates and who commissioned the investigation.
2.Scope and standard of proof
What you were asked to determine, what is expressly excluded, and the standard applied — ordinarily the preponderance of the evidence.
3.Allegations with the elements each engages
Number each allegation and identify, for each, which elements it would need to satisfy. Doing this before the evidence summary keeps the analysis honest, because you can see which elements have no evidence attached.
4.Unwelcomeness
Whether the conduct was unwelcome to the complainant, and how that is evidenced — an express request to stop, avoidance behavior, a contemporaneous complaint to a colleague. Take care with participation: someone who responded in kind, or who did not object at the time, may still have found conduct unwelcome, and there are well-understood reasons why people do not object to a superior in the moment.
5.Protected characteristic or policy basis
Whether the conduct was based on a protected characteristic, or engages a policy that covers conduct regardless of characteristic. Many workplace policies prohibit disrespectful conduct generally — meaning a finding can be made under policy even where the legal harassment elements are not met. Say which basis you are applying.
6.Severity or pervasiveness
A single serious incident can suffice; so can an accumulation of individually minor ones. Assess the pattern as a whole rather than dismissing incidents one at a time — evaluating each in isolation is the classic route to under-finding a pervasive pattern.
7.Employer notice and response
Who in management knew, when, and what they did. Establish this even where nobody asked you to — a prior report to a supervisor that went nowhere is usually the single most important fact in the matter. But whose knowledge matters depends on who the harasser was. Where the harasser is a supervisor — meaning someone empowered to take tangible employment actions (Vance v. Ball State Univ., 570 U.S. 421 (2013)) — and the harassment culminated in such an action, the employer is vicariously liable regardless of what it knew. Where it did not, the Faragher/Ellerth affirmative defense may be available and the notice analysis becomes central. Where the harasser is a co-worker, liability turns on whether the employer knew or should have known and failed to act. Job titles do not settle this: a 'team lead' may or may not be a supervisor in the Vance sense.
8.Evidence summary
Accounts and documents, attributed and dated, without analysis. In harassment matters organize this by incident rather than by witness — the pattern is the evidence, and a witness-by-witness layout hides it.
9.Credibility assessment
Harassment matters are disproportionately one-to-one, so credibility usually decides them. Apply the objective factors and record the reasoning.
10.Findings of fact
One finding per numbered allegation: substantiated, not substantiated, or inconclusive, with the evidence relied on.
11.Policy analysis
Apply the facts found to the policy provisions quoted, keeping the two questions separate.
12.Investigator statement and appendices
Attestation of impartiality, the limits of the report, signature, and a numbered appendix index.
Common mistakes
The failure modes that show up most often when this document is reviewed later.
Evaluating incidents one at a time
Individually minor incidents can be pervasive in aggregate. Dismissing each in isolation systematically under-finds pattern harassment.
Treating a lack of contemporaneous objection as consent
There are well-understood reasons people do not object to a superior in the moment. Absence of objection is weak evidence of welcomeness.
Not establishing when the employer knew
Prior notice that went unactioned is usually the most consequential fact for the organization, and it is rarely in the written complaint.
Making a legal conclusion about statutory harassment
Most investigative mandates cover policy, not law. State which policy provision applies and leave the legal characterization alone.
Questions
- The respondent has resigned. Do I finish the investigation?
- Usually yes, and the reasons are practical. The complainant is entitled to an outcome, a pattern may involve others still employed, the organisation may need the findings if a claim follows, and stopping can itself look like a failure to take the complaint seriously. What changes is the purpose — there is no disciplinary decision to inform — so confirm the scope with whoever commissioned it before continuing.
- Does harassment have to be based on a protected characteristic?
- Under most statutory frameworks, yes. But most workplace policies also prohibit disrespectful or bullying conduct regardless of characteristic — so a policy finding is often available where a statutory one would not be. Be explicit about which basis you are applying.
- Can a single incident amount to harassment?
- It can, where it is sufficiently serious. Severity and pervasiveness are alternatives rather than cumulative requirements — one serious incident or an accumulation of lesser ones.
- What if the complainant participated in the conduct?
- Apparent participation is relevant to unwelcomeness but not decisive. Consider the power dynamic, whether participation was a coping response, and whether the complainant objected later. Record the reasoning rather than treating participation as an answer.
The blank template
Exactly what is in the Word download, so you can see the structure before deciding whether you want it.
Matter identifiers
Scope and standard of proof
Allegations with the elements each engages
Unwelcomeness
Protected characteristic or policy basis
Severity or pervasiveness
Employer notice and response
Evidence summary
Credibility assessment
Findings of fact
Policy analysis
Investigator statement and appendices
Download this template
Free Word download, no email required. Or open it in Professional Drafter — it lands in your template library, ready to draft against.
Sources
Related templates
Workplace Investigation Report Template & Example
A complete workplace investigation report template with a filled-in example report, plus a section-by-section guide covering scope, evidence, credibility, standard of proof and findings.
Credibility Assessment Template & Example (Workplace Investigation)
A structured credibility assessment template using objective factors — plausibility, corroboration, consistency and motive — with a filled-in worked example showing the reasoning written out.
Retaliation Investigation Report Template & Example
A retaliation investigation report template built around the three elements — protected activity, adverse action, and causal connection — with timeline analysis at its center.
Discrimination Investigation Report Template & Example
A discrimination investigation report template covering the adverse action, the protected characteristic, comparators and the employer's stated reason.
This page is a documentation aid, not legal advice. Workplace investigation requirements vary by jurisdiction, sector and policy, and a template cannot tell you what your matter requires. The worked example describes a fictional scenario.