The integrity of the research process is an essential aspect of a university's intellectual and social structure. Research is defined as all research, scholarship, and creative activity that support the intellectual endeavors of the University. Although incidents of misconduct in research may be rare, those that do occur threaten the entire research enterprise. ²

The integrity of the research process must depend largely upon self-regulation. Formalization of the rights and responsibilities of the University of North Dakota and faculty/staff members in conducting research and producing creative activity are imperative. The University is responsible for promoting practices that prevent misconduct and also for developing policies and procedures for dealing with allegations or other evidence of fraud or serious misconduct. All members of the University community, including all faculty, staff, administrators and students, both full and part time, who are affiliated with the University of North Dakota, share responsibility for developing and maintaining standards to assure ethical conduct in research, integrating those standards into their own work and detecting any abuse of the standards by others.

It is important to create an atmosphere that encourages openness and creativity. Good and innovative research cannot flourish in an atmosphere of oppressive regulation. Moreover, it is particularly important to distinguish misconduct in research, scholarship, and creative activity from the honest error and the ambiguities of interpretation that are inherent in the research/creative process and that are normally corrected by further research and study. The following policies and procedures apply to faculty, staff and, in certain circumstances, students (see section 4.1). These policies are not intended to address all academic issues of an ethical nature such as discrimination and affirmative action which are covered by other University policies.

Inquiries regarding this Policy may be directed to the Research Development and Compliance office.

______________________________

¹ This policy statement was derived from a policy statement, "Ethical Conduct in Academic Research and Scholarship," developed at the University of Houston. It has been copied and extensively modified with the permission of Julie T. Norris, Assistant Vice President and Director, Office of Sponsored Programs, University of Houston.

² The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation (NSF) require that entities receiving federal research funds establish formal policies and procedures that ensure an impartial process for the receipt and disposition of allegations of misconduct in science, including prescribed phases, timelines, definitions, and notification procedures. This policy is designed to comply with those federal requirements.

The primary way to encourage appropriate conduct in research and scholarship at the University of North Dakota is for the faculty and staff to promote and maintain a climate consistent with high ethical standards. To reduce the likelihood of misconduct and promote high quality in research, scholarship and creative activity, the faculty and administration should promote and facilitate the following:

2.1. Encouragement of Intellectual Honesty

Because of the importance of a climate of intellectual honesty in a university community, a commitment to the ethical responsibilities of academia by all of its members is essential. This commitment is evidenced by adherence to such common practices as submission of work to peer review, avoidance of conflicts of interest, scholarly exchange of ideas and data, and self-regulation. Mentoring relationships between academic leaders and new practitioners serve to enhance the transmission of ethical standards.

2.2. Acceptance of Responsibility by Research Supervisor

University policies must define a focus of responsibility for the conduct of research and must ensure that the individuals charged with the supervision of researchers can realistically execute the responsibility. These supervisors of research should be experienced academicians who serve as mentors in conveying the ethics and responsibilities underlying scientific and humanistic research. The larger the research team, the more critical the role of the supervisor in promoting open communication and scholarly exchange of ideas, data, and results and in assuming responsibility for the conduct and outcomes of the research process. It is also the responsibility of the supervisor to review and publish as much primary data as possible.

2.3. Establishment of Well-Defined Research Procedures

Strict adherence to well-designed research methods is a deterrent to fraud. Bias in data analysis and interpretation can be avoided by following discipline-specific, commonly-accepted research practices.

2.4. Appropriate Assignment of Credit and Responsibility

Authors or creators should recognize the contributions of others through adequate citation and/or acknowledgment. They should also name as authors or creators only those who have had a genuine role in the research or creative activity and who accept responsibility for the quality of the work being reported or presented.

3.1. Advisor

An Advisor is a person who provides advice to a Complainant, Respondent, or any other person who provides information regarding an Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship. An Advisor may also be Counsel and should not be an individual who has special knowledge of the situation such that he or she may need to contribute testimony or information during the course of an Inquiry or Investigation. Only one Advisor may accompany an individual.

3.2. Allegation

An Allegation is, generally, any written and signed statement describing possible Misconduct in Research or Scholarship. In the course of an Inquiry or Investigation, additional information may emerge that justifies broadening its scope beyond what is reported in the initial Allegation. For all purposes under this Policy, the term Allegation shall be deemed to include any such broadened scope.

3.3. Committee of Investigation (CoI)

The CoI is a three-member panel used as fact-finders during the Investigation. The CoI conducts interviews to obtain information necessary to make a determination regarding the Allegations made by the Complainant and any other matters that may come to the attention of the COI during the Investigation.

3.4. Complainant

Complainant means an individual who brings an Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship.

3.5. Counsel

Counsel is an Advisor who is either an attorney or otherwise has legal training.

3.6. Days

All references to Days in this policy shall mean working days. The number of days shall be calculated beginning with the day after the event (e.g.the receipt of a document, commencement of an Investigation) triggering any deadline.

3.7. Disposition

Disposition means the decision of the VPR or VPAA resolving the Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship.

3.8. Inquiry

Inquiry means information gathering and initial fact-finding to determine whether an Allegation or apparent instance of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship warrants an Investigation. This is a primarily paper review based on the documentation received by the VPR or VPAA and questions submitted by the Inquirer to either the Complainant or Respondent for clarification. After review of all of the documentation including the written responses from the Complainant and Respondent, a determination may be made that follow-up written questions to the Complainant or Respondent may be necessary to complete the Inquiry.

3.9. Inquirer

Person performing an Inquiry.

3.10. Investigation

Investigation means the formal examination and evaluation of all relevant facts to determine if Misconduct in Research or Scholarship has occurred.

