In my previous article, “An Association’s Guide to Disciplinary Actions,” I discussed how associations can establish and enforce ethical standards through disciplinary measures. This piece examines a crucial preceding step: determining when associations should accept ethics complaints for review.

Professional associations face complex decisions when members report potential ethical violations. While maintaining ethical standards is paramount, the timing and circumstances of complaint acceptance require careful consideration, particularly when other investigative bodies are involved.

Is the Complaint Ripe?

Before investing resources in investigating an ethics complaint, associations must first determine whether the complaint is “ripe” for review. Ripeness involves several key considerations:

1. Current status of the alleged violation. The complaint must involve actions that have actually occurred. Associations should not accept complaints based on speculative future violations or actions that a member might take. For example, if someone attempts to file a complaint because they believe a member will violate ethical standards in an upcoming project or transaction, the complaint is not yet ripe for review.
2. Pending external reviews. When complaints involve matters currently under investigation by state licensing boards, courts, or internal employer reviews, the issue may not be ripe for immediate association action. While associations should document and track these complaints, they may choose to defer their investigation until external proceedings conclude. This approach:
   1. Prevents conflicting determinations
   2. Allows the association to benefit from the factual record established by other entities
   3. Conserves association resources
3. Documentation requirements. Even when deferring investigation, associations should:
   1. Accept and log the complaint
   2. Notify the complainant of the decision to defer
   3. Track the status of external proceedings
   4. Maintain all submitted evidence for future review
   5. Establish clear criteria for when deferred complaints will be reactivated

Coordinating With External Investigations

When complaints involve matters under investigation by state licensing boards or legal authorities, associations without dedicated investigative resources should consider deferring their review. This approach offers several advantages:

1. Resource efficiency. State boards and courts typically have more extensive investigative capabilities and legal authority to compel evidence and testimony.
2. Definitive findings. External investigations may conclusively determine whether conduct violated professional standards, potentially rendering association reviews unnecessary.
3. Procedural clarity. Official investigations establish clear factual records that associations can reference in their own ethical determinations.

The Value of Waiting

Deferring to external investigations can protect both the association and its members. If a state board or court finds no violation occurred, the association avoids duplicating investigative efforts and potentially reaching conflicting conclusions. This approach particularly benefits associations without independent investigative units, allowing them to base decisions on thoroughly vetted findings.

However, waiting for external resolution doesn’t mean ignoring complaints entirely. Associations should:

• Document and track submitted complaints
• Maintain communication with complainants about the status of external proceedings
• Monitor public records of relevant investigations
• Preserve evidence and documentation for potential future review

Complex Scenarios

Some cases present additional complexity, such as:

• Appealed court decisions
• Challenged state board findings
• Parallel investigations by multiple authorities
• Matters involving multiple jurisdictions

When navigating these scenarios, associations should consult their in-house or outside counsel, or their chief legal officer (CLO) to help determine the optimal timing and procedures for conducting their own reviews. These legal advisors provide essential guidance on multiple fronts, starting with statutory requirements that may impact how and when an association can proceed with its investigation. They also ensure proper due process protections are in place for all parties involved, helping associations avoid procedural missteps that could compromise the integrity of their review.

Additionally, legal counsel can assess potential liability issues that might arise from the association’s handling of complaints, particularly in cases where multiple jurisdictions are involved or when parallel investigations are ongoing. These legal experts can also clarify jurisdictional questions, ensuring the association acts within its proper authority while respecting the boundaries of other investigating bodies.

Balancing Responsibilities

While deferring to external investigations often makes sense, associations must balance this approach with their responsibility to uphold professional standards. Some situations may warrant immediate association action, such as:

• Clear violations of association-specific standards
• Immediate threats to public safety
• Matters outside regulatory jurisdiction

Moving Forward

Professional associations serve as guardians of their fields’ ethical standards, as outlined in my previous article. By carefully considering when to accept and investigate complaints, associations can fulfill this role while ensuring fair, efficient, and effective ethical oversight.

The decision of when to accept an ethics complaint requires balancing multiple factors: available investigative resources, existence of parallel proceedings, severity of allegations, and potential impact on public safety. Through thoughtful policies and procedures, associations can maintain their ethical standards while leveraging external investigations to reach just and well-supported decisions.

Legal counsel should be consulted when navigating complex scenarios, ensuring associations maintain their ethical oversight role while respecting legal and regulatory processes. This balanced approach helps associations protect their members, the public, and their own institutional integrity.