SUNY College at Brockport Policies and Procedures on Research Misconduct

January 2006

Approved by the College Senate Executive Committee 2/06 Announcement of approval at Full College Senate Meeting on 3/20/06

.

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Preamble

A crucial element of any policy on research misconduct that is to be fair and effective is a process that will distinguish instances of genuine and serious misconduct from insignificant deviations from acceptable practices, technical violations of rules, simple carelessness, and other such minor infractions. The policy proposed in this document will allow such distinctions to be made in a manner that minimizes disruptiveness and protects the conscientious, honest scientist from false or mistaken accusations.

SUNY College at Brockport shall maintain high ethical standards in science and other scholarly work, prevent misconduct where possible, and promptly and fairly evaluate and resolve instances of alleged or apparent misconduct.

B. Policy Statement

It is the purpose of these policies to instill and promote the principles of professional integrity, to prevent research misconduct, and to discover and censure instances of misconduct when they occur. These provisions meet the minimum requirements in 42 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) section 93. Public Health Service Policies on Research Misconduct. SUNY College at Brockport will implement these policies in a uniform manner whether the alleged misconduct occurs in funded or non-funded research activities.

Confidentiality

Every member of the College community has the responsibility of reporting misconduct in scientific work. No person raising serious allegations of misconduct will suffer any penalty; however, frivolous, mischievous or malicious misrepresentation in alleging misconduct will not be tolerated and may result in action against the perpetrator.

To the extent allowed by law, we shall maintain the identity of respondents and complainants securely and confidentially and shall not disclose any identifying information, except to: (1) those who need to know in order to carry out a thorough, competent, objective and fair research misconduct proceeding; and (2) the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) (or other federal funding agency) as it conducts its review of the research misconduct proceeding and any subsequent proceedings.

To the extent allowed by law, any information obtained during the research misconduct proceeding that might identify the subjects of research shall be maintained securely and confidentially and shall not be disclosed, except to those who need to know in order to carry out the research misconduct proceeding.

General Statement on Disciplinary Action

SUNY College at Brockport shall take appropriate disciplinary action against any individual found guilty of misconduct. This will include disclosure to funding agencies, collaborating scientists and institutions, journal editors, professional associations, licensing boards, and potential employers who request oral or written references.

Student Class Requirements Not Covered

These policies apply to scientific research and related scholarly writing conducted by any member of the University faculty or staff. They are not intended to address issues, such as the conduct of students in fulfilling course requirements, which are covered by other policies.

Stages of Misconduct Review

These procedures for the institutional handling of allegations of research misconduct normally have four stages:

• an inquiry to determine whether the allegation or related issues warrant further investigation;
• when warranted, an investigation to collect and thoroughly examine evidence;
• a formal finding, and
• appropriate disposition of the matter.

Usual Timeline

As a general rule, the College will take no more than 60 days to conduct its inquiry and determine whether an investigation is warranted. If an investigation is to be undertaken, it will begin within 30 days of the conclusion of the inquiry, and the institution shall generally take no more than 120 days to complete the investigation, prepare the report of findings, obtain the comments of the subject(s) of the investigation, and make a decision on the disposition of the case. See detailed procedures outlined in section II below.

Reporting

The College will annually report to all funding and sponsoring agencies as follows:

• Assurance that the institution has established an administrative process for reviewing, investigating, and reporting allegations of research misconduct in connection with sponsored research.
• Provision of such aggregate information on allegations, inquiries, and investigations as funding and sponsoring agencies may prescribe.

C. Definitions:

Research Misconduct:

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism, in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.

(a) Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting them.

(b) Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.

(c) Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.

(d) Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.

Source: 42 CFR Section 93.103

Inquiry:

An Inquiry is an information-gathering and initial fact-finding to determine whether an allegation or apparent instance of misconduct warrants an investigation.

Investigation:

An Investigation is a formal examination and evaluation of all relevant facts to determine if an instance of misconduct has taken place. If misconduct is confirmed, the investigation should determine the seriousness of the offense and the extent of any adverse effects resulting from the misconduct.

D. Personnel

1. The Vice President for Academic Affairs, after consultation with the President and others as necessary, will appoint an administrator to serve as the Misconduct Policy Officer.

