I. Introduction

A. Statement of Commitment 

In order to maintain the public trust and to fulfill its obligations as a research institution, the University of North Texas is committed to promoting the highest possible ethical standards in research and scholarly conduct.      The occurrence of research misconduct undermines the integrity of the institution and damages the reputation of all researchers affiliated with the institution.   Therefore, the University must respond appropriately whenever an allegation of research misconduct is made.   The purpose of the University’s research misconduct policy is to define actions constituting research misconduct and to establish clear and coherent procedures for responding to research misconduct allegations in a thorough, timely, and fair manner.

B. Scope of Policy

This policy applies to allegations of research misconduct (fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results) involving:  a person who, at the time of the alleged research misconduct, was employed by, was an agent of, was affiliated by contract or agreement with, or was a visiting scholar at UNT; and (1) research, research training or activities related to that research or research training, (2) applications or proposal for support for research, research training or activities related to that research or research training, or (3) plagiarism of research records produced in the course of research or research training or activities related to that research or research training. This includes any research proposed, performed, reviewed, or reported, or any research record generated from that research, regardless of whether any application or proposal for funds resulted in a grant, contract, cooperative agreement, or other form of support and regardless of whether any funding for the research was sought from any source.

This policy is intended to comply with the research misconduct requirements of the U.S. Public Health Service (42 C.F.R. Part 93), the National Science Foundation (NSF 05-131, Chapter IX, Research Misconduct, 930-933), the Office of Science and Technology (Federal Research Misconduct Policy, 65 Fed. Reg. 76,260, December 6, 2000), and any other applicable research misconduct requirements of agencies or entities providing research funding to UNT. 

II. Definitions

A. Allegation means a disclosure of possible research misconduct through any means of communication.  The disclosure may be by written or oral statement or other communication to a UNT or funding entity official.

B. Complainant means a person who in good faith makes an allegation of research misconduct.

C. Evidence means any document, tangible item, or testimony offered or obtained during a research misconduct proceeding that tends to prove or disprove the existence of an alleged fact.

D. Good faith as applied to a complainant or witness, means having a belief in the truth of one’s allegation or testimony that a reasonable person in the complainant’s or witness’s position could have based on the information known to the complainant or witness at the time.  An allegation or cooperation with a research misconduct proceeding is not in good faith if it is made with knowing or reckless disregard for information that would negate the allegation or testimony.  Good faith as applied to a committee member means cooperating with the purpose of helping UNT meet its responsibilities under this policy and the applicable regulations of any involved funding entity.  A committee member does not act in good faith if his/her acts or omissions on the committee are dishonest or influenced by personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest with those involved in the research misconduct proceeding.

E. Inquiry means preliminary information-gathering and preliminary fact-finding that meets the criteria and follows the procedures of Sections V and VI of this policy.

F. Institutional member means a person who is employed by, is an agent of, is affiliated by contract or agreement with, or is a visiting scholar at UNT. Institutional members may include, but are not limited to, officials, tenured and untenured faculty, teaching and support staff, researchers, research coordinators, technicians, postdoctoral and other fellows, volunteers, agents, contractors, subcontractors, and subawardees, as well as the employees of any of these parties.

G. Investigation means the formal development of a factual record and the examination of that record leading to a decision not to make a finding of research misconduct or to a recommendation for a finding of research misconduct which may include a recommendation for other appropriate actions, including administrative actions.

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

I.  Records of research misconduct proceedings means:  (1) the research records and evidence secured for the research misconduct proceeding pursuant to this policy, including any records provided by any involved funding entity, except to the extent the inquiry committee or the investigation committee as applicable determines and documents that those records are not relevant to the proceeding or that the records duplicate other records that have been retained; (2) the documentation of the determination of irrelevant or duplicate records; (3) the inquiry report and final documents (not drafts) produced in the course of preparing that report, including the documentation of any decision not to investigate; and (4) the investigation report and all records (other than drafts of the report) in support of the report, including the recordings or transcripts of each interview conducted.  

J. Research means a systematic investigation, including development, testing, evaluation, or publication to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge.  Activities which meet this definition constitute Research for purposes of this policy, whether they are conducted or supported under a program that is considered Research for other purposes.

K. Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.  Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting them.  Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.  Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.  Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.     

L. Research misconduct proceeding means any actions related to alleged research misconduct, including but not limited to, allegation assessments, inquiries, investigations,  oversight reviews by the relevant office of any involved funding entity, hearings and administrative appeals.

M. Research record means the record of data or results that embody the facts resulting from scientific inquiry, including but not limited to, research proposals, laboratory records, both physical and electronic, progress reports, abstracts, theses, oral presentations, internal reports, journal articles, and any documents and materials provided to the relevant office of any involved funding entity or a UNT official by a respondent in the course of the research misconduct proceeding.               