3.11. Misconduct in Research or Scholarship

Misconduct in Research or Scholarship means any form of behavior which entails research fraud, scientific misconduct, or an act of deception whereby one's work or the work of others is misrepresented. Misconduct in Research or Scholarship is distinguished from honest error and from ambiguities of interpretation that are inherent in the research/creative process. The principal element of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship is the intent to deceive others or misrepresent one's work. Misconduct in Research or Scholarship involves significant breaches of integrity, which may take numerous forms such as, but are not limited to, those outlined below:

3.11.1. Falsification of Data

Falsification of data means 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.

3.11.2. Fabrication of Data

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

3.11.3. Plagiarism

Plagiarism means the misappropriation of the work of another or one's own work and its misrepresentation as one's own original work. Examples of plagiarism include, without limitation, the following: (1) Verbatim, word-for-word lifting of words without quotation marks and without source citation; (2) Verbatim, word-for-word lifting of words without quotation marks but with source citation; (3) Paraphrasing words or using ideas without citing to the source; (4) Verbatim, word-for-word lifting of words from the article or paraphrasing of those words from the article without citing to the article, but citing to the sources cited by author in the article; (5) Lifting an article's structure and organization without attribution; and (6) Paraphrasing a sentence in such a way that with the replacement of several words, it should be quoted. Plagiarism does NOT require intent i.e., lack of awareness does not excuse responsibility for upholding these standards.

3.11.4. Improprieties of Authorship

Improprieties of authorship means the improper assignment of credit, such as excluding other authors; inclusion of individuals as authors who have not made a definite contribution to the work; or submission of multi-authored publications without the knowledge of all authors.

3.11.5. Misappropriation of the Intellectual Property of Others

Misappropriation of the intellectual property of others means the unauthorized use of proprietary or private information (e.g., use of information obtained while conducting a peer review of someone else's work), however obtained.

3.11.6. Violation of Generally Accepted Research Practices

Violation of generally accepted research practices includes, but is not limited to, deceptive practices in proposing, conducting, or reporting research. This definition includes all scholarly and creative activities, not just research activities.

3.11.7. Inappropriate Behavior in Relation to Misconduct

Inappropriate behavior in relation to Misconduct in Research or Scholarship includes, but is not limited to, unjust and malicious accusations of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship; failure to report Misconduct in Research or Scholarship; withholding or destruction of information relevant to a claim of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship; or retaliation against persons involved in the Allegation or Investigation who have acted in good faith.

3.12. Office of Research Integrity

The Office of Research Integrity means the federal agency organized under the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Office of the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Office of Public Health and Science.

3.13. Research Integrity Officer

The Research Integrity Officer is the person designated by the VPR to serve that role on behalf of the University.

3.14. Respondent

Respondent means the person against whom the Complainant makes an Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship.

3.15. VPAA

VPAA means the Vice President for Academic Affairs or a designee.

3.16. VPR

VPR means the Vice President for Research and Economic Development (VPR) or a designee. Generally, the designee will be the Research Integrity Officer if that individual is not the VPR.

4.1. Allegations Involving Students

Allegations of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship against students will be handled according to policies in the University of North Dakota Code of Student Life, with the following modification: if a student against whom an Allegation is lodged serves in a research assistant capacity and is supported in that position by University administered funds, the Allegation must be reported to the VPAA or VPR who will make the decision as to whether the complaint should be handled in accordance with the procedures as stipulated in the Code of Student Life or the procedures as provided in this Policy. If the decision is to proceed utilizing the Code of Student Life process, each step of the process must be coordinated with the VPAA or VPR or a designee in order to assure compliance with the procedures for timelines, decisions, and sanctions as prescribed in this Policy.

4.2. Principles

The following principles shall guide the review of Allegations of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship in research, scholarship, and creative activity at the University of North Dakota:

4.2.1. The process must avoid damage to research, scholarship, or creative activity.

4.2.2. The University will provide vigorous leadership in the pursuit and resolution of all charges.

4.2.3. Process will be provided to all parties under University of North Dakota and State Board of Higher Education policies and procedures. All parties will be fairly treated and their reputations guarded by providing confidentiality to the extent possible under University and Board policies and procedures, applicable state and federal requirements, and the North Dakota Open Records Act.

4.2.4. The integrity of the process will be maintained by painstaking avoidance of conflicts of interest.

4.2.5. Allegations will be resolved as expeditiously as possible.

4.2.6. The University will document the pertinent facts and actions at each stage of the process.

4.2.7. The University will pursue Allegations within the scope of this Policy without regard to whether related civil or criminal proceedings have been initiated. The University may, at its option, suspend the Inquiry/Investigation temporarily, but is not under obligation to do so, as the standards of the University may differ from those of the courts.

4.2.8. To the extent feasible and reasonable, the University will pursue the Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship to its conclusion, even if the Respondent leaves or has left the University before the matter is resolved.

A Complainant may make Allegations of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship, in writing, to any faculty member or administrator. All Allegations must then be reported to the VPR by the person who receives it. The VPR will determine whether the Allegations concern research, scholarship, or creative activity which is either being presently funded with federal or state funds or has been used in a grant proposal to a federal or state agency. The VPR will determine, in consultation with others if necessary, whether the person alleged to have committed Misconduct in Research or Scholarship has external support that is reportable to the Office of Research Integrity. If the Allegations concern research, scholarship, or creative activity with actual or potential federal or state funding, the VPR will institute the procedures outlined in section 6 of this Policy. If the VPR has a possible conflict of interest, the Allegations will be referred to the VPAA, who will institute the procedures outlined in section 6 of this Policy (in such cases VPAA will be substituted for VPR in each place where it appears in section 6 of this Policy). If the Allegations do not involve actual or potential federal or state funding, the VPR will forward the Allegations to the VPAA, who will institute the procedures outlined in section 7 of this Policy. If the VPAA has a possible conflict of interest, the Allegations the VPR will institute the procedures outlined in section 7 of this Policy (in such cases VPR will be substituted for VPAA in each place where it appears in section 7 of this Policy

