The following policies were developed according to the University System of Maryland Policies on Misconduct in Scholarly Work (Approved by the Board of Regents, November 30, 1989).
I. POLICY
Integrity in research and scholarly activities is the responsibility of the entire academic community. Scholars work in an environment in which there is an important sense of trust. Published material is assumed to have been obtained during an author's investigations. Falsification or fabrication of such data is intolerable. The University of Maryland Baltimore County (UMBC) is responsible for promoting academic practices that discourage scientific misconduct. It also is responsible for developing policies and procedures to address scientific misconduct and for providing the necessary education, training, and resources to all faculty and staff for dealing with allegations or other evidence of misconduct in scholarly work.
All members of UMBC, including faculty, staff, administrators and students share responsibility for developing and maintaining standards to assure the highest ethical conduct of research and detection of abuse of these standards. Fraud or misconduct in carrying out academic activities undermines the integrity of the educational system and the scientific enterprise, and erodes the public trust in the university community to conduct research and communicate results using the highest standards and ethical practices. This responsibility to prevent and detect misconduct, however, must be assumed without creating an atmosphere that discourages the openness and creativity which are vital to scholarship and the research enterprise.
Misconduct in scholarly work by any University System of Maryland employee is a breach of contract. Furthermore, misconduct in scholarly work by others associated with UMBC (e.g., graduate students, volunteer faculty or staff) will not be tolerated. UMBC considers such a breach adequate cause for termination of employment of faculty or staff.
The policies and procedures outlined below are intended to be consistent with the policies and guidelines on scholarly misconduct which were adopted by the Board of Regents of the University System of Maryland in 1989 and shall be modified in the future as may be required to conform to those policies and guidelines. As discussed further in Part IV, these policies and procedures are also intended to bring UMBC into compliance with federal regulations applicable to allegations of misconduct related to research funded by the Public Health Service (PHS). In the event of any conflict between any provision of this policy and the federal regulations applicable to a specific case, the federal regulations shall be followed.
The UMBC policy derives from the "Model Policy and Procedures for Responding to Allegations of Scientific Misconduct" published as an advisory document by the Office of Research Integrity in April, 1995, which may consulted for details, definitions and examples.
The policies and procedures outlined here apply to faculty, staff and graduate students, paid or unpaid, engaged in research, scholarly writing, and the creation of works of art. A copy of this policy shall be provided to all of those individuals. This policy is not intended to address administrative issues of an ethical nature which are covered by other policies; for example, discrimination, affirmative action, and conflicts of interests are covered by other University policies.
The scope of these scientific misconduct policy and procedures is not limited to matters related
to externally sponsored research, but covers all research and scholarly activity, regardless of
source of support.
II. DEFINITION OF SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT
Scientific misconduct involves any form of behavior which entails an act of deception whereby one's work or the work of others is misrepresented, and includes fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the scientific community for proposing, conducting or reporting research. Other terms such as research fraud, scholarly misconduct or research misconduct, are subsumed within the term scientific misconduct as defined below. Scientific misconduct is distinguished from honest error and from honest differences in interpretations or judgments of data that are inherent in the scientific process. Further, misconduct involves significant breaches of integrity which may take numerous forms such as, but not limited to, those outlined below:
A. Falsification of Data: Ranging from fabrication to deceptive selective reporting of findings and omission of conflicting data, or willful suppression and/or distortion of data.
B. Plagiarism: The appropriation of the language, ideas, or thoughts of another and representation of them as one's own original work.
C. Improprieties of Authorship: Improper assignment of credit, such as excluding others; misrepresentation of the same material as original in more than one publication; inclusion of individuals as authors who have not made a definite contribution to the work published; or submission of multi-authored publications without the concurrence of all authors.
D. Misappropriation of the Ideas of Others: An important aspect of scholarly activity is the exchange of ideas among colleagues. New ideas gleaned from such exchanges can lead to important discoveries. Scholars also acquire novel ideas during the process of reviewing grant applications and manuscripts. However, improper use of such information could constitute fraud. Wholesale appropriation of such material constitutes scientific misconduct.