2. Responsibilities of the Misconduct Policy Officer:

• To work confidentially with a complainant in the development of a specific, formal written complaint.
• To maintain records of all complaints and institutional responses.
• To conduct inquiries and submit recommendations concerning investigations to the Vice President for Academic Affairs.
• To assist the Vice President for Academic Affairs in the conduct of formal investigations into allegations of misconduct.
• To inform sponsoring and funding agencies as appropriate
  
  

E. Liability Coverage  

The involvement of faculty and staff in inquiries or investigations pursuant to these Guidelines is considered part of their employment duties and responsibilities within the meaning of Section 17 of the Public Officers Law.

II. RESEARCH MISCONDUCT PROCEEDINGS–Criteria, Reports, and Time Limitations

Promptly after receiving an allegation of research misconduct, defined as a disclosure of possible research misconduct through any means of communication, we shall assess the allegation to determine if:

1. it meets the definition of research misconduct in 42 CFR Section 93.103 (see definitions below);
2. it involves either Public Health Service (PHS) supported research, applications for PHS research support, or research records specified in 42 CFR Section 93.102(b) (see document at: www.brockport.edu/etc/forms); and,
3. the allegation is sufficiently credible and specific so that potential evidence of research misconduct may be identified.

Inquiry

If it is determined that an inquiry (i.e., an initial review of the evidence to determine if the criteria for conducting an investigation have been met) is warranted, we shall complete the inquiry, including preparation of the inquiry report and giving the respondent a reasonable opportunity to comment on it, within 60 calendar days of its initiation, unless the circumstances warrant a longer period. If the inquiry takes longer than 60 days to complete, we shall include documentation of the reasons for the delay in the inquiry record. The inquiry report shall contain the following information: (1) The name and position of the respondent(s); (2) A description of the allegations of research misconduct; (3) The PHS support involved, including, for example, grant numbers, grant applications, contracts, and publications listing PHS support; (4) The basis for recommending that the alleged actions warrant an investigation; and (5) Any comments on the report by the respondent or the complainant.

The Misconduct Policy Officer will make a written determination of whether an investigation is warranted. This report shall be filed with the Vice President for Academic Affairs with an assessment as to whether or not the allegation(s) is warranted, and the reasons attendant thereto. The Misconduct Policy Officer will maintain sufficiently detailed documentation of inquiries to permit a later assessment of the reasons for determining that an investigation was not warranted, if necessary. Such records shall be maintained in a secure manner for a period of at least three years after the termination of the inquiry and shall, upon request, be provided to authorized representatives of sponsoring and funding agencies.

The Vice President for Academic Affairs shall determine on the basis of the written report of the inquiry, and any other consultation deemed necessary, whether the allegations warrant a formal investigation. In either case, the basis for the decision will be fully documented.

.

If the decision of the Vice President for Academic Affairs is that no investigation is warranted, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will notify all those concerned of this determination. The Vice President for Academic Affairs may also examine the propriety of the initial charge and take further action if appropriate.

Investigation

If the decision of the Vice President for Academic Affairs is that an investigation is necessary, the Vice President for Academic Affairs or their designee shall:

Appoint a Misconduct Investigation Committee, which will have the following membership:

• Misconduct Policy Officer (Chair)
• Dean/Director of Appropriate Area
• Director of Research & Sponsored Programs (or designee)
• Other Administrators as Appropriate

This committee will begin the investigation within 30 calendar days of the investigation and prepare a report for the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

If the misconduct relates to funded research, on or before the date on which the investigation begins, an inquiry report will be sent with a written determination to the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) or other appropriate funding agency. We shall use our best efforts to complete the investigation within 120 calendar days of the date on which it began, including conducting the investigation, preparing the report of findings, providing the draft report for comment, and sending the final report to ORI or other agency when appropriate. If it becomes apparent that we cannot complete the investigation within that period, we shall promptly request an extension in writing from ORI or other agency. This time period does not apply to separate termination hearings.