6.1. Pre-Inquiry Review (federal or state funding)

6.1.1. Initial review by the VPR

Within 20 Days of the receipt of an Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship, the VPR shall conduct a pre-inquiry review of the Allegation and determine whether:

6.1.1.1. the Allegation is within the purview of this Policy;

6.1.1.2. other policies and procedures, such as those relevant to employment grievances, should be invoked;

6.1.1.3. the Allegation is outside the purview of the University;

6.1.1.4. the Allegation is clearly without substance;

If an Inquiry is determined to be unwarranted, the VPR shall prepare an internal memorandum-for-file including a statement of the Allegation and the rationale for not conducting an Inquiry. After the resolution of the Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship this memorandum shall be kept secure pursuant to the University's records retention schedule. A copy shall be given to the Respondent and Complainant.

If an Inquiry is determined to be warranted, the Inquiry process will be initiated.

6.1.2. Notification of Respondent (federal or state funding)

In the event the VPR determines that an Inquiry is warranted, the VPR, within 20 Days of receipt of an Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship, shall:

6.1.2.1. notify (Memo #1) the Respondent, the Research Integrity Officer, the University's Office of General Counsel and the appropriate Dean(s) of the Allegation;

6.1.2.2. notify all parties of the procedures that will be used to examine the Allegation; and

6.1.2.3. notify all parties of the proposed Inquirer and ask all parties to identify any real or potential conflict of interest between the proposed Inquirer and the parties involved in the Allegation.

6.1.3. Precautionary Actions. As the University is responsible for protecting the health and safety of research subjects, students, and staff, interim administrative action prior to conclusion of the Inquiry and, if necessary, the Investigation may be indicated. Such action ranging from slight restrictions through complete suspension of the Respondent or the Respondent's research and notification of external sponsors, if indicated, will be initiated by the VPR in collaboration with the VPAA. Sanctions that prevent the Respondent from fulfilling his/her obligations as an employee of the University shall not be imposed during the Inquiry or Investigation phases unless it is necessary to prevent harm to the Respondent or to others. Factors to be considered in determining the timing of such actions include the following:

6.1.3.1. There is an immediate health hazard involved.

6.1.3.2. There is an immediate need to protect federal or state funds or equipment.

6.1.3.3. There is an immediate need to protect the interests of the Complainant or Respondent as well as co-investigators and associates, if any.

6.1.3.4. It is probable that the Allegation will be reported publicly.

6.1.3.5. There is reasonable indication of possible criminal violation.

6.2. Inquiry Phase (federal or state funding)

6.2.1. Purpose (federal or state funding)

After review by the VPR and a determination that an Inquiry is warranted, the VPR will initiate an Inquiry. In the Inquiry phase, factual information will be gathered and expeditiously reviewed to determine whether or not a further investigation of the charge (Investigation phase) is warranted. The Inquiry phase is designed to separate Allegations deserving of further investigation from frivolous, malicious, unjustified, or clearly mistaken Allegations.

6.2.2. Process and Structure (federal or state funding)

6.2.2.1. After a decision has been made to proceed with an Inquiry, the VPR will appoint an Inquirer. The Inquirer must be a tenured faculty member at the rank of associate or full professor who is without conflict of interest and has appropriate expertise to evaluate the information relative to the case.

6.2.2.2. The VPR will provide the Inquirer and the Respondent with copies of all relevant documents. During the Inquiry, the VPR and the Inquirer will be responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of the information obtained and the security of relevant documents. After the resolution of the Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship, originals of all documents and related communications are to be securely maintained in the Office of the VPR pursuant to the University's records retention schedule.

6.2.2.3. Responsibilities of the Inquirer:

6.2.2.3.1. Records of the Inquiry are to be stored securely throughout the Inquiry and, at the end of the Inquiry, transferred to the VPR.

6.2.2.3.2. If there is a need for interviews, the interviews must be recorded and, upon request, made available to involved parties after the completion of the Disposition Phase.

6.2.2.3.3. Information, expert opinions, records, and other pertinent data may be requested by the Inquirer. All involved individuals are expected to cooperate with the Inquirer by supplying such requested documents and information.

6.2.2.3.4. The Inquiry phase will be completed within 60 Days of its initiation. If the Inquirer determines that circumstances clearly warrant an extension of time, a request for such an extension must be forwarded to the VPR. If the VPR grants the request, the Inquirer will notify all relevant parties of the extension. The record of the Inquiry will include the rationale for exceeding the 60 Day period.

6.2.2.3.5. As the Inquiry is intended to be expeditious, individuals are expected to speak for themselves, but may be accompanied by an Advisor. If any individual chooses to bring Counsel, the University's Office of General Counsel must be notified in advance and must be present during the meeting.

6.2.3. Findings (federal or state funding)

6.2.3.1. The completion of an Inquiry is marked by a determination of whether or not an Investigation is warranted. The report of the Inquirer will be conveyed in writing to the VPR who will be responsible for communicating the findings to the Respondent and the Complainant within 10 Days of receipt of the report in writing, by certified mail, return receipt requested. The report of the Inquirer shall specify the information that was reviewed, summarize relevant interviews, and include the conclusions of the Inquiry. The Inquirer will make a recommendation to the VPR as to whether an Investigation is warranted. The Inquirer shall not recommend that an Investigation occur unless he/she concludes, based on the sufficient information for each Allegation, that the Allegation justifies an Investigation. The Respondent shall be given the opportunity to comment in writing (Memo #2) upon the findings and recommendations of the Inquirer. If the Respondent chooses to comment, such comments shall be forwarded to the VPR as soon as possible but no later than 20 Days from the date of notification of the findings by the VPR. The Respondent's comments will become part of the Inquiry record. Within the earlier of 30 Days of delivering the report of the Inquirer to the Respondent and Complainant, the VPR will determine whether to proceed with an Investigation.