E. Violation of Generally Accepted Research Practices: Serious deviation from accepted practices in proposing or carrying out research, improper manipulation of experiments to obtain biased results, deceptive statistical or analytical manipulations, or improper reporting of results.
F. Material Failure to Comply with Federal Requirements Affecting Research: including but not limited to serious or substantial, repeated, willful violations involving the use of funds, care of animals, human subjects, investigational drugs, recombinant products, new devices including engineering research materials, or radioactive, biological or chemical materials.
G. Inappropriate Behavior in Relation to Misconduct: Including inappropriate accusation of misconduct; failure to report known or suspected misconduct; withholding or destruction of information relevant to a claim of misconduct and retaliation against persons involved in the allegation or investigation.
H. Deliberate Misrepresentation of Qualifications, Experience, or Research Accomplishments to advance the research program, to obtain external funding, or for other professional advancement.
I. Misappropriation of Funds or Resources: For example, misuse of funds for personal gain.
III. PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING ALLEGATIONS OF FRAUD/ MISCONDUCT
UMBC must undertake examination (as described below) of any allegation of scientific misconduct. In the inquiry and investigation which may follow, the institution should focus on the substance of the issues and be guided by the following imperatives:
- The process pursued to resolve allegations of misconduct must not damage science
itself, or the academic process.
- UMBC will provide vigorous leadership in the pursuit and resolution of all
charges.
- All participants in the inquiry and investigation will be treated with justice and
fairness and with sensitivity to their reputations.
- Procedures must preserve the highest attainable degree of confidentiality
compatible with an effective and efficient response.
- The integrity of the process must be maintained by painstaking avoidance of real
or apparent conflict of interest.
- The procedures should be as expeditious as practical.
- Pertinent facts at each stage of the response should be documented.
- UMBC shall pursue allegations within the scope of this policy without regard to
whether related civil or criminal proceedings have been initiated or are underway.
In the event of such proceedings, UMBC may, at its option, suspend
inquiry/investigation temporarily, but is not under an obligation to do so, as the
standards of the University may differ from those of the courts.
- UMBC shall recognize and discharge its responsibility after resolving allegations
of misconduct to communicate the results of the investigating process internally to
all involved individuals, and externally to the public, the sponsors of research, the
scientific literature, and the scientific community as appropriate and permissible
under law.
A. Initiation of an Allegation of Misconduct
A person who believes that scientific misconduct has occurred should discuss the matter with the Vice Provost for Research to determine whether or not the conduct falls under the purview of this document or under other applicable UMBC procedures. If it is determined that the alleged conduct is within the scope of this document, the allegation shall be reported, in writing, to the Provost.
If the Vice Provost for Research or the Provost has a possible conflict of interest, the allegations should be referred to the President of UMBC, who shall designate a substitute administrator to oversee and carry out responsibilities assigned under this policy with respect to the specific allegation in question.
The Vice Provost for Research shall review informally any allegation of scientific misconduct, confer with legal counsel, and determine whether the allegation warrants initiation of the inquiry process according to the policies and procedures for scientific misconduct, or whether other policies and procedures, such as those relevant to employment grievances, should be invoked. The Vice Provost for Research will counsel the individual(s) bringing the allegation about the policies and procedures to be used. If the reporting individual chooses not to make a formal allegation but the Vice Provost for Research believes an inquiry is warranted, the inquiry process will be initiated.
Even if the individual against whom an allegation is made (hereafter referred to as the respondent) leaves or has left the UMBC before the case is resolved, UMBC will pursue an allegation of misconduct to its conclusion.
B. Inquiry
1. The first step of the review process is an inquiry. This inquiry has as its primary purpose fact finding in an expeditious manner to determine if an allegation is deserving of further formal investigation and, if formal investigation is not warranted, to make recommendations concerning the disposition of the case. Records of the inquiry are confidential and are to be passed on to a Committee of Investigation if formal review is initiated.