In conducting all investigations, we shall: (1) Use diligent efforts to ensure that the investigation is thorough and sufficiently documented and includes examination of all research records and evidence relevant to reaching a decision on the merits of the allegations; (2) Interview each respondent, complainant, and any other available person who has been reasonably identified as having information regarding any relevant aspects of the investigation, including witnesses identified by the respondent, and record or transcribe each interview, provide the recording or transcript to the interviewee for correction, and include the recording or transcript in the record of investigation; (3) Pursue diligently all significant issues and leads discovered that are determined relevant to the investigation, including any evidence of additional instances of possible research misconduct, and continue the investigation to completion; and (4) Otherwise comply with the requirements for conducting an investigation in 42 CFR Section 93.310 (see document at: www.brockport.edu/etc/forms).

We shall prepare the draft and final institutional investigation reports in writing and provide the draft report for comment as provided elsewhere in these policies and procedures and 42 CFR Section 93.312 (see document at: www.brockport.edu/etc/forms). The final investigation report shall:

(1). Describe the nature of the allegations of research misconduct;

(2). Describe and document the PHS or other funding support, including, for example any grant numbers, grant applications, contracts, and publications listing PHS support;

(3). Describe the specific allegations of research misconduct considered in the investigation;

(4). Include the institutional policies and procedures under which the investigation was conducted, if not already provided to ORI or other funding agency;

(5). Identify and summarize the research records and evidence reviewed, and identify any evidence taken into custody, but not reviewed. The report should also describe any relevant records and evidence not taken into custody and explain why.

(6). Provide a finding as to whether research misconduct did or did not occur for each separate allegation of research misconduct identified during the investigation, and if misconduct was found, (i) identify it as falsification, fabrication, or plagiarism and whether it was intentional, knowing, or in reckless disregard, (ii) summarize the facts and the analysis supporting the conclusion and consider the merits of any reasonable explanation by the respondent and any evidence that rebuts the respondent’s explanations, (iii) identify the specific PHS or other support; (iv) identify any publications that need correction or retraction; (v) identify the person(s) responsible for the misconduct, and (vi) list any current support or known applications or proposals for support that the respondent(s) has pending with non-PHS Federal agencies; and

(7). Include and consider any comments made by the respondent and complainant on the draft investigation report.

We shall maintain and provide to ORI upon request all relevant research records and records of our research misconduct proceeding, including results of all interviews and the transcripts or recordings of such interviews.

Ensuring a Fair Research Misconduct Proceeding

We shall take all reasonable steps to ensure an impartial and unbiased research misconduct proceeding to the maximum extent practicable. We shall select those conducting the inquiry or investigation on the basis of scientific expertise that is pertinent to the matter and, prior to selection, we shall screen them for any unresolved personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest with the respondent, complainant, potential witnesses, or others involved in the matter. Any such conflict which a reasonable person would consider to demonstrate potential bias shall disqualify the individual from selection.

Notice to Respondent

During the research misconduct proceeding, we shall provide the following notifications to all identified respondents:

Initiation of Inquiry. Prior to or at the beginning of the inquiry, we shall provide the respondent(s) written notification of the inquiry and contemporaneously sequester all research records and other evidence needed to conduct the research misconduct proceeding. If the inquiry subsequently identifies additional respondents, they shall be promptly notified in writing.

Comment on Inquiry Report. We shall provide the respondent(s) an opportunity to comment on the inquiry report in a timely fashion so that any comments can be attached to the report.

Results of the Inquiry. We shall notify the respondent(s) of the results of the inquiry and attach to the notification copies of the inquiry report and these institutional policies and procedures for the handling of research misconduct allegations.

Initiation of Investigation. Within a reasonable time after our determination that an investigation is warranted, but not later than 30 calendar days after that determination, we shall notify the respondent(s) in writing of the allegations to be investigated. We shall give respondent(s) written notice of any new allegations within a reasonable time after determining to pursue allegations not addressed in the inquiry or in the initial notice of the investigation.

Scheduling of Interview. We will notify the respondent sufficiently in advance of the scheduling of his/her interview in the investigation so that the respondent may prepare for the interview and arrange for the attendance of legal counsel, if the respondent wishes.

Comment on Draft Investigation Report. We shall give the respondent(s) a copy of the draft investigation report, and concurrently, a copy of, or supervised access to, the evidence on which the report is based and notify the respondent(s) that any comments must be submitted within 30 days of the date on which he/she received the draft report. We shall ensure that these comments are included and considered in the final investigation report.