Research Misconduct and Procedures for Responding to Allegations of Research Misconduct

means a systematic investigation, including research development, testing, and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge. For the purposes of this Policy, research includes all basic applied and demonstration research in all academic and scholarly fields. Research fields include, but are not limited to, the arts, basic and applied sciences, liberal arts, and social science. It also includes research involving human or animal subjects.

 refers to any serious deviation from practices that are commonly accepted within the academic community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research or scholarship. This definition specifically includes plagiarism; fabrication or falsification of evidence or data; unauthorized use of privileged information; and deliberate and substantial violation of federal, state, or University regulations relating to the conduct of research. It does not include honest error or honest differences in interpretation of data.

 is making up data or results and recording or reporting them.

 is manipulating research materials, equipment, processes, changing or omitting data and/or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record. The research record is the record of data or results that embody the facts resulting from the research inquiry. The record includes, but is not limited to research proposals, laboratory records—both physical and electronic—progress reports, abstracts, theses and dissertations, oral presentations, internal reports, books, and journal articles.

is the use of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.

means a Covered Individual’s department head or dean; the Vice Chancellor for Research and Economic Development (VCRED); the Provost; the Research Integrity Officer; the Chancellor; or the General Counsel.

is an institutional official (usually the Director of the Office of Research Integrity), designated by the VCRED. The VCRED may, at their discretion, serve as the campus RIO.

is a person who makes an allegation of research misconduct.

is any written or oral statement or other indication of possible research misconduct made to an Institutional Official.

is a preliminary evaluation of the available evidence and testimony of the respondent, complainant, and key witnesses to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to warrant an investigation of possible research misconduct.

is an evaluation of all relevant facts to determine if research misconduct has occurred and, if so, to determine the responsible person(s) and the seriousness of the research misconduct.

is the person against whom an allegation of research misconduct is directed or the person whose actions are the subject of the inquiry or investigation. There can be more than one respondent in any inquiry or investigation.

 is an organization, company, or bureau that provides some service for another entity, or with which the university has a contractual relationship related to Research. Examples of agencies include but are not limited to: federal/state government, publishing companies, collaborators, foundations or other universities.

means this Policy on Research Misconduct and Procedures for Responding to Allegations of Research Misconduct.

means proof by information that, compared with that opposing it, leads to the conclusion that the fact at issue is more probably true than not.

means all UNCG faculty, staff, students, guest researchers, collaborators and consultants.

Fostering a research environment that discourages misconduct in all research.

Appointing committee members with the particular expertise in the area of Research related to an Allegation to evaluate the evidence and issues related to the Allegation, avoiding real or apparent conflicts of interest among those involved and assuring that a full, fair, and complete Inquiry, Investigation, and resolution process is conducted.

Assuring that no real or apparent conflicts of interest arise in those appointed to implement an Inquiry or Investigation that they have the appropriate disciplinary expertise, and that due regard is given to the prevailing standards of the field.

Notifying concerned parties such as sponsors, co-authors, collaborators, editors, licensing boards, professional societies, criminal authorities, and all relevant academic departments, including the Dean of Students, of the outcome of Investigations and making the best possible efforts to clear the name of anyone falsely charged, if appropriate or required.

Coordinating the procedures related to Inquiries and Investigations.

Disseminating this Policy and maintaining records related to misconduct in research.

Determining, in consultation with the Office of the General Counsel and Office of Sponsored Programs, whether statutes, rules, regulations, or the terms and conditions of a research grant or award or other contract require notification of the sponsor, specify time limits, or require other actions to assure compliance with externally imposed requirements, and, if so, coordinate the inquiry and investigation with all involved individuals and offices to assure compliance.

Assuring appropriate confidentiality or anonymity, fairness, and objectivity of Inquiries and Investigations.

Assuring a full, fair, and complete Inquiry, Investigation, and resolution to an Allegation.

Maintaining confidentiality of records, in accordance with established University policy, relating to an Inquiry or Investigation.

Protecting, to the extent possible, the positions and reputations of Complainants who, in good faith, make Allegations, and those against Respondents prior to a finding of Research Misconduct.

Assuring that if decision-making persons (VCRED, Provost, Dean, or Department head/Direct Supervisor) have a conflict of interest that they are replaced by capable individuals.

The Research Integrity Officer shall conduct a Preliminary Assessment of an allegation by reviewing the Allegation, supporting documentation and/or witness statements to determine if the Allegation has enough substance to move forward to an Inquiry. The Research Integrity Officer shall complete the preliminary assessment promptly. If the preliminary assessment requires more than 10 days to complete, the Research Integrity Officer shall document and record the reasons as to the delay, and complete the assessment as promptly thereafter as possible.

The purpose of the Inquiry is to determine whether there is sufficient substance to the Allegation to warrant a formal investigation. The purpose of the Inquiry is not to reach a final conclusion about whether misconduct definitely occurred or who was responsible.

If at any time the Research Integrity Officer or Inquiry Committee has reason to believe that extenuating circumstances exist that warrant contacting Agency, they shall immediately inform the VCRED, who shall notify the appropriate agency. Examples of such circumstances are listed below:

• The health or safety of the public is at risk, including an immediate need to protect human or animal participants.
• Agency resources or interests are threatened.
• Research activities should be suspended.
• There is a reasonable indication of possible violations of civil or criminal law.
• Federal action is required to protect the interests of those involved in the research misconduct proceeding.
• There is reason to believe that the Inquiry may be made public prematurely, so that the Agency may take appropriate steps to safeguard evidence and protect the rights of those involved.
• The research community or public should be informed.