2. A Committee of Inquiry composed of no less than three full-time employees who hold a professional level position (i.e., faculty or academic administrator) with no conflict of interest according to the guidelines of the UMBC policy on conflict of interest, with no appointment in the administrative unit or center of either the complainant or the respondent, and with appropriate expertise for evaluating the information relevant to the case, shall be appointed by the Vice Provost for Research as expeditiously as possible. At least two members of the Committee shall be faculty tenured at UMBC. The Committee shall elect a Chairperson from among its members. Every effort will be made following an initial expeditious administrative review of the allegation to appoint a Committee of Inquiry within fifteen (15) days. The Committee Chairperson shall convene a hearing and shall have the responsibility for ensuring that all of these procedures are followed and shall have the authority to conduct all committee hearings and proceedings.
3. The Vice Provost for Research is responsible for notifying all parties, and if required, any sponsoring agency, in writing, of the charges and of the procedures that will be used to examine the charges. Further, they will be informed of the proposed membership of the Committee of Inquiry for the purpose of identifying in advance any conflict of interest as defined in the UMBC/UMS policy.
4. Anonymity of the complainant is neither desirable nor appropriate where the testimony of the complainant is important to the substantiation of the allegations. However, where the complainant seeks anonymity, the Committee of Inquiry shall operate in such a way as to maintain that anonymity to the degree compatible with accomplishing the fact-finding purpose of the inquiry. Such anonymity cannot be assured.
5. Information, expert opinions, records and other pertinent data may be requested by the Committee. All involved individuals including UMS/UMBC employees shall cooperate fully with the Committee of Inquiry by supplying such requested documents and information. Failure to comply with Committee requests may result in sanctions permissible under UMBC/ UMS policy.
6. All materials will be considered confidential and will be shared only among parties in the investigation. All parties in the investigation will have timely access to copies of all documents viewed by the Committee. The Vice Provost for Research and the members of the Committee of Inquiry are responsible for the security of relevant documents. Copies of all documents and related communications shall be securely maintained in the Office of the Vice Provost for Research.
7. Representation by counsel is not permitted at the inquiry/investigation stage. Respondents and those making allegations may be assisted or advised by any person of their choice including legal counsel. An advisor or attorney may not be a witness or directly address the Committee or engage in cross examination of witnesses. Principals are expected to speak for themselves.
8. Hearings or Committee proceedings are not conducted according to technical or legal rules relating to evidence and witnesses. Evidence, documentation and testimony will be considered by the Committee if reasonable persons would accept it as having probative value in the conduct of the inquiry.
9. The Committee of Inquiry shall arrive at a judgment as expeditiously as possible. The inquiry phase generally should be completed and a written report filed within sixty (60) calendar days from initiation of the inquiry. If this deadline cannot be met, the Provost and President shall be advised and the record of the inquiry shall include documentation of the reasons for exceeding the 60-day period. The Vice Provost for Research shall inform the sponsoring agency of delays, if required by such agency or sponsor.
10. The inquiry report must include the name and title of the Committee members, the allegations, PHS support if relevant, a summary of the inquiry process used and a list of the research records reviewed. It must also contain summaries of any interviews, a description of the evidence in sufficient detail to demonstrate whether an investigation is warranted, and the Committee's decision as to whether an investigation is recommended. Further, if the Committee does not recommend an investigation, it may recommend in this report if other actions may be warranted. The report should be reviewed by university counsel for legal sufficiency.
11. The outcome of the Committee of Inquiry will be conveyed in writing to the Vice Provost for Research who will be responsible for communicating the findings to the respondent. This report shall include evidence reviewed, interview summaries, and conclusions of the inquiry. The respondent shall be given the opportunity to comment in writing upon the findings and recommendations of the committee within 30 days of receipt of the final report of the Committee of Inquiry.