6.2.3.2. If the VPR determines that an Investigation is unnecessary, the VPR will proceed to the Disposition Phase under section 6.4.

6.2.3.3. If the VPR determines that an Investigation should be conducted, the VPR (after notification to the appropriate Dean(s), the VPAA, the Research Integrity Officer and the University's Office of General Counsel), will initiate the Investigation phase. The VPR, through the Research Integrity Officer for the University, must notify any sponsoring agency or funding source, including the Office of Research Integrity at a time prior to the initiation of an Investigation. Factors to be considered in determining the timing of such notification to the sponsoring agency or funding source include the following:

6.2.3.3.1. There is an immediate health hazard involved.

6.2.3.3.2. There is an immediate need to protect federal or state funds or equipment.

6.2.3.3.3. There is an immediate need to protect the interests of the person(s) making the Allegations or the individual(s) who is the subject of the Allegations as well as co-investigators and associates, if any.

6.2.3.3.4. It is probable that the alleged incident will be reported publicly.

6.2.3.3.5. There is reasonable indication of possible criminal violation.

6.2.4. Information Outside the Inquiry

If, in the course of its Inquiry, the Inquirer finds something that should be reviewed or changed which does not relate to the Inquiry, the Inquirer may send a separate letter to the individual who has the authority to act on the information. This information should not be contained in the official Inquirer report nor should it reveal the subject matter of the Investigation or the parties involved.

6.3. Investigative Phase (federal or state funding)

6.3.1. Purpose (federal or state funding)

An Investigation will be initiated when VPR determines that one is necessary. The purpose of the Investigation is to explore further the Allegations and determine whether Misconduct in Research or Scholarship has occurred. The Investigation will focus on Allegations of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship and examine the factual materials of each case.

6.3.2. Process and Structure (federal or state funding)

6.3.2.1. After making a decision to proceed with an Investigation, the VPR will consult with the Chair of the University Senate to appoint a CoI. No member of the CoI may have a conflict of interest. At least two members must be tenured faculty at the rank of associate or full professor and have appropriate expertise for evaluating the information relative to the case. However, if the Respondent is someone other than a faculty member of the University, one of these two members of the CoI must have a position with the University similar to that of the Respondent. The third member may be appointed from outside the University of North Dakota community if, in the judgment of the VPR, the circumstances justify such an appointment. Otherwise, the third member shall be appointed from within the University and must meet the same requirements as those listed for the first two members. The Inquirer may not serve on the CoI. Appointment of a CoI should be made within 20 Days following the decision by the VPR to proceed with an Investigation.

6.3.2.2. Before the CoI is convened, the VPR shall notify (Memo #3) all parties in writing of the Allegations and of the procedures that will be used to examine the Allegations. Further, the parties will be informed of the proposed membership of the CoI for the purpose of identifying, in advance, any real or potential conflicts of interest.

6.3.2.3. At its first meeting, the CoI will elect a chairperson to handle procedural and administrative matters. All CoI members will be voting members.

6.3.2.4. Copies of all pertinent documents in the possession of the VPR will be provided by the VPR to the CoI and the Respondent in advance of scheduled meetings. The CoI proceedings must be recorded and, upon request, made available to the involved parties, but only after the completion of the Disposition phase.

6.3.2.5. Every effort shall be made to complete the Investigation within 120 Days. If the CoI determines that circumstances clearly warrant an extension of time, a request for such an extension must be forwarded to the VPR. If the VPR grants the request, the CoI will notify all relevant parties of the extension. The record of the Inquiry will include the rationale for exceeding the 120 Day period.

6.3.2.6. As related to the Investigation, the VPR, through the Research Integrity Officer, shall convey to any affected funding agency such information as may be required by the funding agency, and shall keep the funding agency up to date at intervals as required by the agency.

6.3.2.7. Individuals involved may have an Advisor accompany them to the meeting with the CoI. The Advisor may not present to the CoI. If any individual chooses to bring Counsel, the University's Office of General Counsel must be notified in advance and must be present during the meeting.

6.3.2.8. The Investigation normally will include examination of all documentation, including but not necessarily limited to relevant funding information, research data and proposals, publications, correspondence, and information the CoI feels pertains to the issue. The CoI will make every attempt to interview all individuals involved either in making the Allegation or against whom an Allegation is made, as well as other individuals who might have information regarding key aspects of the Allegations. Complete summaries of recorded interviews will be prepared, provided to the interviewed party for comment or revision, and included as part of the investigatory file. Additional interviews may be held, and the CoI may request the involvement of outside experts. The Investigation must be sufficiently thorough to permit the CoI to reach a decision about the validity of the Allegation and the scope of the wrongdoing or to be sure that further investigation is not likely to alter an inconclusive result.

6.3.2.9. All parties in the Investigation will cooperate by producing any additional data requested. Copies of all materials secured by the CoI shall be provided to the Respondent.

6.3.2.10. The Respondent shall have an opportunity to address the charges and information in detail during the interview and in writing at the end of the process.

6.3.2.11. After all information has been received and the fact-finding interviews have been completed, the CoI shall deliberate and prepare its findings. The CoI shall find no Misconduct in Research or Scholarship unless a majority of the members conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the Allegation has been substantiated. A minority report can be written.

6.3.2.12. All significant developments during the Investigation, as well as the findings of the CoI, will be reported by the VPR to any affected research sponsor, if appropriate.