N. Respondent means the person against whom an allegation of research misconduct is directed or who is the subject of a research misconduct proceeding.  

O.  Retaliation means an adverse action taken against a complainant, witness, or committee member by this institution or one of its institutional members in response to (1) a good faith allegation of research misconduct; or (2) good faith cooperation with a research misconduct proceeding.  

III. Rights and Responsibilities

A. Research Integrity Officer

The UNT Associate Vice President for Research will serve as the Research Integrity Officer who will have primary responsibility for implementation of UNT’s policies and procedures on research misconduct.  The Associate Vice President for Research will administer the procedures and be sensitive to the varied demands made on those who conduct research, those who are accused of research misconduct, those who make good faith allegations of research misconduct, and those who may serve on inquiry and investigation committees.

The responsibilities of the Associate Vice President for Research include the following duties related to research misconduct proceedings:  

• Consult confidentially with persons uncertain about whether to submit an allegation of research misconduct;

 • Receive allegations of research misconduct;

• Assess each allegation of research misconduct in accordance with Section V.A. of this policy to determine whether it falls within the definition of research misconduct and warrants an inquiry;  

• As necessary, take interim action and, in accordance with any federal or state requirement, notify the relevant office of an involved funding entity of special circumstances as set forth in Section IV.F of this policy; 

• Sequester research data and evidence pertinent to the allegation of research misconduct in accordance with Section V.C. of this policy and maintain it securely in accordance with this policy and applicable law and regulation;

• Provide confidentiality to those involved in the research misconduct proceeding as required by applicable law and UNT policy;

• Notify the respondent and provide opportunities for him/her to review/ comment/respond to allegations, evidence, and committee reports in accordance with Section III.C. of this policy;

• Inform respondents, complainants, and witnesses of the procedural steps in the research misconduct proceeding;  

• In cooperation with the Vice President for Research and the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, take all reasonable and practical steps to protect or restore the positions and reputations of good faith complainants, witnesses, and committee members and counter  potential or actual retaliation against them by respondents or other institutional members;

• Keep the Vice President for Research and UNT System Office of General Counsel apprised of the progress of the review of the allegation of research misconduct; 

• Notify and make reports to the relevant office of an involved funding entity in accordance with federal or state requirements; 

• Ensure that administrative actions taken by UNT and the relevant office of any involved funding entity are enforced and take appropriate action to notify other involved parties, such as sponsors, law enforcement agencies, professional societies, and licensing boards of those actions, as required; and 

• Maintain records of the research misconduct proceeding and, in accordance with any federal or state requirement, make them available to the relevant office of an involved funding entity as set forth in Section VIII.E. of this policy. 

B. Complainant

The complainant is responsible for making allegations in good faith, maintaining confidentiality, and cooperating with the inquiry and investigation.  As a matter of good practice, the complainant should be interviewed at the inquiry stage and given the transcript or recording of the interview for correction.  The complainant should be interviewed during an investigation whenever possible, and be given the transcript or recording of the interview for correction.    

C. Respondent

The respondent is responsible for maintaining confidentiality and cooperating with the conduct of an inquiry and investigation.  The respondent is entitled to:

• A good faith effort from the Associate Vice President for Research to notify the respondent in writing at the time of or before beginning an inquiry;

• An opportunity to comment on the inquiry report and have his/her comments attached to the report; 

• Be notified of the outcome of the inquiry and receive a copy of the inquiry report that includes a copy of UNT’s policies and procedures on research misconduct;   

• Be notified in writing of the allegations to be investigated within a reasonable time after the determination that an investigation is warranted, but before the investigation begins, and be notified in writing of any new allegations not addressed in the inquiry or in the initial notice of investigation within a reasonable time after the determination to pursue those allegations; 

• Be interviewed during the investigation, have the opportunity to correct the recording or transcript, and have the corrected recording or transcript included in the record of the investigation;  

• Whenever possible, have interviewed during the investigation any witness who has been reasonably identified by the respondent as having information on relevant aspects of the investigation, have the recording or transcript provided to the witness for correction, and have the corrected recording or transcript included in the record of the investigation; and 

• Receive a copy of the draft investigation report and, concurrently, a copy of or supervised access to the evidence on which the report is based, and be notified that any comments must be submitted within 10 days of the date on which the copy was received and that the comments will be considered by UNT  and addressed in the final report.   

