The routine practice of an organization is admissible to show conduct on a specific occasion.

Fed. R. Evid. 413 (sexual assault; "In a criminal case in which the defendant is accused of an offense of sexual assault, evidence of the defendant's commission of another offense or offenses of sexual assault is admissible, and may be considered for its bearing on any matter to which it is relevant.").Evidence of a person's other sexual misconduct is frequently admissible in sexual assault cases, child molestation cases, and in civil cases involving claims of sexual misconduct.

Fed. R. Evid. 405(a) & (b) ("(a) Reputation or opinion. In all cases in which evidence of character or a trait of character of a person is admissible, proof may be made by testimony as to reputation or by testimony in the form of an opinion. On cross-examination, inquiry is allowable into relevant specific instances of conduct. (b)...When an exception makes the victim's character admissible, the testimony of a witness on direct examination about the victim's character must take the form of opinion or reputation and it cannot take the form of specific instances of victim's conduct.

Cf. Pennsylvania v. Ritchie, 480 U.S. 39, 58 (1987) (accused charged with sexual offenses against his daughter; held, accused had constitutional right "to have the CYS [Children and Youth Services] file [which was confidential under state law] reviewed by the trial court to determine whether it...A nonconstitutional privilege sometimes must yield to a criminal defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confront and cross-examine an adverse witness in a criminal trial. A nonconstitutional privilege privilege may have to yield to a criminal defendant's Confrontation Right when the privilege shields evidence or facts (particularly evidence or facts showing bias) that have significant probative value on the credibility of an adverse witness in a criminal trial who testifies about material facts in issue.