SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT PROCEDURES
(Proposal 8-98)
Senate Procedures 204.1.1
Coordinating Policy 204.1
1. Preamble
A major goal of the University is the furthering of research. The University upholds
the
scientific method in the conduct of research and other scholarly activities and is
committed to the ethical conduct of research by its faculty, staff and students. A
requirement of valid experimental observation or theoretical deduction is that the
data
and/or the conditions of obtaining the data and results can be verified, either by
scrutiny
of accurate records made at the time of experimentation or by repetition of the
experiments or theoretical deduction.These procedures shall apply to all faculty,
staff,
and students involved in allegations of scientific misconduct.
2. Definitions
Conduct inconsistent with the ethical conduct of research and which is considered
scientific misconduct includes:A. Serious deviation from commonly accepted practices
in the scientific community in proposing, conducting or reporting research. This may
include:1. Inappropriate transmission of experimental observations, data or the results
of
experiments including fabrication, falsification, deception, misrepresentation, or
arbitrary selection of experimental observations, data or results of experiments.2.
Plagiarism or other appropriation of the work of another individual and presenting
it as if
it were one's own or without credit to the originator as is required by commonly accepted
practices in the scientific community;B. Material failure to comply with funding agency
(Federal, State, or private, etc.) requirements that uniquely relate to the conduct
of the
research; and C. Retaliation against a person who, acting in good faith, has reported
or
provided information about alleged misconduct.
3. University Responses to Scientific Misconduct
Faculty, staff, and students involved in scientific misconduct or false allegations
of such
conduct may be subject to University disciplinary procedures.Possible University
sanctions may include, but are not limited to, removal from the graduate faculty,
sending
a letter of reprimand, setting special conditions on research activities, requiring
special
certifications or assurances of compliance, dismissal from degree programs and/or
termination of employment. Any termination of employment or removal from the
graduate faculty shall occur in a manner consistent with existing applicable University
policies on employment practices and academic tenure. Any removal of students from
degree programs should follow existing applicable university policies. The University
may impose limitations or special reviews on the research activities or expenditures
of
affected individuals.
4. University Reaction to an Allegation of Misconduct
When scientific misconduct is alleged, a thorough and timely process shall take place
within the University to provide adequate opportunity for reaching valid conclusions
about the alleged misconduct. It is imperative that due process be followed as described
by the procedures herein and that protection be afforded to the rights and reputation
of
both the person(s) against whom the allegations have been made and the person(s)
bringing the allegations, collaborators of the person(s) against whom the allegations
have been made, those investigating the allegations, any sponsoring agency, any
publisher, and the University. The University shall make legal counsel available to
any
committee formally investigating the allegations if requested by that committee.
5. Confidentiality and Conflicts of Interest
During inquiries into and investigation of allegations, all parties having knowledge
of the
allegations, including the person(s) against whom the allegations have been made and
the person(s) bringing the allegations, shall be responsible for maintaining the
confidentiality of the proceedings and all evidence developed during these proceedings.
Precautions shall also be taken against real or apparent conflicts of interest on
the part
of those individuals involved in reviewing the allegations. If a member of a committee
formally investigating the allegations is aware of any factors which might compromise
his or her impartial review of alleged misconduct in a particular case, this person
shall
excuse himself/herself from the proceedings. In addition, members of committees
formally investigating the allegations shall not use information derived solely from
Inquiry or Investigating Committee activities as input to personnel-related decisions
involving either the person(s) against whom the allegations have been made or the
person(s) bringing the allegations.All proceedings shall be in accordance with applicable
rules and contractual obligations of the University.
6.0 University Procedure
6.1 Committee Structures
6.1.1 The Standing Committee of Inquiry
A Standing Committee of Inquiry is a committee established by the University Senate.