If the respondent admits that research misconduct occurred and that he/she committed the research misconduct, the Vice President for Research, with the advice of the Associate Vice President for Research and the Office of General Counsel, may terminate UNT’s review of an allegation that has been admitted, subject to obtaining prior approval from the relevant office of an involved funding entity in accordance with any federal or state requirement.  .  If no funding entity is involved, the Vice President for Research’s decision to terminate the review of an admitted allegation shall be final.

 D. Deciding Official 

The UNT Vice President for Research will serve as the Deciding Official for the purposes of this policy.  The Vice President for Research will appoint the chair and the members of the inquiry committee and the investigation committee as described in Sections V.D and VII.C below.   The Vice President for Research will receive the inquiry report and after consulting with the Associate Vice President for Research, decide whether an investigation is warranted under this policy.  Any finding that an investigation is warranted must be made in writing by the Vice President for Research.  If there is a federal or state requirement to provide notice, then the written findings and a copy of the inquiry report must be provided to the relevant office of an involved funding entity within 30 days of the finding.  If it is found that an investigation is not warranted, the Vice President for Research and the Associate Vice President for Research will ensure that detailed documentation of the inquiry is retained for at least 7 years after termination of the inquiry or for the required period under the UNT records retention schedule, whichever is longer.        

The Vice President for Research will receive the investigation report and, after consulting with the Associate Vice President for Research and other appropriate officials, decide the extent to which UNT accepts the findings of the investigation and, if research misconduct is found, recommend to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs what, if any, administrative actions are appropriate.  If there is a federal or state requirement to do so, then the Vice President for Research shall ensure that the final investigation report, the findings of the Vice President for Research and a description of any pending or completed administrative actions taken by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs are provided to the relevant office of an involved funding entity.    

IV. General Policies and Principles

A.  Responsibility to Report Misconduct

All institutional members will report observed, suspected, or apparent research misconduct to the Associate Vice President for Research, the Vice President for Research, or the Office of General Counsel.  Any UNT official who receives an allegation of research misconduct must report it immediately to the Associate Vice President for Research.  If an individual is unsure whether a suspected incident falls within the definition of research misconduct, he or she may meet with or contact the Associate Vice President for Research to discuss the suspected research misconduct informally, which may include discussing it anonymously and/or hypothetically.  If the circumstances described by the individual do not meet the definition of research misconduct, the Associate Vice President for Research will refer the individual or allegation to other UNT offices or officials with responsibility for resolving the problem.

At any time, an institutional member may have discussions and consultations about concerns of possible misconduct with the Associate Vice President for Research and will be counseled about appropriate procedures for reporting allegations.  Any such discussions and consultations will be confidential to the extent allowed by law.

B.  Cooperation with Research Misconduct Proceedings           

Institutional members will cooperate with the Associate Vice President for Research and other UNT officials in the review of allegations and the conduct of inquiries and investigations.  Institutional members, including respondents, have an obligation to provide evidence relevant to research misconduct allegations to the Associate Vice President for Research or other UNT officials.

C. Confidentiality

The Associate Vice President for Research shall:  (1) limit disclosure of the identity of respondents and complainants to those who need to know in order to carry out a thorough, competent, objective and fair research misconduct proceeding; and (2) except as otherwise prescribed by law, limit the disclosure of any records or evidence from which research subjects might be identified to those who need to know in order to carry out a research misconduct proceeding.  The Associate Vice President for Research will inform the respondents and complainants about the importance of confidentiality with respect to research misconduct proceedings.   At the initiation of an inquiry or investigation, the Office of General Counsel will inform the members of the Inquiry Committee and the Investigation Committee about the importance of confidentiality with respect to committee proceedings.  

D. Protecting complainants, witnesses, and committee members

Institutional members may not retaliate in any way against complainants, witnesses, or committee members.  Institutional members should immediately report any alleged or apparent retaliation against complainants, witnesses or committee members to the Associate Vice President for Research, who shall review the matter and, as necessary, make all reasonable and practical efforts to counter any potential or actual retaliation and protect and restore the position and reputation of the person against whom the retaliation is directed.  

E. Protecting the Respondent

As requested and as appropriate, the Associate Vice President for Research, the Vice President for Research, and the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs shall make all reasonable and practical efforts to protect or restore the reputation of persons alleged to have engaged in research misconduct, but against whom no finding of research misconduct is made.

During the research misconduct proceeding, the Associate Vice President for Research is responsible for ensuring that respondents receive all the notices and opportunities provided for in the applicable regulations of any involved funding entity and UNT policies and procedures.