6.3.3. Findings (federal or state funding)

6.3.3.1. Upon completion of the Investigation, the CoI will submit a draft report to the Respondent by certified mail, return receipt requested. The Respondent shall be given the opportunity to comment in writing (Memo #4) upon the findings and recommendations of the CoI. If the Respondent chooses to comment, such comments shall be forwarded as soon as possible but no later than 20 Days from the date of receipt of the draft report. The Respondent's comments will be taken into consideration when completing the report. The CoI will then submit the final report to the VPR, which details the CoI's findings.

6.3.3.2. The final CoI report must be in writing and include:

6.3.3.2.1. Allegations. Describe the nature of the initial Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship;

6.3.3.2.2. Federal or state support. Describe and document federal or state support including, for example, any grant numbers, grant applications, contracts and publications listing federal or state support;

6.3.3.2.3. Institutional charge. Describe the specific Allegations of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship that were considered in the Investigation;

6.3.3.2.4. Policies and procedures. If not already provided to Office of Research Integrity with the Inquiry report, the institutional policies and procedures under which the Investigation was conducted;

6.3.3.2.5. Research records and information. Identify and summarize the research records and information reviewed, and identify any information taken into custody but not reviewed;

6.3.3.2.6. Statement of findings. For each separate Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship identified during the Investigation, provide a finding as to whether Misconduct in Research or Scholarship did or did not occur and for each instance of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship that did occur:

6.3.3.2.6.1. Identify the person(s) responsible for the Misconduct in Research or Scholarship;

6.3.3.2.6.2. Identify whether the Misconduct in Research or Scholarship was falsification, fabrication, and/or plagiarism, and if it was, intentional, knowing, or in reckless disregard;

6.3.3.2.6.3. Summarize the facts and the analysis of information which support the conclusion of the CoI, considering the merits of any reasonable explanations by the Respondent or other individuals who provided information;

6.3.3.2.6.4. Identify the specific federal or state support;

6.3.3.2.6.5. Identify whether any publications need to be corrected or retracted; and

6.3.3.2.6.6. List any current support or known applications or proposals for support that the Respondent has pending with all federal or state agencies.

6.3.3.2.7. Comments. Include and consider any comments made by the Respondent and Complainant on the draft Investigation report.

6.3.3.3. Upon request, the CoI will maintain and provide to the Office of Research Integrity (or other federal or state agencies) all relevant research records and records of the institution's Misconduct in Research or Scholarship proceeding, including results of all interviews and the transcripts of recordings of such interviews.

6.3.3.4. After the resolution of the Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship, including any Office of Research Integrity proceedings involving the Allegations of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship, all records will be maintained in the office of the VPR by the Research Integrity Officer pursuant to the University's records retention schedule.

6.3.4. Information Outside the Investigation

If, in the course of its Investigation, the CoI finds something that should be reviewed or changed which does not relate to the Investigation, the CoI may send a separate letter to the individual who has the authority to act on the information. This information should not be contained in the official CoI report nor should it reveal the subject matter of the Investigation or the parties involved.

6.4. Disposition Phase (federal or state funding)

The VPR shall consider the recommendations of the Inquirer or the CoI and shall be responsible for determining and implementing any sanctions. The evaluation has two possible designated outcomes:

6.4.1. If No Misconduct in Research or Scholarship is Found (federal or state funding)

Within 10 Days of receipt of the Inquirer's or the CoI report, the VPR shall furnish the report to the Respondent with the VPR's decision. The VPR shall inform the Respondent, Complainant, and the appropriate Dean that Allegations of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship were not supported. The VPR, through the Research Integrity Officer, shall inform all federal or state agencies, sponsors, or other external entities initially informed of the Investigation, that the Allegations of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship were not supported. In determining whether to publicize the findings of no Misconduct in Research or Scholarship, the University will be guided by whether public announcements will be harmful or beneficial in restoring any reputation(s) that may have been damaged. The Respondent's wishes will be taken into consideration when making publicity decisions. If the Allegations are deemed to have been maliciously motivated, the Inquirer or CoI will report those findings to the VPR and a decision will be made whether to treat that finding as an Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship against the Complainant.

6.4.2. If Misconduct in Research or Scholarship is Found (federal or state funding)

6.4.2.1. Within 10 Days of receipt of the report from the Inquirer or the CoI, the VPR shall notify the Respondent and the President, in writing, of the recommended sanctions, if any. A copy of the report will accompany the VPR's decision.

6.4.2.2. The University must impose sanctions that are appropriate to the seriousness of the Misconduct in Research or Scholarship, including, but not limited to, one or more of the following:

6.4.2.2.1. Letter of reprimand in file.

6.4.2.2.2. Removal from particular project.

6.4.2.2.3. Special monitoring of future work.

6.4.2.2.4. Letter of reprimand with public notice.

6.4.2.2.5. Probation for a specified period with conditions.

6.4.2.2.6. Suspension of rights and responsibilities for a specified period, with or without salary.

6.4.2.2.7. Financial restitution.

6.4.2.2.8. Termination of employment/enrollment.

6.4.2.3. If the sanctions involve a recommendation for termination of employment, the Respondent may use any applicable termination procedures.

6.4.2.4. The VPR, through the Research Integrity Officer, is responsible for notification of all federal or state agencies, sponsors or other entities initially informed of the Investigation's outcome. Consideration should be given to formal notification of:

6.4.2.4.1. Sponsoring agencies, funding sources.

6.4.2.4.2. Co-authors, co-investigators, collaborators, departments.

6.4.2.4.3. Editors of journals in which fraudulent research was published.

6.4.2.4.4. State professional licensing boards.

6.4.2.4.5. Editors of journals or other publications, other institutions, sponsoring agencies, and funding sources with which the individual has been affiliated.

6.4.2.4.6. Professional societies.

6.4.3. Appeal (federal or state funding)

6.4.3.1. Respondents who are members of the faculty of the University may appeal the sanctions to the Standing Committee on Faculty Rights (SCFR).