This Inquiry Committee shall be a standing University committee made up of three
members and one alternate. If one of the three primary members of the Inquiry
committee has a conflict of interest with any of the parties involved in the alleged
misconduct, or is in the same department/non-academic unit as the one in which the
alleged misconduct occurred, the Vice Provost for Research and Dean of the Graduate
School shall designate that this member be replaced by the alternate when transmitting
the allegations to the Committee. This committee has the responsibility for assisting
the
Vice Provost for Research and Dean of the Graduate School, or a person appointed by
the President of the University to act in place of the Vice Provost for Research and
Dean
of the Graduate School, in preliminary investigations into allegations of misconduct.
The
Standing Committee of Inquiry may decide that a Formal Committee of Investigation
should be appointed to undertake a more detailed investigation into the allegations.
The
Standing Committee of Inquiry shall elect their own chair and establish their own
operating procedure within these guidelines.
6.1.2 The Formal Committee of Investigation
The Formal Committee of Investigation should consist of five impartial members with
sufficient expertise and dedication to conduct a thorough and equitable investigation.
At
least three of these five members shall be selected from a list of at least six University
faculty/staff candidates recommended by the initial Inquiry Committee. The Formal
Committee of Investigation will generally not include members of the same academic
department or operating unit as those charged with scientific misconduct or be members
of the Inquiry Committee, but may include up to two faculty or staff members with
appropriate expertise from other institutions. The Formal Committee of Investigation,
if
formed, shall elect their own chair and establish their own operating procedure within
these guidelines.
6.2 Initial Response to Allegations
6.2.1 Transmission of the Allegation to the Vice Provost for Research
Written allegations of scientific misconduct within the academic areas may be brought
to
the Head/Chair of the Department or Director of the Unit or the Dean of the College
or
School in which such conduct allegedly occurred. The Head/Chair shall expeditiously
inform the Dean or Director who shall expeditiously inform the Vice Provost for Research
and Dean of the Graduate School, who shall expeditiously inform the Executive Vice
President and Provost. Allegations of scientific misconduct brought to other University
officials in positions of authority shall be expeditiously transmitted to the Vice
Provost
for Research and Dean of the Graduate School. If, at any time, allegations of misconduct
involve a University official responsible for administering this policy, the situation
shall
be expeditiously reported to the President of the University. The President shall
then
designate another individual to fulfill the responsibilities of that official under
this policy.
6.2.2 Actions of the Vice Provost for Research and the Standing Committee of Inquiry
The Vice Provost for Research and Dean of the Graduate School, or a person appointed
by the President of the University to act in place of the Vice Provost for Research
and
Dean of the Graduate School, shall advise the person(s) against whom the allegations
have been made of the allegations and within ten (10) working days of the receipt
of
these allegations transmit them to the Inquiry Committee for review. The purpose of
this
initial investigation is to determine whether or not there may be substance to the
allegations warranting an investigation and to recommend appropriate action to the
Vice
Provost for Research and Dean of the Graduate School, or a person appointed by the
President of the University to act in place of the Vice Provost for Research and Dean
of
the Graduate School. All written allegations of misconduct, even those brought to
the
attention of the University by external sources, shall be subject to initial review
by this
Inquiry Committee.Private and separate sessions will be conducted by the Inquiry
Committee to hear the person(s) against whom the allegations have been made and the
person(s) bringing the allegations, and others as determined necessary by the Inquiry
Committee. Sessions to obtain information from any persons may be conducted either
in
person or through electronic means such as telephone conference calls. The person(s)
against whom the allegations have been made shall be informed of the allegations and
given the opportunity to respond during the inquiry. All information and material
gathered in the investigation shall be reviewed and kept in a secure manner.
6.2.3 Report of the Standing Committee of Inquiry
The Inquiry Committee shall submit a report and recommendation to the Vice Provost
for
Research and Dean of the Graduate School within thirty (30) working days after receiving
the allegations for review. Under exceptional circumstances the Vice Provost for
Research and Dean of the Graduate School may extend this period and shall set forth
in
writing the reasons for any extension. Copies of the recommendation and all pertinent
documentation and evidence shall be given to the person(s) against whom the
allegations were made and the opportunity to comment shall be provided to them. Two
recommendations may result from this initial inquiry: 1) the allegations have sufficient
substance to warrant further investigation; or 2) the allegations are without merit.