F. Interim Administrative Actions and Notifying Funding Entity of Special Circumstances

Throughout the research misconduct proceeding, the Associate Vice President for Research will review the situation to determine if there is any threat of harm to public health, research funds and equipment, or the integrity of any funded research process.  In the event of such a threat, the Associate Vice President for Research will, in consultation with other UNT officials and the relevant office of any involved funding entity (if there is a federal or state requirement), take appropriate interim action to protect against any such threat.  Interim action might include additional monitoring of the research process and the handling of research funds and equipment, reassignment of personnel or of the responsibility for the handling of research funds and equipment, additional review of research data and results or delaying publication.  The Associate Vice President for Research shall, at any time during a research misconduct proceeding, immediately notify the relevant office of an involved funding entity in accordance with federal or state notification requirements or as he/she deems necessary to meet a health or safety concern,  if he/she has reason to believe that any of the following conditions exist:  

• Health or safety of the public is at risk, including an immediate need to protect human or animal subjects; 

• Funding entity resources or interests are threatened; 

• Research activities should be suspended; 

• There is a reasonable indication of possible violations of civil or criminal law; 

• Federal or state action is required to protect the interests of those involved in the research misconduct proceeding; 

• The research misconduct proceeding may be made public prematurely and funding entity action may be necessary to safeguard evidence and protect the rights of those involved; or 

• The research community or the public should be informed.  

V. Conducting the Assessment and Inquiry 

A. Assessment of Allegations 

Upon receiving an allegation of research misconduct, the Associate Vice President for Research will immediately assess the allegation to determine whether it is sufficiently credible and specific so that potential evidence of research misconduct may be identified, and whether the allegation falls within the definition of research misconduct in this policy.  An inquiry must be conducted if these criteria are met.  

The assessment period should be brief, preferably concluded within a week.  In conducting the assessment, the Associate Vice President for Research need not interview the complainant, respondent, or other witnesses, or gather data beyond any that may have been submitted with the allegation, except as necessary to determine whether the allegation is sufficiently credible and specific so that potential evidence of research misconduct may be identified.  The Associate Vice President for Research shall, on or before the date on which the respondent is notified of the allegation, obtain custody of, inventory, and sequester all research records and evidence needed to conduct the research misconduct proceeding, as provided in paragraph C. of this section. 

B. Initiation and Purpose of the Inquiry

If the Associate Vice President for Research determines that the criteria for an inquiry are met, he or she will immediately initiate the inquiry process.  The purpose of the inquiry is to conduct an initial review of the available evidence to determine whether to conduct an investigation.  An inquiry does not require a full review of all the evidence related to the allegation.  

C. Notice to Respondent; Sequestration of Research Records

At the time of or before beginning an inquiry, the Associate Vice President for Research must make a good faith effort to notify the respondent in writing, if the respondent is known.  If the inquiry subsequently identifies additional respondents, they must be notified in writing.  On or before the date on which the respondent is notified, or the inquiry begins, whichever is earlier, the Associate Vice President for Research must take all reasonable and practical steps to obtain custody of all the research records and evidence needed to conduct the research misconduct proceeding, inventory the records and evidence and sequester them in a secure manner, except that where the research records or evidence encompass scientific instruments shared by a number of users, custody may be limited to copies of the data or evidence on such instruments, so long as those copies are substantially equivalent to the evidentiary value of the instruments. 

D. Appointment of the Inquiry Committee

The Vice President for Research, in consultation with other UNT officials as appropriate, will appoint an inquiry committee and committee chair within 10 days of the initiation of the inquiry or as soon thereafter as practical.  The inquiry committee must consist of seven individuals who do not have unresolved personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest with those involved with the inquiry and should include individuals with the appropriate scientific and/or scholarly expertise to evaluate the evidence and issues related to the allegation, interview the respondent and complainant and key witnesses, and conduct the inquiry.  When necessary to secure the necessary expertise or to avoid conflicts of interest, the Vice President for Research may select committee members from outside UNT.

The Vice President for Research shall notify the respondent of the proposed committee membership.  The respondent shall have 10 calendar days to submit an objection to a proposed member based upon a personal, professional, or financial conflict of interest.  The Vice President for Research will review any such objections and make a final determination as to whether a conflict of interest exists and appoint substitute committee members as needed.  

The Vice President for Research shall notify the Office of General Counsel of the appointment of an inquiry committee.  

 E.  Charge to the Committee and First Meeting

The Associate Vice President for Research will prepare a charge for the inquiry committee that: 

• Sets forth the time for completion of the inquiry; 

• Describes the allegations and any related issues identified during the allegation assessment; 

• States that the purpose of the inquiry is to conduct an initial review of the evidence, including the testimony of the respondent, complainant and key witnesses, to determine whether an investigation is warranted, not to determine whether research misconduct definitely occurred or who was responsible; 

• States that an investigation is warranted if the committee determines:  (1) there is a reasonable basis for concluding that the allegation falls within the definition of research; and, (2) the allegation may have substance, based on the committee’s review during the inquiry.   