12. If the outcome of the inquiry indicates a need for formal investigation, the Committee will communicate its findings to the Vice Provost for Research who then, in consultation with UMBC legal counsel, will initiate the investigatory process. When the Vice Provost for Research has decided to move to the investigation phase, the respondent and complainant must be notified immediately by the Vice Provost for Research in writing. Under certain circumstances, the institution may be expected to notify the sponsoring agency or funding source at a point prior to the initiation of an investigation, and the policies of that agency, including applicable federal regulations, will be followed.
Where notification is not required by regulation or the timing of notice is at the discretion of the UMBC, factors used in determining the timing of such notification will include the seriousness of the possible misconduct, reasonable indication of possible criminal violations, the presence of an immediate health hazard, consideration of the interests or specific requirements of the funding agency and of the interests of the scientific community, the public, and the individual who is the subject of the inquiry or investigation and his/her associates.
a. If the outcome of the inquiry does not indicate the need for a formal investigation, but does find a need for alternative action(s), such actions shall be taken by the Provost acting in consultation with the Vice Provost for Research. Such alternative actions might include but are not limited to a Committee recommendation that: (i) a correction of the literature is required and/or (ii) the respondent be reprimanded for lax supervision, faulty techniques, or inattention to detail.
13. It is a violation of UMBC policy if an allegation of misconduct is not made in good faith. If the Committee finds that allegations were not made in good faith, the matter should be referred to the Provost.
14. If the Committee plans to terminate the inquiry for any reason prior to completion of the inquiry process, a report of the termination, including a description of the reasons for such termination shall be made to the Vice Provost for Research. The Vice Provost for Research shall report the finding to the Provost.
15. Detailed documentation of an inquiry, even where it has been determined that an investigation is not warranted, will be maintained securely for a period of three years by the Vice Provost for Research and provided to a sponsoring agency and to authorized HHS personnel upon request.
16. If the allegations, however incorrect, are deemed to have been made in good faith, no disciplinary measures are indicated and the Provost should take steps to prevent retaliatory actions and to protect, to the maximum extent possible, the positions and reputations of the persons who made the allegations as well as those against whom allegations of misconduct were not confirmed. The Provost will publicize a finding of no misconduct only with permission of the innocently accused.
C. Investigation
1. The Vice Provost for Research shall, within thirty (30) days of the reporting by a Committee of Inquiry of the need for formal investigation, appoint an Investigating Committee of no less than three full-time employees who hold a professional level position (i.e., faculty or academic administrator) with no real or apparent conflict of interest, with no appointment in the administrative unit or center of either the complainant or the respondent, and with appropriate expertise for evaluating the information relevant to the investigation. At least two members shall be faculty tenured at UMBC. In addition, at least one member shall not be associated with UMBC. The Committee shall elect one of its members as Chairperson. This Investigating Committee will be charged by the Vice Provost for Research to investigate the allegation of scientific misconduct which has passed through the inquiry phase.
2. The purpose of the Investigating Committee is to explore further the allegation and determine whether misconduct has been committed and the extent of the malfeasance and to make recommendations regarding whether formal termination procedures or other disciplinary sanctions are warranted. The Committee Chairperson shall convene a hearing as soon as practicable and shall have the responsibility for ensuring that all of these procedures are followed and shall conduct all committee hearings and proceedings.
All parties to the case, including the Investigating Committee and the respondent, may request documents, present evidence, and call witnesses. The Investigating Committee and the respondent may examine or cross examine any witnesses. Additional hearings may be held and the Committee may request the involvement of outside experts. The investigation must be sufficiently thorough to permit the Committee to reach a firm decision about the validity of the allegation(s) and the scope of the alleged wrongdoing or to be sure that further investigation would be unlikely to alter an inconclusive result. Whenever possible, interviews should be conducted of all individuals involved either in making the allegation or against whom the allegation is made, as well as other individuals who might have information regarding key aspects of the allegations; complete summaries of these interviews should be prepared, provided to the interviewed party for comment or revision, and included as part of the investigatory file.