If the Inquiry Committee concludes that the allegation warrants an Investigation, it shall prepare a written report that summarizes all pertinent information including the determination.
If the Inquiry Committee determines that an investigation is not warranted, it shall prepare a sufficiently detailed documentation of the Inquiry to inform a later assessment by third parties of the reasons for not conducting an Investigation. Such report shall identify any other actions the Inquiry Committee feels should be taken in connection with the Allegation.

• Notice to the Respondent. The Research Integrity Officer must notify the Respondent whether the inquiry found that an investigation is warranted. The notice must include a copy of the Inquiry Committee report and a copy of or reference to this Policy. The Research Integrity Officer will provide the Respondent with a copy of the Inquiry Committee draft report for review and comment. Within 14 calendar days of receipt of the draft report, the Respondent will provide his or her comments, if any, to the Inquiry Committee for its consideration.
• Notice to the Complainant. The Research Integrity Officer may notify the Complainant who made the allegation whether the Inquiry found that an Investigation is warranted. The Research Integrity Officer may provide relevant portions of the Inquiry Committee report.
• Notice to Appropriate Agencies. If an Inquiry is terminated before its completion, a report of the planned termination, including the reasons for such an action, should be made to those Agencies that require it.

The Inquiry Committee will forward the Inquiry Committee report to the Research Integrity Officer, who shall notify any external agencies as may be required by applicable laws or regulations. All aspects of the inquiry must be completed within 60 days of its commencement. If the Inquiry Committee is unable to complete its work in 60 days, it shall request an extension in writing from the VCRED. If Agencies are involved the Research Integrity Officer may need to request an extension from the agency.

The purpose of the Investigation is to explore in detail the Allegation, to examine the evidence in depth, and to determine specifically whether Research Misconduct has been committed, by whom, to what extent, and make recommendations with respect to imposition of disciplinary sanctions.

The investigation will also determine whether there are additional instances of possible misconduct that would justify broadening the scope beyond the initial Allegation. All aspects of the Investigation must be completed within 120 days of its commencement. If the Investigation Committee is unable to complete the Investigation in 120 days, it shall request an extension in writing from the VCRED. For Investigations that involve Agencies, the Research Integrity Officer may need to request an extension from the Agency.

• Appointing the Investigation Committee. The VCRED shall appoint the Investigation Committee. The Investigation Committee should consist of at least three (3) individuals who have the necessary expertise to evaluate the evidence and issues related to the Allegation, interview the principals and key witnesses, and conduct the Investigation. The VCRED shall take precautions to ensure that individuals responsible for carrying out any part of the Investigation do not have unresolved personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest with the Complainant, Respondent(s), or witnesses. The VCRED may seek additional expertise for the Investigation Committee, who will advise the Investigation Committee, but not vote or participate in interviews, if needed. The experts can be from inside or outside of UNCG.
• Notice of Commencement of the Investigation. The Research Integrity Officer will notify the Respondent(s) that an Investigation is being undertaken, the nature of the Allegation, as well as the composition of the Investigation Committee, and the procedures that will be followed. If the Investigation subsequently identifies additional Respondents, the Research Integrity Officer must notify them.
• Notice of Commencement of the Investigation. The Research Integrity Officer will notify the Respondent(s) that an Investigation is being undertaken, the nature of the Allegation, as well as the composition of the Investigation Committee, and the procedures that will be followed. If the Investigation subsequently identifies additional Respondents, the Research Integrity Officer must notify them.

The University bears the burden of proving based on the Preponderance of the Evidence that Research Misconduct occurred. The destruction, absence of, or Respondent’s failure to provide research records adequately documenting the questioned research shall be considered evidence of Research Misconduct, provided the University establishes by a Preponderance of the Evidence that:

The Respondent has the burden of proof going forward with and proving by a Preponderance of the Evidence any mitigating factors that are relevant to a decision to impose administrative sanctions following a finding of Research Misconduct.

If the Investigation Committee is unable to complete the investigation in 120 days, it shall request an extension in writing from the VCRED. For Investigations that involve Agencies, the Research Integrity Officer may need to request an extension from the Agency.

Upon the conclusion of the Investigation, the Investigation Committee shall prepare, in writing, a final report (“Investigation Report”) for the VCRED that shall:

If a majority of the Investigation Committee finds that the individual has violated this Policy, it shall recommend, in writing, an appropriate course of action to the VCRED, which may include appropriate sanctions and which shall include adequate steps to ensure that the institution meets its obligations, if any, to Agencies affected by the violation, co-investigators and co-authors, funding agencies and other research sponsors, professional journals, and relevant clients. Any individual that does not agree with the majority can record their comments in a minority report that will be filed with the official proceeding records.

The Respondent and Complainant shall have an opportunity to review the draft Investigation Report and to provide written comments, which the Investigation Committee shall consider and include, if warranted, in the final Investigation Report. The Respondent shall have 30 calendar days to submit written comments on the draft of the Investigation Report. The findings of the Investigation Report should take into account the respondent’s comments in addition to all the other evidence.

Where the Investigation concludes no Research Misconduct occurred:

If the Investigation concludes Research Misconduct has occurred, the violation may be addressed in various ways as stated below in Section 7.

If the institution or entity believes that criminal or civil fraud violations may have occurred, the VCRED shall promptly refer the matter to the appropriate investigative body.