• Informs the inquiry committee that they are responsible for preparing or directing the preparation of a written report of the inquiry that meets the requirements of this policy.  

At the committee's first meeting, the Associate Vice President for Research will review the charge with the committee, discuss the allegations, any related issues, and the appropriate procedures for conducting the inquiry, assist the committee with organizing plans for the inquiry, and answer any questions raised by the committee.  The Associate Vice President for Research will be present or available throughout the inquiry to advise the committee as needed.

F.  Inquiry Process

The inquiry committee will normally interview the complainant, the respondent, and key witnesses as well as examining relevant research records and materials.  Then the inquiry committee will evaluate the evidence, including the testimony obtained during the inquiry.  After consultation with the Associate Vice President for Research, the committee members will decide whether an investigation is warranted based on the criteria in this policy.  The scope of the inquiry is not required to and does not normally include deciding whether misconduct definitely occurred, determining definitely who committed the research misconduct or conducting exhaustive interviews and analyses.  However, if a legally sufficient admission of research misconduct is made by the respondent, misconduct may be determined at the inquiry stage in accordance with  Section III.C of this policy.

G. Time for Completion

The inquiry, including preparation of the final inquiry report and the decision of the Vice President for Research on whether an investigation is warranted, must be completed within 60 calendar days of initiation of the inquiry, unless the Vice President for Research determines that circumstances warrant a longer period.  If the Vice President for Research approves an extension, the inquiry record must include documentation of the reasons for exceeding the 60-day period.  The Associate Vice President for Research will notify the respondent of any extension.  

VI. The Inquiry Report

A. Elements of the Inquiry Report

A written inquiry report must be prepared that includes the following information:  (1) the name and position of the respondent; (2) a description of the allegations of research misconduct; (3) any funding support, including, for example, grant numbers, grant applications, contracts and publications listing funding support; (4) the basis for recommending or not recommending that the allegations warrant an investigation; (5) any comments on the draft report by the respondent or complainant; (6) any other comments or corrections required to be included under this policy; (7) the names and titles of the committee members and experts who conducted the inquiry; (8) a summary of the inquiry process used; (9) a list of the research records reviewed; (10) summaries of any interviews; and (11) whether any other actions should be taken if an investigation is not recommended.

The Office of General Counsel may be consulted to review the report for legal sufficiency.  Modifications should be made as appropriate in consultation with the Associate Vice President for Research and the inquiry committee.

B. Notification to the Respondent; Opportunity to Comment

The Associate Vice President for Research shall notify the respondent whether the inquiry found an investigation to be warranted, include a copy of the draft inquiry report for comment within 10 days, and include a copy of UNT’s policies and procedures on research misconduct.

.  

Any comments submitted by the respondent will be attached to the final inquiry report.  Based on the comments, the inquiry committee may revise the draft report as appropriate and prepare it in final form.  The committee will deliver the final report to the Associate Vice President for Research.  

C. UNT Decision and Notification

1. Decision by Deciding Official

The Associate Vice President for Research will transmit the final inquiry report and any comments to the Vice President for Research, who will determine in writing whether an investigation is warranted.  The inquiry is completed when the Vice President for Research makes this determination.

2. Notification to Funding Entity

Within 30 calendar days of the Vice President for Research’s decision that an investigation is warranted, the Associate Vice President for Research will comply with any federal or state requirement to provide the relevant office of an involved funding agency with the Vice President for Research’s written decision and a copy of the inquiry report.  The Associate Vice President for Research will also notify the Office of General Counsel of the Vice President for Research’s decision.  The Associate Vice President for Research will also provide the following information to the relevant office of the involved funding agency upon request:  (1) the UNT policies and procedures under which the inquiry was conducted; (2) the research records and evidence reviewed, transcripts or recordings of any interviews, and copies of all relevant documents; and (3) the charges to be considered in the investigation.

3. Documentation of Decision Not to Investigate

If the Vice President for Research decides that an investigation is not warranted, the Associate Vice President for Research shall secure and maintain all documentation related to the decision not to investigate for 7 years or for the applicable retention period under the UNT records retention schedule, whichever is longer.  These documents will be provided to the relevant office of any involved funding agency upon request.

VII. Conducting the Investigation

A. Initiation and Purpose

The investigation must begin within 30 calendar days after the determination by the Vice President for Research that an investigation is warranted.  The purpose of the investigation is to develop a factual record by exploring the allegations in detail and examining the evidence in depth, leading to recommended findings on whether research misconduct has been committed, by whom, and to what extent.  The investigation will also determine whether there are additional instances of possible research misconduct that would justify broadening the scope beyond the initial allegations.  This is particularly important where the alleged research misconduct involves potential harm to human subjects or the general public or if it affects research that forms the basis for public policy.  The findings of the investigation will be set forth in an investigation report.