In
either case, subsequent action may be recommended including such action as is
necessary to restore the reputations of persons whose alleged misconduct has not been
confirmed and to protect those persons having made good faith allegations. The Vice
Provost for Research and Dean of the Graduate School shall review the recommendation
of the Inquiry Committee and the recommended action pursuant to University rules or
contractual agreements. The decision shall be submitted in writing with the Inquiry
Committee report and recommendation to the person(s) against whom the allegations
have been made and the person(s) bringing the allegations, the Inquiry Committee,
the
Executive Vice President and Provost, and the College Dean or unit Director. The
Executive Vice President and Provost shall notify the University President.
6.2.4 Response of the Vice Provost for Research to a Recommendation to Investigate
and
the Appointment of a Formal Committee of Investigation
If a further investigation is recommended, the Vice Provost for Research and Dean
of the
Graduate School shall give notice to the person(s) against whom the allegations have
been made that an investigation will be conducted prior to the time that this investigation
begins and that the person(s) against whom the allegations have been made shall have
notice of the allegations and an opportunity to respond to this investigation. If
this
further investigation is warranted, the Vice Provost for Research and Dean of the
Graduate School shall also determine whether sponsored research is involved. If
sponsored research is involved, the Vice Provost for Research and Dean of the Graduate
School shall notify the appropriate authority of the sponsoring agency prior to the
time
the investigation begins that an investigation will be conducted. If any of the following
conditions exist, the Inquiry or Investigating Committee shall notify the Vice Provost
for
Research and Dean of the Graduate School, who will, within one working day of its
discovery, notify the appropriate authority of the sponsoring agency:A. There is an
immediate health or safety risk;B. There is an immediate need to protect sponsored
research funds or equipment;C. There is an immediate need to protect the interests
of
the person(s) making the allegations or of the individual(s) who is the subject of
the
allegations as well as his/her co-investigators and associates, if any;D. It is probable
that
the alleged incident is going to be reported publicly;E. There is a reasonable indication
of possible criminal violation. Any necessary notification will state that the investigation
is to determine the propriety of the conduct or reporting of the research and that
the
agency will be appraised of the results and of any developments critical to continued
funding or use of agency funds in the interim.If a further investigation is recommended,
the Vice Provost for Research and Dean of the Graduate School shall appoint, within
15
working days of the completion of the preliminary inquiry, the Formal Investigating
Committee. The Committee shall begin its investigation expeditiously. The person(s)
against whom the allegations have been made will be given notice of the allegations
by
the Vice Provost for Research and Dean of the Graduate School and shall have an
opportunity to respond to the Formal Investigating Committee.
6.2.5 Functions of the Formal Investigating Committee
An appropriate deadline for completion of the investigation shall be established by
the
Vice Provost for Research and Dean of the Graduate School. In most cases, this deadline
will be 90 working days after the appointment of the Investigating Committee. The
Investigating Committee investigation shall not exceed 90 working days. The Vice
Provost for Research and Dean of the Graduate School shall also inform the Committee
about relevant precedents, if any, at the University in similar cases involving alleged
scientific misconduct.Necessary support (e.g., clerical, gathering information, witnesses,
and record keeping) will be arranged by the Vice Provost for Research and Dean of
the
Graduate School. Private and separate sessions will be conducted to hear the person(s)
against whom the allegations have been made and the person(s) bringing the
allegations, and others, including off-campus expert witnesses, as determined necessary
by the Investigating Committee. Sessions with expert witnesses may be conducted either
in person or through electronic means such as telephone conference calls. Funding
for
essential off-campus expert witnesses called by the Investigating Committee shall
be
provided by the Vice Provost for Research and Dean of the Graduate School. Information
and material gathered in the investigation shall be reviewed and kept in a secure
manner.