In the course of an investigation, additional information may emerge that may justify broadening the scope of the investigation beyond the initial allegations. Should this occur, the respondent is to be informed in writing of significant new directions in the investigation. In addition to making a judgment on the veracity of the allegations, the Committee of Investigation shall recommend to the Provost appropriate sanctions, if warranted, and any corrective actions. A copy of the report shall be given to the Vice Provost for Research.
3. As UMBC is responsible for protecting the health and safety of research subjects, patients, students and staff, interim administrative action prior to the conclusion of either the inquiry or the investigation may be indicated. Such action ranging from slight restrictions to complete suspension of the respondent and notification of external sponsors, if indicated, is initiated by the Provost, but may be taken only after consultation with the President of UMBC and legal counsel to UMBC.
4. UMBC parties in the investigation are obliged to cooperate in a timely fashion by producing any additional data or information requested for the investigation by the Committee or by the respondent, if approved by the Committee. Copies of all materials secured by the Committee shall be provided to the respondent and other concerned parties as judged appropriate by the Committee.
5. The respondent shall have an opportunity to address the charges and evidence in detail. The respondent may be accompanied by and confer with legal counsel at hearings, but shall speak for him/herself.
6. All affected individual(s) will be afforded maximum confidentiality to the extent possible throughout the investigation. All hearings are deemed confidential and may be declared closed by request of any of the principals. Written notification of hearing dates and copies of all relevant documents will be provided by the Vice Provost for Research's Office in advance of scheduled meetings. Proceedings will be tape-recorded by the committee and copies of the tapes will be made available to involved parties upon request. The Committee Chairperson will have full authority over the conduct of the hearing(s) and may consult with the Office of the Attorney General if necessary to resolve legal issues.
7. After all evidence has been received and hearings completed, the Investigating Committee shall meet in closed sessions to deliberate, and prepare its findings and recommendations. The Committee shall vote by secret ballot on each recommendation, and a tally of each vote shall be recorded. Written findings shall be dated and signed by all Committee members and submitted to the Provost, who shall acknowledge receipt of the document by letter to the Committee Chair. Signing the document is an indication of participation in the review process and affirms the accuracy of each voting tally. Committee members who disagree with aspects of the report are encouraged to submit to the Provost dissenting opinions. A copy of the report shall be given to the Vice Provost for Research.
8. The findings and recommendations of the Committee will be reported by the Provost to the research sponsor.
9. Every effort should be made to complete the investigation within 120 days. This includes conducting the investigation, preparing the report of findings, making that report available for comment by the subjects of the investigation, and submitting the report to the Provost. The person(s) who raised the allegations will be provided by the Provost with those portions of the report that address their role and opinions in the investigation. The final report of the Investigating Committee will be prepared in the same manner as that detailed for the report of the Committee of Inquiry as noted in section B.10.
10. Some cases may not be possible to be fully investigated in 120 days. In some extraordinary cases, the Investigating Committee should compile a progress report, identify reasons for the delay, estimate time required to complete the investigation, and request an extension from the Provost. The Provost shall convey to the funding agency such information as may be required by it, and at intervals as required by the agency.
11. When the respondent is notified of the Committee's findings and the Provost's decision regarding application of sanctions, the respondent should also be informed of the appeals process. If the sanctions involve a recommendation for termination of employment or other affect legal rights of faculty or other personnel, applicable disciplinary or termination procedures shall be followed.
12. Detailed documentation of an investigation will be maintained in the Office of the Vice Provost for Research for at least five years and provided to the sponsoring agency upon request.
D. Resolution
1. Finding of absence of scientific misconduct
The Provost shall inform all research sponsors and others initially informed of the investigation, in writing, that allegations of misconduct were not supported. If the allegations are deemed not to have been made in good faith, appropriate actions should be taken against the complainant in accordance with this policy. If the allegations, however incorrect, are deemed to have been made in good faith, no disciplinary measures are indicated and efforts should be made to prevent retaliatory actions and to protect, to the maximum extent possible, the positions and reputations of the persons who made the allegations as well as those against whom allegations of misconduct were not confirmed. The Provost will publicize a finding of no misconduct only with permission of the innocently accused.