B. Notifying Funding Agency and Respondent; Sequestration of Research Records

            On or before the date on which the investigation begins, the Associate Vice President for Research will: (1) in accordance with any federal or state requirement, notify the relevant office of an involved funding agency of the decision to begin the investigation and provide a copy of the inquiry report; and (2) notify the respondent in writing of the allegations to be investigated.  The Associate Vice President for Research must also give the respondent written notice of any new allegations of research misconduct within a reasonable amount of time of deciding to pursue allegations not addressed during the inquiry or in the initial notice of the investigation.    

The Associate Vice President for Research will, prior to notifying respondent of the allegations, take all reasonable and practical steps to obtain custody of  and sequester in a secure manner all research records and evidence needed to conduct the research misconduct proceeding that were not previously sequestered during the inquiry.  Where the research records or evidence encompass scientific instruments shared by a number of users, custody may be limited to copies of the data or evidence on such instruments, so long as those copies are substantially equivalent to the evidentiary value of the instruments.  The procedures to be followed for sequestration during the investigation are the same procedures that apply during the inquiry.  

C. Appointment of the Investigation Committee

The Vice President for Research, in consultation with other UNT officials as appropriate, will appoint an investigation committee and the committee chair within 10 days of the beginning of the investigation or as soon thereafter as practical.  The investigation committee must consist of seven individuals who do not have unresolved personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest with those involved with the investigation and should include individuals with the appropriate scientific and/or scholarly expertise to evaluate the evidence and issues related to the allegation, interview the respondent, complainant and key witnesses, and conduct the investigation.  Individuals appointed to the investigation committee may also have served on the inquiry committee.  When necessary to secure the necessary expertise or to avoid conflicts of interest, the Vice President for Research may select committee members from outside UNT.

The Vice President for Research shall notify the respondent of the proposed committee membership.  The respondent shall have 10 calendar days for submitting an objection to a proposed member based upon a personal, professional, or financial conflict of interest.  The Vice President for Research will review any such objections and make a final determination as to whether a conflict of interest exists and appoint substitute committee members as needed.  

 The Vice President for Research shall notify the Office of General Counsel of the appointment of an investigation committee.

D. Charge to the Committee and the First Meeting

1. Charge to the Committee

The Associate Vice President for Research will define the subject matter of the investigation in a written charge to the committee that: 

• Describes the allegations and related issues identified during the inquiry; 

• Identifies the respondent;  

• Informs the committee that it must conduct the investigation as prescribed in paragraph E. of this section; 

• Defines research misconduct;

• Informs the committee that it must evaluate the evidence and testimony to determine whether, based on a preponderance of the evidence, research misconduct occurred and, if so, the type and extent of it and who was responsible;  

• Informs the committee that in order to determine that the respondent committed research misconduct it must find that a preponderance of the evidence establishes that:  (1) research misconduct, as defined in this policy, occurred (respondent has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence any affirmative defenses raised, including honest error or a difference of opinion); (2) the research misconduct is a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant research community; and (3) the respondent committed the research misconduct intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly; and 

• Informs the committee that it must prepare or direct the preparation of  a written investigation report that meets the requirements of this policy and the applicable regulations of any involved funding entity. 

2. First Meeting

The Associate Vice President for Research will convene the first meeting of the investigation committee to review the charge, the inquiry report, and the prescribed procedures and standards for the conduct of the investigation, including the necessity for confidentiality and for developing a specific investigation plan.  The investigation committee will be provided with a copy of this policy and the applicable regulations of any involved funding entity.  At the first meeting, the Office of General Counsel will advise the investigation committee about applicable law related to conducting the investigation.  The Associate Vice President for Research will be present or available throughout the investigation to advise the committee as needed. 

E. Investigation Process

The investigation committee and the Associate Vice President for Research must:  

• Use diligent efforts to ensure that the investigation is thorough and sufficiently documented and includes examination of all research records and evidence relevant to reaching a decision on the merits of each allegation; 

• Take reasonable steps to ensure an impartial and unbiased investigation to the maximum extent practical;

• Whenever possible, interview each respondent, complainant, and any other available person who has been reasonably identified as having information regarding any relevant aspects of the investigation, including witnesses identified by the respondent, and record or transcribe each interview, provide the recording or transcript to the interviewee for correction, and include the recording or transcript in the record of the investigation; and 

• Pursue diligently all significant issues and leads discovered that are determined relevant to the investigation, including any evidence of any additional instances of possible research misconduct, and continue the investigation to completion.