6.4.3.1.1. Under section 605.3(9) of the State Board of Higher Education(SBHE) Policies "If the administration determines that the conduct of a faculty member . . . provides reasonable cause for imposition of a sanction, the administration shall inform the faculty member in writing of the sanction and the reasons for the sanction." A faculty member may appeal to the SCFR" if the sanction is imposed without a [SCFR] hearing . . . ." The faculty member may request a SCFR review by following the SBHE policy and the University's implementation, both of which may be found in the University's Faculty Handbook.

6.4.3.1.2. If initiated, the review of imposed sanctions by SCFR concludes review under this Policy.

6.4.3.1.3. If the finding of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship results in termination, Respondent may request a SCFR review of the decision to terminate by following the SBHE policy and the University's implementation procedures, both of which may be found in the University's Faculty Handbook.

6.4.3.2. Respondents who are not members of the faculty of the University may appeal the sanctions using any applicable procedures available under state or University policies.

7.1. Pre-Inquiry Review (no federal or state funding)

7.1.1. Initial review by the VPAA(no federal or state funding)

Within 20 Days of the receipt of an Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship, the VPAA shall conduct a pre-inquiry review of the Allegation and determine whether:

7.1.1.1. the Allegation is within the purview of this Policy;

7.1.1.2. other policies and procedures, such as those relevant to employment grievances, should be invoked;

7.1.1.3. the Allegation is outside the purview of the University;

7.1.1.4. the Allegation is clearly without substance;

If an Inquiry is determined to be unwarranted, the VPAA shall prepare an internal memorandum-for-file including a statement of the Allegation and the rationale for not conducting an Inquiry. After the resolution of the Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship, this memorandum shall be kept secure pursuant to the University's records retention schedule. .A copy shall be given to the Respondent and Complainant.

If an Inquiry is determined to be warranted, the Inquiry process will be initiated.

7.1.2. Notification of Respondent (no federal or state funding)

In the event the VPAA determines that an Inquiry is warranted, the VPAA, within 20 Days of receipt of an Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship, shall:

7.1.2.1. notify (Memo #5) the Respondent, the University's Office of General Counsel and the appropriate Dean(s) of the Allegation;

7.1.2.2. notify all parties of the procedures that will be used to examine the Allegation; and

7.1.2.3. notify all parties of the proposed Inquirer and ask all parties to identify any real or potential conflict of interest between the proposed Inquirer and the parties involved in the Allegation.

7.1.3. Precautionary Actions. As the University is responsible for protecting the health and safety of research subjects, students, and staff, interim administrative action prior to conclusion of the Inquiry and, if necessary, the Investigation, may be indicated. Such action ranging from slight restrictions through complete suspension of the Respondent or the Respondent's research and notification of external sponsors, if indicated, will be initiated by the VPR in collaboration with the VPAA. Sanctions that prevent the Respondent from fulfilling his/her obligations as an employee of the University shall not be imposed during the Inquiry or Investigation phases unless it is necessary to prevent harm to the Respondent or to others. Factors to be considered in determining the timing of such actions include the following:

7.1.3.1. There is an immediate health hazard involved.

7.1.3.2. There is an immediate need to protect federal or state funds or equipment.

7.1.3.3. There is an immediate need to protect the interests of the Complainant or Respondent as well as co-investigators and associates, if any.

7.1.3.4. It is probable that the Allegation will be reported publicly.

7.1.3.5. There is reasonable indication of possible criminal violation.

7.2. Inquiry Phase (no federal or state funding)

7.2.1. Purpose (no federal or state funding)

After review by the VPAA and a determination that an Inquiry is warranted, the VPAA will initiate an Inquiry. In the Inquiry phase, factual information will be gathered and expeditiously reviewed to determine whether or not a further investigation of the charge (Investigation phase) is warranted. The Inquiry phase is designed to separate Allegations deserving of further investigation from frivolous, malicious, unjustified, or clearly mistaken Allegations.

7.2.2. Process and Structure (no federal or state funding)

7.2.2.1. After a decision has been made to proceed with an Inquiry, the VPAA will appoint an Inquirer. The Inquirer must be a tenured faculty member at the rank of associate or full professor who is without conflict of interest and has appropriate expertise to evaluate the information relative to the case.

7.2.2.2. The VPAA will provide the Inquirer and the Respondent with copies of all relevant documents. During the Inquiry, the VPAA and the Inquirer will be responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of the information obtained and the security of relevant documents. After the resolution of the Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship, originals of all documents and related communications are to be securely maintained in the Office of the VPAA pursuant to the University's records retention schedule.

7.2.2.3. Responsibilities of the Inquirer:

7.2.2.3.1. Records of the Inquiry are to be stored securely throughout the Inquiry and, at the end of the Inquiry, transferred to the VPAA.

7.2.2.3.2. If there is a need for interviews, the interviews must be recorded and, upon request, made available to involved parties after the completion of the Disposition Phase.

7.2.2.3.3. Information, expert opinions, records, and other pertinent data may be requested by the Inquirer. All involved individuals are expected to cooperate with the Inquirer by supplying such requested documents and information.

7.2.2.3.4. The Inquiry phase will be completed within 60 Days of its initiation. If the Inquirer determines that circumstances clearly warrant an extension of time, a request for such an extension must be forwarded to the VPAA. If the VPAA grants the request, the Inquirer will notify all relevant parties of the extension. The record of the Inquiry will include the rationale for exceeding the 60 Day period.

7.2.2.3.5. As the Inquiry is intended to be expeditious, individuals are expected to speak for themselves but may be accompanied by an Advisor. If any individual chooses to bring Counsel, the University's Office of General Counsel must be notified in advance and must be present during the meeting.

