The following is a memorandum on the University's policy issued on 30 January 1990 by T. Alexander Pond, Acting President:

On August 8, 1989, the Public Health Service (PHS) established final rules for dealing with possible misconduct in research and related activities funded, conducted, or regulated by PHS. Under these final rules, awardee institutions have primary responsibility for preventing, detecting and dealing with possible misconduct in research in programs funded by PHS.

As defined in the PHS rules, misconduct means 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. It does not include honest error or honest differences in interpretations or judgments of data. The National Science Foundation additionally includes a "material failure to comply with Federal requirements for protection of researchers, human subjects or the public or for ensuring the welfare of laboratory animals; or a failure to meet other material legal requirements governing research" in the definition of misconduct.

The concerns of the University in regard to the conduct of research extend beyond the research that is Federally funded and beyond that conducted by scientists. Consequently, effective immediately, the following policies are applicable to the University's research activities conducted in all its disciplines and without regard to source of funding.

1. Misconduct in research is (1) fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the relevant discipline for proposing, conducting or reporting research, or (2) a material failure to comply with University, Federal or State policies regulating the use of human subjects, the welfare of laboratory animals, or other aspects of the conduct of research.
2. As a general principle governing the process specified below, appropriate efforts shall be made by all individuals and bodies considering or investigating allegations of misconduct to protect the privacy, confidentiality and reputations of those who report apparent misconduct and those against whom allegations of misconduct are made but not confirmed.
3. The individuals concerned in the allegations shall be informed promptly of the allegations and of the determinations and recommendations made by the chairpersons, directors, deans, provosts, and the RAB, and shall have the opportunity to comment on the allegations, to provide information to individuals and bodies considering the allegations, and to comment on the findings of the inquiry and/or the investigation.
4. An allegation of misconduct by a faculty or staff member in research or related activities shall be referred to the chairperson of the appropriate academic department or to the director of the appropriate center, institute or unit. (If the allegation concerns the chairperson or the director, it shall be referred directly to the appropriate dean or provost.)
5. The chairperson or director promptly shall make a determination as to whether or not the allegation warrants further inquiry. If the chairperson or director determines that it does not, the chairperson shall make a brief written report within sixty days to the appropriate dean, describing the allegation and informing the dean of his or her determination, and the matter shall end there. If the chairperson or director determines that further inquiry is warranted, he or she shall consult with an appropriate group of faculty members in the department or unit and shall make a recommendation, within sixty days of having been made aware of the allegation, to the appropriate dean or provosts as to whether or not an investigation is warranted. Detailed documentation of the inquiry shall be maintained in an official file of the office that conducted the inquiry for at least three years.
6. The dean or provost promptly shall make a determination as to whether or not an investigation is warranted. If the dean or provost determines that an investigation is not warranted, within thirty days of his/her receipt of the report of the inquiry, he or she shall document in writing the findings of the inquiry and the reasons for the determination. If the dean or provost determines that an investigation is warranted, he or she shall refer the matter, within thirty days of his/her receipt of the report of the inquiry, to the Vice President for Research with a request that the Research Advisory Board (RAB) investigate the allegations. (A dean shall refer such matters to the vice president via the provost.)
7. Upon receipt of the provost's request, the Vice President for Research shall refer the allegations of misconduct to the RAB and, if the research is supported by PHS or by another agency external to the University, shall immediately notify the funding agency of the alleged misconduct and of the fact that a determination has been made to carry out an investigation of the matter.
8. In carrying out its investigation, the RAB shall act promptly and fairly, shall secure necessary and appropriate impartial expertise (either internal or external to the University) in order to carry out a thorough and authoritative evaluation of the relevant evidence, and shall take precautions against real or apparent conflicts of interest. The RAB shall make every effort to conclude its investigation and to prepare its written findings within four months of receipt of the request to investigate. If, after two months, the RAB determines that it will not be able to complete its investigation within the four month period, it shall submit to the Vice President for Research an interim report on the progress of the investigation to date and an estimated timetable for the completion of the investigation. Thereafter, the RAB shall submit a progress report to the Vice President every two months until such time as it has completed the investigation and prepared its written findings. If the research is funded by an agency exernal to the University, the vice president shall inform the funding agency, as appropriate, of the progress and the estimated timetable for the completion of the investigation.
9. If, during the course of its investigation, the RAB deems it advisable that certain interim actions be taken, it shall recommend such actions to the Vice President for Research. Similarly, if the RAB becomes aware of any facts of which the funding agency or the University should be apprised immediately, it shall so inform the Vice President for Research. If the research is supported by PHS, the Vice President for Research shall apprise PHS's Office of Scientific Integrity within 24 hours of obtaining a reasonable indication of possible criminal violations and shall take appropriate actions to protect Federal funds and to ensure their appropriate use.
10. If the allegations of misconduct are not substantiated, the Vice President for Research shall take appropriate actions to make that fact known within the academic community. If the allegations are sustained, the Vice President for Research shall initiate appropriate disciplinary actions consistent with the University's policies and regulations. If the allegation concerns research or a related activity which is externally funded, the Vice President for Research shall inform the funding agency of the findings of the RAB. The Vice President for Research shall maintain detailed documentation of the investigation for at least three years.