 F. Time for Completion

The investigation is to be completed within 120 days of the first meeting of the investigation committee, including conducting the investigation, preparing the report of findings, providing the draft report for comment and sending the final report to the relevant office of any involved funding entity.  However, if the Associate Vice President for Research determines that the investigation will not be completed within this 120-day period and there is a federal or state requirement that the involved funding entity must approve an extension of time, then the Associate Vice President for Research will submit to the relevant office of the involved funding entity a written request for an extension, setting forth the reasons for the delay.  In accordance with any federal or state requirement to do so, the Associate Vice President for Research will ensure that periodic progress reports are filed with the relevant office of an involved funding entity, if the funding entity grants the request for an extension and directs the filing of such reports.  If no funding entity is involved, the Associate Vice President will submit any written request for an extension to the Vice President for Research, who will decide if the request for an extension will be granted.  

VIII. The Investigation Report

A. Elements of the Investigation Report

The investigation committee and the Associate Vice President for Research are responsible for preparing a written draft report of the investigation that:  

• Describes the nature of the allegation of research misconduct, including identification of the respondent;

• Describes and documents any funding entity support, including, for example, the numbers of any grants that are involved, grant applications, contracts, and publications listing any funding entity support; 

• Describes the specific allegations of research misconduct considered in the investigation; 

• Includes the UNT policies and procedures under which the investigation was conducted, unless those policies and procedures were provided to the relevant office of any involved funding entity previously; 

• Identifies and summarizes the research records and evidence reviewed and identifies any evidence taken into custody but not reviewed;

• Includes any comments or corrections required to be included under this policy; and  

• Includes a statement of findings for each allegation of research misconduct identified during the investigation.  Each statement of findings must: (1) identify whether the research misconduct was falsification, fabrication, or plagiarism, and whether it was committed intentionally, knowingly, or  recklessly;  (2) summarize the facts and the analysis that support the conclusion and consider the merits of any reasonable explanation by the respondent, including any effort by respondent to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she did not engage in research misconduct because of honest error or a difference of opinion; (3) identify any funding entity support; (4) identify whether any publications need correction or retraction; (5) identify the person(s) responsible for the misconduct; and (6) list any current support or known applications or proposals for support that the respondent has pending with other funding entities. 

B. Comments on the Draft Report and Access to Evidence

1. Respondent

The Associate Vice President for Research must give the respondent a copy of the draft investigation report for comment and, concurrently, a copy of or supervised access to the evidence on which the report is based.  The respondent will be allowed 10 days from the date he/she received the draft report to submit comments to the Associate Vice President for Research.  The respondent's comments must be included and considered in the final report.  

2. Confidentiality

In distributing any portion of the draft report to the respondent, the Associate Vice President for Research will inform the respondent of the confidentiality under which the draft report is made available. 

 C. Decision by Deciding Official

The Associate Vice President for Research will assist the investigation committee in finalizing the draft investigation report, including ensuring that the respondent’s comments are included and considered, and transmit the final investigation report to the Vice President for Research, who will determine in writing:  (1) whether UNT accepts the investigation report, its findings, and the recommended institutional actions; and (2) make recommendations to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs as to the appropriate institutional actions in response to the accepted findings of research misconduct.  If this determination varies from the findings of the investigation committee, the Vice President for Research will, as part of his/her written determination, explain in detail the basis for rendering a decision different from the findings of the investigation committee. Alternatively, the Vice President for Research may return the report to the investigation committee with a request for further fact-finding or analysis.  

When a final decision on the case has been reached, the Associate Vice President for Research will normally notify both the respondent and the complainant in writing.  After informing the relevant office of any involved funding entity if there is a federal or state requirement to do so, the Associate Vice President for Research will determine whether law enforcement agencies, professional societies, professional licensing boards, editors of journals in which falsified reports may have been published, collaborators of the respondent in the work, or other relevant parties should be notified of the outcome of the case.  The Associate Vice President for Research is responsible for ensuring compliance with all notification requirements of funding or sponsoring entities.

D. Notice to Funding Entity of UNT Findings and Actions

If there is a federal or state requirement to do so and an extension has not been granted, then the Associate Vice President for Research must, within the 120-day period for completing the investigation, submit the following to the relevant office of an involved funding entity:  (1) a copy of the final investigation report with all attachments; (2) a statement of whether UNT accepts the findings of the investigation report; (3) a statement of whether UNT found misconduct and, if so, who committed the misconduct; and (4) a description of  any pending or completed institutional administrative actions against the respondent.