2. Presence of scientific misconduct
When an investigation confirms misconduct, the Provost shall consider the recommendations of the Committee and shall be responsible for determining and implementing sanctions as appropriate or referring to the President, termination or other action not within the Provost's authority. The Provost is responsible for notification to all federal agencies, sponsors, or other entities initially informed of the investigation of the outcome. UMBC must take action appropriate for the seriousness of the misconduct including but not limited to the following:
a. Institutional Disciplinary Action including:
1) Removal from particular project
2) Special monitoring of future work
3) Letter of reprimand
4) Probation for a specified period with
conditions specified
5) Suspension of rights and responsibilities
for a specified period
6) Financial restitution
7) Termination of employment
b. Notification: Consideration should be given to formal notification of involved parties such as:
1) Sponsoring agencies, funding sources
2) Co-authors, co-investigators, collaborators
academic unit, campus university publications
3) Editors of journals in which fraudulent
research was published
4) State professional licensing boards
5) Editors of journals or other publications,
other institutions, sponsoring agencies, and
funding sources with which the individual
has been affiliated
6) Notification of professional societies
c. The Provost also shall take action to protect, to the maximum extent possible, the positions and reputations of those persons who made the confirmed allegations.
3. Appeal
The respondent may appeal the judgment of the Investigating Committee and/or the sanction. A written statement of the grounds for the appeal must be submitted to the President within thirty (30) days of written notification of the results of the investigation. Upon receipt of a written appeal, the President will evaluate the evidence and make a determination. The President of UMBC may reopen the investigation. The President's decision will be binding on all parties and will be conveyed to all involved in a timely fashion.
IV. SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR EXAMINING ALLEGATIONS SUBJECT TO PHS MISCONDUCT REGULATIONS
The University System of Maryland Misconduct Policy and this policy are intended to meet the requirements of Title 42, Subchapter D, Code of Federal Regulation, Subpart A, sections 50.101 through 50.105 (the PHS Misconduct Regulations). The PHS Misconduct Regulations apply to UMBC because they apply to research, research-training, or research-related grants or cooperative agreements under the Public Health Service (PHS) Act. These regulations require UMBC to investigate and report instances of alleged or apparent misconduct involving research or research training, applications for support of research or research training, or related research activities that are supported with funds made available under the PHS Act. It is anticipated that the University System Policy and this policy will be changed, from time to time, to comply with any changes required by amendment of these regulations.
The scope of the System policy and these policy and procedures is not limited to matters related to research supported by the PHS Act. All research and scholarly activity, regardless of source of support, is subject to the same standard of integrity. Misconduct in scholarly work will be censured by UMBC in all cases. Misconduct associated with research funded under the PHS
Act can result in additional federal sanctions against investigators, as well as sanctions against UMBC, and must be reported to federal authorities as specified below.
In this part of the policy and procedures, the following definitions apply:
"ORI" means the Office of Research Integrity, a component of the Office of the
Director of the National Institutes for Health (NIH) which oversees the
implementation of all PHS policies and procedures related to scientific
misconduct; monitors the individual investigations into alleged or suspected
scientific misconduct conducted by institutions that receive PHS funds
for biomedical research projects or programs; and conducts investigations
as necessary.
A. Compliance with Regulations
It is UMBC's policy to comply with all requirements of the PHS Misconduct Regulations applicable to Misconduct. The University System of Maryland and UMBC will file institutional assurances as required by section 50.103 of the PHS Misconduct Regulations. UMBC will provide to the System such information as it may require for that purpose relating to the Policies and Procedures Relating to Allegations of Misconduct in Scientific Work at UMBC and to allegations, inquiries and investigations under these procedures. In order to remain in compliance with the assurance for UMBC, UMBC will:
1. Keep current and upon request provide to ORI, and other PHS officials this policy and other policies UMBC may develop to encourage scientific integrity.
