PRO-U4520.02 Addressing Responsible Conduct for Research

Action By:

Vice Provost for Research

  1. Appoints or serves as the Research Integrity Officer (RIO).

Research Compliance Officer

  1. Trains all federally funded principal investigators (PI) in responsible conduct of research. Training is offered on-line and via face to face classes offered on campus.

Complainant

  1. Reports the research misconduct orally or in writing to the Dean of the Respondent’s College (Dean) or to the RIO.
  2. Maintains confidentiality of allegations.

Dean

  1. Notifies RIO of allegation of research misconduct.

RIO

  1. Informs Respondent and Provost of research misconduct allegation within three (3) working days of receipt of the allegation.
  2. Decides whether to proceed with an inquiry within fourteen (14) days of the initial allegation.
  3. Determines whether the allegation evidence is sufficient to support an inquiry into research misconduct and whether the allegation falls under the definition of responsible conduct of research.
  4. Commences inquiry to be completed within  sixty (60) calendar days  unless circumstances clearly warrant a longer period such as witness unavailability. If inquiry takes longer than sixty (60) days, the inquiry record must include documentation of the reasons. 42 CFR 93.307(d)(2)(g).
  5. Ensures that all original research records and materials relevant to the allegation are immediately secured.

Respondent

  1. Maintains the confidentiality and cooperates with the conduct of the inquiry or investigation.

Dean and RIO

  1. Protect the confidentiality of the Complainant and ensure that this person will not be retaliated against in the terms and conditions of employment or other status at the Institution.
  2. Protect the confidentiality of the Respondent and the research misconduct allegation.

RIO

  1. Conducts the inquiry and investigation in a manner that ensures fair treatment to the Respondent and provides a prompt and thorough inquiry.
  2. Conducts an inquiry into the allegation. The purpose of the inquiry is to make a preliminary evaluation of the evidence and testimony of the Respondent and witnesses to determine whether there is sufficient evident to warrant an investigation. Respondent has a right for a union representative to be present in an interview. The Inquiry does not determine whether research misconduct has occurred.
  3. Interviews the Respondent, Claimant, and witnesses as well as examines relevant research records and materials.
  4. Decides whether there is sufficient evidence of possible research misconduct to recommend further investigation.
  5. Completes the inquiry and prepares written inquiry report within sixty (60) days of receipt of the allegation. Written inquiry report listing the name and title of the witnesses and experts, if any; the allegations; the source of external funding, if any; a summary of the inquiry process used; a list of the research records reviewed; summaries of any interviews; and a description of the evidence in sufficient detail to demonstrate whether an investigation is warranted.
  6. Provides a copy of the Inquiry Report to the Respondent for comment and rebuttal.
  7. Comments and rebuts allegations in the Inquiry Report within fourteen (14) days of receiving the report.

RIO

  1. Provides the witness the portion of the draft inquiry report that addresses the witness’s role. RIO may keep the Complainant apprised of the status of the matter.

Complainant

  1. Comments and rebuts allegations in the Inquiry report within fourteen (14) days of receiving the report.

RIO

  1. Attaches Respondent’s and the Claimant’s comments to the report and may revise the inquiry report incorporating and responding to Respondent’s comments.
  2. Provides a copy of the report with attachments to the Provost.
  3. If the research misconduct was committed on research funded by the National Institute of Health, the RIO provides a copy of the inquiry report to the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) notifying ORI of investigation. If the research was funded by another external agency, the RIO provides a copy of the inquiry report to the appropriate agency.
  4. Establishes reasonable conditions for review to protect the confidentiality of the report.

Provost

  1. Reviews report and determines whether to proceed with a full investigation. The case warrants full investigation if there is a reasonable basis for concluding that the allegation falls within the definition of research misconduct and the preliminary information-gathering from the inquiry indicates that the allegation may have substance. If a conflict of interest exists, the President or delegate will assume the Provost’s responsibilities.

RIO

  1. Nominates replacement members to investigation committee to replace any committee members removed following Respondent’s objection.
  2. Prepares charge within ten (10) days for RCRP describing the allegations and related issues identified during the inquiry, defines research misconduct, and identifies the name of the Respondent. The charge will state that the committee is to evaluate the evidence and testimony of the Respondent, Complainant, and witnesses, to determine whether, based on a preponderance of the evidence, research misconduct occurred and, if so, to what extent who was responsible, and its seriousness.
  3. Convenes; reviews charge; collects and reviews evidence. The Panel interviews the Respondent, witnesses, and reviews all evidence including documents, computer files, lab books to determine whether research misconduct has occurred. When possible, the interviews and deliberations should be recorded and transcribed. Experts may be consulted to assist with determination of research misconduct under the circumstances.

RCRP

  1. Begin investigations within thirty (30) days of the completion of the inquiry
  2. The investigation includes conducting the investigation, preparing a report, and making the report available for comment to the subjects of the investigation. The Investigation Report must be completed within sixty (60) days of initiation of the investigation process unless extenuating circumstances are documented.
  3. Provides transcript of witness testimony to witness for review and revision. Provides transcript of Respondent testimony to Respondent for review and revision.
  4. In order to find research misconduct, the Respondent’s actions must have been a significant departure from accepted practices in the research community.
  5. Drafts Investigation Report including the following:
    • The name of the committee members;
    • The name and position of the Respondent;
    • A description of the allegations of research
    • misconduct;
    • The support for the research;
    • The basis for the investigation of research misconduct; and
    • The conclusion reached by the Committee.
  6. Submits investigation report to Respondent and Complainant.

Respondent and Complainant

  1. Submit comments and rebuttal to investigation report findings within fourteen (14) days of receiving the report.

RCRP

  1. Submits Investigation Committee Report including report, witness testimony transcripts, complainant’s and Respondent’s comments and rebuttal to the RIO.

RIO

  1. Submits report and attachments to the Provost, the Respondent, and the Respondent’s dean, department chair, and the appropriate federal agency.

Provost

  1. Imposes penalty on Respondent.

Respondent

  1. May appeal determination to President within thirty (30) days of receiving the Provost’s determination.

President

  1. Reviews report and Provost’s determination and makes final ruling on disposition of the allegation.

Procedure Information

Approved By:

Vice President for Academic Affairs

Effective Date:

March 12, 2013

Authority:

Related Forms

No forms apply to this procedure.

Procedure Contact

Research and Sponsored Programs

Phone: (360) 650-3220

Research and Sponsored Programs website