E.  Maintaining Records for Review by Funding Entity

The Associate Vice President for Research must maintain and in accordance with federal and state requirements, provide to the relevant office of any involved funding entity upon request “records of research misconduct proceedings” as that term is defined by the applicable regulations of any involved funding entity.  Records of research misconduct proceedings must be maintained in a secure manner for 7 years after completion of the proceeding or the completion of any funding entity proceeding involving the research misconduct allegation or for the applicable retention period under the UNT records retention schedule, whichever is longer.  The Associate Vice President for Research is also responsible for providing any information, documentation, research records, evidence or clarification requested by the funding entity to carry out its review of an allegation of research misconduct or of UNT’s handling of such an allegation.

IX. Completion of Cases; Reporting Premature Closures to Funding Entity

Generally, all inquiries and investigations will be carried through to completion and all significant issues will be pursued diligently.  In accordance with any federal or state requirement, the Associate Vice President for Research will notify the relevant office of an involved funding entity in advance if there are plans to close a case at the inquiry, investigation, or appeal stage on the basis that respondent has admitted guilt, a settlement with the respondent has been reached, or for any other reason, except:  (1) closing of a case at the inquiry stage on the basis that an investigation is not warranted; or (2) a finding of no misconduct at the investigation stage, which must be reported to the funding entity, as prescribed in this policy and the applicable regulations of any involved funding entity. 

X. Institutional Administrative Actions

If the Vice President for Research determines that research misconduct is substantiated by the findings, after consultation with the Associate Vice President for Research he/she will recommend the appropriate institutional administrative actions to be taken to the UNT Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.  The administrative actions to be taken by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs may include, but are not limited to:

• Withdrawal or correction of all pending or published abstracts and papers emanating from the research where research misconduct was found;

•  Removal of the responsible person from the particular project, letter of reprimand, special monitoring of future work, probation, suspension, salary reduction, or initiation of steps leading to possible rank reduction or termination of employment; 

•   Restitution of funds to any involved funding entity as appropriate; or

•   Other actions appropriate to the misconduct.

XI. Other Considerations

A. Termination or Resignation Prior to Completing Inquiry or Investigation

The termination of the respondent's employment with UNT, by resignation or otherwise, before or after an allegation of possible research misconduct has been reported, will not preclude or terminate the research misconduct proceeding or otherwise limit any of UNT’s responsibilities under this policy and the applicable regulations of any involved funding entity.

If the respondent, without admitting to the misconduct, elects to resign his or her position after UNT receives an allegation of research misconduct, the assessment of the allegation will proceed, as well as the inquiry and investigation, as appropriate based on the outcome of the preceding steps.  If the respondent refuses to participate in the process after resignation, the Associate Vice President for Research and any inquiry or investigation committee will use their best efforts to reach a conclusion concerning the allegations, noting in the report the respondent's failure to cooperate and its effect on the evidence.

B. Restoration of the Respondent's Reputation

Following a final finding of no research misconduct, and after obtaining concurrence by the relevant office of an involved funding entity in accordance with any federal or state requirement,, the Associate Vice President for Research shall undertake all reasonable and practical efforts to restore the respondent's reputation. Depending on the particular circumstances and the views of the respondent, the Associate Vice President for Research should consider notifying those individuals aware of or involved in the investigation of the final outcome, publicizing the final outcome in any forum in which the allegation of research misconduct was previously publicized, or expunging all reference to the research misconduct allegation from the respondent's personnel file.  Any UNT actions to restore the respondent's reputation should first be approved by the Vice President for Research.

C. Protection of the Complainant, Witnesses and Committee Members

During the research misconduct proceeding and upon its completion, regardless of whether the institution or the relevant office of any involved funding entity determines that research misconduct occurred, the Associate Vice President for Research will undertake all reasonable and practical efforts to protect the position and reputation of, or to counter potential or actual retaliation against, any complainant who made allegations of  research misconduct in good faith and of any witnesses and committee members who cooperate in good faith with the research misconduct proceeding.  The Vice President for Research will determine, after consulting with the Associate Vice President for Research, and with the complainant, witnesses, or committee members, respectively, what steps, if any, are needed to restore their respective positions or reputations or to counter potential or actual retaliation against them.  The Associate Vice President for Research is responsible for implementing any steps the Vice President for Research approves.    

D. Allegations Not Made in Good Faith

If relevant, the Vice President for Research will determine whether the complainant’s allegations of research misconduct were made in good faith, or whether a witness or committee member acted in good faith.  If the Vice President for Research determines that there was an absence of good faith, he/she will make recommendations to the appropriate administrative officer as to whether any administrative action should be taken against the person who failed to act in good faith.