2. Inform its scientific and administrative staff and, as appropriate, its students, of this Policy and the System policy and the importance of compliance with this policy.
3. Take immediate and appropriate action as soon as misconduct on the part of employees or persons within UMBC's control is suspected or alleged. Actions shall include interim measures to protect Federal funds and ensure that the purposes of Federal financial assistance are being carried out.
4. In accordance with the PHS Misconduct Regulation, inform and cooperate with ORI with regard to each investigation of possible misconduct.
B. Reports to ORI
The Provost must make all reports to ORI which are required by 50.104, or other parts of the PHS Misconduct Regulations, in connection with allegations of misconduct subject to those regulations. More specifically, the Provost will report:
1. UMBC's decision to initiate any investigation. This report will be made in writing to the Director, ORI, on or before the date the investigation begins, and will include, at a minimum, the name of the person(s) against whom the allegations have been made, the general nature of the allegation, and the PHS application or grant number(s) involved. In general, it will be UMBC's policy to disclose in this notice no more than the minimum information required under the PHS Misconduct Regulations.
2. During the investigation of the allegations, any developments which disclose facts that may affect current or potential Department of Health and Human Services funding for the respondent or that the PHS needs to know to ensure appropriate use of Federal funds and otherwise protect the public interest.
3. If UMBC, as a result of the inquiry or investigation process, plans to terminate an inquiry or an investigation for any reason without completing all relevant requirements under 50.103(d), a copy of this report of such planned termination, including a description of the reasons for such termination, shall be submitted to ORI in accordance with federal regulations.
4. The result of the investigation, which shall be filed with ORI within 120 days of the institution of the investigation unless an extension is granted by ORI. The final report will describe the policies and procedures under which the investigation was conducted, how and from whom information was obtained relevant to the investigation, the findings, and the basis for the findings, and include the actual text or an accurate summary of the views of any individual(s) found to have engaged in misconduct, as well as a description of any sanctions under consideration, pending, or taken by UMBC.
5. If the investigation can not be completed within 120 days, the Committee shall forward an extension request to the Provost, who will then forward the request to the ORI. Such a request shall include an explanation for the delay, an interim report on the progress to date, an outline of what remains to be done and an estimated date of completion.
6. Immediately, at any stage of the inquiry or investigation, any determination by UMBC that any of the following conditions exists:
a. Immediate health hazard;
b. Need to protect Federal funds or equipment;
c. Immediate need to protect the interests of the
persons making the allegations or the individuals who are the subjects of the allegations as well as their co-investigators and associates, if any.
d. Probability that the alleged incident is going to be
reported publicly;
e. Reasonable indication of possible criminal
violation (a report for this reason must be made
within 24 hours of obtaining the information
leading to this conclusion).
C. Record Keeping
Detailed documentation of the inquiry and investigation shall be maintained. A copy of all documentation prepared and maintained during the inquiry and investigation shall be made available to the Director, ORI.
APPROVED:
Freeman A. Hrabowski, III, President, UMBC
Date
Policy and Procedures for Responding to Allegations of Scientific Misconduct
Table of Contents
I. Policy 1
II. Definition of Scientific Misconduct 2
A. Falsification of Data 2
B. Plagiarism 2
C. Improprieties of Authorship 2
D. Misappropriation of the Ideas of Others 2
E. Violation of Generally Accepted Research Practices 2
F. Material Failure to Comply with Federal Requirements 3
G. Inappropriate Behavior in Relation to Misconduct 3
H. Deliberate Misrepresentation 3
I. Misappropriation of Funds or Resources 3
III. Procedures for Handling Allegations of Fraud/Misconduct 3
A. Initiation of an Allegation of Misconduct 4
B. Inquiry 5
C. Investigation 8
D. Resolution 11
IV. Special Provisions for Examining Allegations Subject to PHS
Misconduct Regulations 13
A. Compliance with Regulations 13
B. Reports to ORI 14
C. Record Keeping 15