Which finding indicates that the allegations in an administrative investigation are proven to be true?

The finding that indicates the allegations in an administrative investigation are proven to be true is characterized as "sustained." This term means that there is enough credible evidence to support the claims made against an individual or entity in the investigation. In administrative investigations, a sustained finding confirms that the allegations have been thoroughly evaluated and validated, thereby confirming misconduct or failure to adhere to policies or regulations.

In this context, "exonerated" would indicate that the investigation has cleared the individual of wrongdoing, while "unfounded" suggests that the allegations are baseless and lack any merit. "Not sustained" refers to situations in which the evidence does not support the allegations, leaving them unresolved without confirmation of their truthfulness. Each of these findings serves a different purpose in the investigative process, highlighting the distinct meaning and implications of a sustained finding as definitive evidence of substantiated claims.