7.2.3. Findings (no federal or state funding)

7.2.3.1. The completion of an Inquiry is marked by a determination of whether or not an Investigation is warranted. The report of the Inquirer will be conveyed in writing to the VPAA who will be responsible for communicating the findings to the Respondent and the Complainant within 10 Days of receipt of the report, in writing, by certified mail, return receipt requested. The report of the Inquirer shall specify the information that was reviewed, summarize relevant interviews, and include the conclusions of the Inquiry. The Inquirer will make a recommendation to the VPAA as to whether an Investigation is warranted. The Inquirer shall not recommend that an Investigation occur unless he/she concludes, based on the sufficient information for each Allegation, that the Allegation justifies an Investigation. The Respondent shall be given the opportunity to comment in writing (Memo #6) upon the findings and recommendations of the Inquirer. If the Respondent chooses to comment, such comments shall be forwarded as soon as possible but no later than 20 Days from the date of notification of the findings by the VPAA. The Respondent's comments will become part of the Inquiry record. Within the earlier of 30 Days of delivering the report of the Inquirer to the Respondent and Complainant, the VPAA will determine whether to proceed with an Investigation.

7.2.3.2. If the VPR determines that an Investigation is unnecessary, the VPR will proceed to the Disposition Phase under section 6.4.

7.2.3.3. If the VPAA determines that an Investigation should be conducted, the VPAA (after notification to the appropriate Dean(s), the VPR, and the University's Office of General Counsel), will initiate the Investigation phase.

7.2.4. Information Outside the Inquiry

If, in the course of its Inquiry, the Inquirer finds something that should be reviewed or changed which does not relate to the Inquiry, the Inquirer may send a separate letter to the individual who has the authority to act on the information. This information should not be contained in the official Inquirer report nor should it reveal the subject matter of the Investigation or the parties involved.

7.3. Investigative Phase (no federal or state funding)

7.3.1. Purpose (no federal or state funding)

An Investigation will be initiated when the VPAA determines that one is necessary. The purpose of the Investigation is to explore further the Allegations and determine whether Misconduct in Research or Scholarship has occurred. The Investigation will focus on Allegations of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship and examine the factual materials of each case.

7.3.2. Process and Structure (no federal or state funding)

7.3.2.1. After making a decision to proceed with an Investigation, the VPAA will consult with the Chair of the University Senate to appoint a CoI. No member of the CoI may have a conflict of interest. At least two members must be tenured faculty at the rank of associate or full professor and have appropriate expertise for evaluating the information relative to the case. However, if the Respondent is someone other than a faculty member of the University, one of these two members of the CoI must have a position with the University similar to that of the Respondent. The third member may be appointed from outside the University of North Dakota community if, in the judgment of the VPAA, the circumstances justify such an appointment. Otherwise, the third member shall be appointed from within the University and must meet the same requirements as those listed for the first two members. The Inquirer may not serve on the CoI. Appointment of a CoI should be made within 20 Days following the decision by the VPAA to proceed with an Investigation.

7.3.2.2. Before the CoI is convened, the VPAA shall notify (Memo #7) all parties in writing of the Allegations and of the procedures that will be used to examine the Allegations. Further, the parties will be informed of the proposed membership of the CoI for the purpose of identifying, in advance, any real or potential conflicts of interest.

7.3.2.3. At its first meeting, the CoI will elect a chairperson to handle procedural and administrative matters. All CoI members will be voting members.

7.3.2.4. Copies of all pertinent documents in the possession of the VPAA will be provided by the VPAA to the CoI and the Respondent in advance of scheduled meetings. The CoI proceedings must be recorded and, upon request, made available to the involved parties, but only after the completion of the Disposition phase.

7.3.2.5. Every effort shall be made to complete the Investigation within 120 Days. If the CoI determines that circumstances clearly warrant an extension of time, a request for such an extension must be forwarded to the VPAA. If the VPAA grants the request, the CoI will notify all relevant parties of the extension. The record of the Inquiry will include the rationale for exceeding the 120 Day period.

7.3.2.6. Individuals involved may have an Advisor accompany them to the meeting with the CoI. The Advisor may not present to the CoI. If any individual chooses to bring Counsel, the University's Office of General Counsel must be notified in advance and must be present during the meeting.

7.3.2.7. The Investigation normally will include examination of all documentation, including but not necessarily limited to relevant research data and proposals, publications, correspondence, and information the CoI feels pertains to the issue. The CoI will make every attempt to interview all individuals involved either in making the Allegation or against whom an Allegation is made, as well as other individuals who might have information regarding key aspects of the Allegations. Complete summaries of recorded interviews will be prepared, provided to the interviewed party for comment or revision, and included as part of the investigatory file. Additional interviews may be held, and the CoI may request the involvement of outside experts. The Investigation must be sufficiently thorough to permit the CoI to reach a decision about the validity of the Allegation and the scope of the wrongdoing or to be sure that further investigation is not likely to alter an inconclusive result.

7.3.2.8. All parties in the Investigation will cooperate by producing any additional data requested. Copies of all materials secured by the CoI shall be provided to the Respondent.

7.3.2.9. The Respondent shall have an opportunity to address the charges and information in detail during the interview and in writing at the end of the process.

7.3.2.10. After all information has been received and the fact-finding interviews have been completed, the CoI shall deliberate and prepare its findings. The CoI shall find no Misconduct in Research or Scholarship unless a majority of the members conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the Allegation has been substantiated. A minority report can be written.

7.3.3. Findings (no federal or state funding)

7.3.3.1. Upon completion of the Investigation, the CoI will submit a draft report to the Respondent by certified mail, return receipt requested. The Respondent shall be given the opportunity to comment in writing (Memo #8) upon the findings and recommendations of the CoI. If the Respondent chooses to comment, such comments shall be forwarded as soon as possible but no later than 20 Days from the date of receipt of the draft report. The Respondent's comments will be taken into consideration when completing the report. The CoI will then submit the final report to the VPAA, which details the CoI's findings.