The person(s) against whom the allegations have been made shall be informed of all
evidence against them/him/her and be provided the right to present evidence and
testimony on their/his/her behalf. Either party or the Formal Investigating Committee
may
request a hearing in which both parties may have the opportunity to cross-examine
the
other party and witnesses; the Formal Investigating Committee will arrange such a
hearing if both parties agree.
6.2.6 Report of the Formal Investigating Committee and University Responses to the
Report
The Investigating Committee shall submit a written report of its findings, conclusions
and recommendations, together with all pertinent documentation and evidence, to the
Vice Provost for Research and Dean of the Graduate School and to the person(s) against
whom the allegations have been made. The Vice Provost for Research and Dean of the
Graduate School shall review the report of the Investigating Committee, and develop
recommendations for the Executive Vice President and Provost about appropriate
University actions. These recommendations shall be submitted in writing to and
reviewed with the Investigating Committee within 20 working days after receipt of
the
Investigating Committee report. The Investigating Committee shall be given a 20-day
period to provide written comments about these recommendations. The Investigating
Committee report, the recommendations of the Vice Provost for Research and Dean of
the Graduate School and the Investigating Committee's comments about these
recommendations shall then be transmitted to the Executive Vice President and Provost,
person(s) against whom the allegations have been made and the person(s) bringing the
allegations and the appropriate Dean or Director. The Executive Vice President and
Provost shall transmit this information to the President. With the advice of the University
legal counsel, the Executive Vice President and Provost shall decide how to proceed
under applicable University rules and contractual agreements. The Executive Vice
President and Provost shall submit his/her decision in writing to the person(s) against
whom the allegations have been made and the person(s) bringing the allegations, both
committees, the appropriate College Dean or unit Director, the Vice Provost for Research
and Dean of the Graduate School, and the University President. Individuals have a
right
to appeal decisions to the University President. Such appeals must be made in writing
within 15 working days after notification of the Executive Vice President and Provost's
decision. The President shall establish an Appeal Committee of at least three impartial
members to review the matter and make recommendations. This Appeal Committee shall
consist of two University faculty/staff members who are not members of previous
committees, and one faculty or staff member with appropriate expertise from another
institution. The Committee shall begin its deliberations within 20 working days after
the
Presidential appeal has been filed, and it shall report its findings back to the President
within 30 working days after being convened. The President's decision shall be
submitted to the person(s) against whom the allegations have been made and the
person(s) bringing the allegations, the committees, the appropriate unit Director
or
Department Chair and College Dean, the Vice Provost for Research and Dean of the
Graduate School, and the Executive Vice President and Provost.Collaborators of the
person(s) against whom the allegations have been made shall be advised of any
substantiated scientific misconduct or questions related to their research.
6.2.7 Notification of Parties External to the University
Any time that scientific misconduct as defined herein or significant errors are
substantiated in any sponsored or reported research, the Vice Provost for Research
and
Dean of the Graduate School shall notify the sponsoring agency or publisher in writing.
In addition, any party notified of a pending scientific misconduct investigation under
this
policy shall also be notified of the final outcome of this investigation by the Vice
Provost
for Research and Dean of the Graduate School. The Vice Provost for Research and Dean
of the Graduate School shall be responsible for taking such interim administrative
action
as is appropriate to protect research agency funds and to assure that the purposes
of
research agency assistance are carried out. All evidence, reports and recordings
involving the allegation, inquiry, and investigation shall be maintained in a secure
manner by the Executive Vice President and Provost for at least five (5) years after
the
final report.Where the rules and procedures of the National Science Foundation are
involved, MTU will report as required by the statutes and regulations which may include
informing the NSF if an initial inquiry supports a formal investigation, keeping NSF
informed during the investigation and providing NSF with a final report from all relevant
investigations.
Adopted by Senate and Administration: January 1999