7.3.3.2. The final CoI report must be in writing and include:

7.3.3.2.1. Allegations. Describe the nature of the initial Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship;

7.3.3.2.2. Institutional charge. Describe the specific Allegations of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship that were considered in the Investigation;

7.3.3.2.3. Research records and information. Identify and summarize the research records and information reviewed, and identify any information taken into custody but not reviewed;

7.3.3.2.4. Policies and procedures. If not already provided with the Inquiry report, the institutional policies and procedures under which the Investigation was conducted;

7.3.3.2.5. Statement of findings. For each separate Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship identified during the Investigation, provide a finding as to whether Misconduct in Research or Scholarship did or did not occur and for each instance of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship that did occur:

7.3.3.2.5.1. Identify the person(s) responsible for the Misconduct in Research or Scholarship;

7.3.3.2.5.2. Identify whether the Misconduct in Research or Scholarship was falsification, fabrication, and/or plagiarism, and if it was, intentional, knowing, or in reckless disregard;

7.3.3.2.5.3. Summarize the facts and the analysis of information which support the conclusion of the CoI, considering the merits of any reasonable explanations by the Respondent or other individuals who provided information;

7.3.3.2.5.4. Identify whether any publications need to be corrected or retracted; and

7.3.3.2.5.5. List any current support or known applications or proposals for support that the Respondent has pending with all federal or state agencies.

7.3.3.2.6. Comments. Include and consider any comments made by the Respondent and Complainant on the draft Investigation report.

7.3.3.3. After the resolution of the Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship, all records of any proceedings will be maintained in the office of the VPAA pursuant to the University's records retention schedule.

7.3.4. Information Outside the Investigation

If, in the course of its Investigation, the CoI finds something that should be reviewed or changed which does not relate to the Investigation, the CoI may send a separate letter to the individual who has the authority to act on the information. This information should not be contained in the official CoI report nor should it reveal the subject matter of the Investigation or the parties involved.

7.4. Disposition Phase (no federal or state funding)

The VPAA shall consider the recommendations of the Inquirer or the CoI and shall be responsible for determining and implementing any sanctions. The evaluation has two possible designated outcomes:

7.4.1. If No Misconduct in Research or Scholarship is Found (no federal or state funding)

Within 10 Days of receipt of the Inquirer's or the CoI report, the VPAA shall furnish the report to the Respondent with the VPAA's decision. The VPAA shall inform the Respondent, Complainant, and the appropriate Dean that Allegations of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship were not supported In determining whether to publicize the findings of no Misconduct in Research or Scholarship, the University will be guided by whether public announcements will be harmful or beneficial in restoring any reputation(s) that may have been damaged. The Respondent's wishes will be taken into consideration when making publicity decisions. If the Allegations are deemed to have been maliciously motivated, the Inquirer or the CoI will report those findings to the VPR and a decision will be made whether to treat that finding as an Allegation of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship against the Complainant.

7.4.2. If Misconduct in Research or Scholarship is Found (no federal or state funding)

7.4.2.1. Within 10 Days of receipt of the report from the Inquirer or the CoI, the VPAA shall notify the Respondent and the President, in writing, of the recommended sanctions, if any. A copy of the report will accompany the VPAA's decision.

7.4.2.2. The University must impose sanctions that are appropriate to the seriousness of the Misconduct in Research or Scholarship, including, but not limited to, one or more of the following:

7.4.2.2.1. Letter of reprimand in file.

7.4.2.2.2. Removal from particular project.

7.4.2.2.3. Special monitoring of future work.

7.4.2.2.4. Letter of reprimand with public notice.

7.4.2.2.5. Probation for a specified period with conditions.

7.4.2.2.6. Suspension of rights and responsibilities for a specified period, with or without salary.

7.4.2.2.7. Financial restitution.

7.4.2.2.8. Termination of employment/enrollment.

7.4.2.3. If the sanctions involve a recommendation for termination of employment, the Respondent may use any applicable termination procedures.

7.4.2.4. The VPAA is responsible for notification of all entities initially informed of the Investigation's outcome. Consideration should be given to formal notification of:

7.4.2.4.1. Sponsoring agencies, funding sources.

7.4.2.4.2. Co-authors, co-investigators, collaborators, departments.

7.4.2.4.3. Editors of journals in which fraudulent research was published.

7.4.2.4.4. State professional licensing boards.

7.4.2.4.5. Editors of journals or other publications, other institutions, sponsoring agencies, and funding sources with which the individual has been affiliated.

7.4.2.4.6. Professional societies.

7.4.3. Appeal (no federal or state funding)

7.4.3.1. Respondents who are members of the faculty of the University may appeal the sanctions to the Standing Committee on Faculty Rights (SCFR).

7.4.3.1.1. Under section 605.3(9) of the State Board of Higher Education(SBHE) Policies: "If the administration determines that the conduct of a faculty member . . . provides reasonable cause for imposition of a sanction, the administration shall inform the faculty member in writing of the sanction and the reasons for the sanction." A faculty member may appeal to the SCFR" if the sanction is imposed without a [SCFR] hearing . . . ." The faculty member may request a SCFR review by following the SBHE policy and the University's implementation, both of which may be found in the University's Faculty Handbook.

7.4.3.1.2. If initiated, the review of imposed sanctions by SCFR concludes review under this Policy.

7.4.3.1.3. If the finding of Misconduct in Research or Scholarship results in termination, Respondent may request a SCFR review of the decision to terminate by following the SBHE policy and the University's implementation procedures, both of which may be found in the University's Faculty Handbook.

7.4.3.2. Respondents who are not members of the faculty of the University may appeal the sanctions using any applicable procedures available under state or University policies.