Principles and Procedures Concerning Allegations of Scientific Misconduct in Scientific Research

Adopted by the University Senate, April 17, 1986

Principles Maintaining high ethical standards in the conduct of scientific research is an important University responsibility imposed by public trust and is essential to the discovery of new knowledge and the reputation of research and reaching institutions. Misconduct or apparent misconduct in scientific research challenges the integrity of the scientific enterprise at large and threatens to undermine public trust in university research. There is concern that ad hoc informal responses that universities have used to deal with suspected misconduct may not be sufficiently effective, and that systematic, explicit, and official policies are needed to assure that allegations of misconduct are properly addressed. These concerns have prompted the Association of American Universities, the Association of American Medical Colleges, and the National Institutes of Health, as well as a growing number of universities, to develop policy guidelines for promoting ethical standards in scientific research and dealing with alleged misconduct.

This document aims to promote timely, effective and fair responses to allegations of scientific misconduct. These procedures are designed to cover such problems as:

1. Fraud (i.e., willful fabrication, falsification or plagiarism);
   
   
2. Abuse of confidentiality including misappropriation of data;
   
   
3. Knowing violation of scientifically substantive administrative regulations governing the conduct of research; or;
   
   
4. Failure properly to supervise co-workers.

This document addresses allegations of misconduct among employees, who for these purposes shall be deemed to include all teaching and research personnel whether or not they have faculty titles, including those with tenure track and non-tenure track positions, and principal research investigators. In addition, where the scope of an inquiry into allegations of misconduct broadens to include allegations regarding students, fact finding into the allegations regarding students shall proceed in accordance with the procedures outlined in this document, and findings of fact related to misconduct of students shall be forwarded to the relevant School disciplinary committee. These principles and procedures do not attempt to legislate guidelines for the conduct of scientific research. It is, however, necessary to sensitize researchers to their responsibilities in meeting the highest standards in selecting collaborators, gathering, evaluating and reporting data, supervising junior colleagues, authoring publications, disclosing suspicions of misconduct, cooperating in any authorized investigation, and maintaining the highest standards of ethical behavior in the conduct of scientific research and a general climate of intellectual honesty. In dealing with allegations of misconduct and following the procedures outlined here, employees are urged to keep in mind the following basic principles:

1. That research, teaching, and patient care should conform to the highest standards;

2. That members of the academic community have a responsibility to report what they believe to be scientific misconduct and to cooperate in investigations of scientific misconduct; this duty of cooperation includes the obligation to provide all documentation reasonably requested by those charged with investigatory responsibilities herein;

3. That allegations of misconduct are to be investigated promptly, thoroughly, and judiciously;

4. That the rights and reputation of all parties involved in allegations of misconduct, including those suspected of misconduct and those who report misconduct in good faith, are to be protected.

Procedures

I. Reporting Allegations

A. An initial report of suspected scientific misconduct should be brought to the attention of the person directly responsible for the individual whose actions are in question. If this person is not the department chair, he or she shall immediately report the allegations to the department chair, who shall in turn notify the Dean. In so notifying, the department chair shall bring to the Dean's attention any indication that the report is frivolous or otherwise insubstantial. Allegations that concern a department chair are to be brought directly to the Dean. Allegations involving the Dean should be brought directly to the President or Chancellor. In any instance involving an allegation against a Dean, the word 'Dean" as used below shall be deemed to mean the President or Chancellor or his or her designee.

II. Initial Inquiry

A. The Dean, in consultation with the department chair, shall determine whether to authorize a preliminary inquiry. The department chair will conduct any such preliminary investigation of the allegations. The chair, with the approval of the Dean, shall appoint at least two persons selected from the New York University faculty. They and the chair shall make a determination as to whether or not a formal investigation should be carried out. The individuals appointed to investigate must be objective and impartial and must possess, where required, the competence to understand the research in question. The individuals accused shall be advised of the accusation and of the existence of the preliminary inquiry. The inquiry and its findings shall not otherwise be disclosed by the investigators, except as necessary to carry out the assignment, or as otherwise provided herein. The department chair will report in writing to the Dean recommending whether or not a more formal investigation should be initiated.

B. Based on the recommendations of the preliminary investigative committee, the Dean shall either dismiss the allegations for lack of merit, resolve them through informal processes without further investigation, or initiate a formal investigation. Upon making such a determination, the Dean shall notify the individual making the allegations, the person(s) suspected of misconduct, and the department chair. If the charges are dismissed for lack of merit) the Dean shall give notice of that fact to the accused individuals in writing. Should the Dean decide to initiate further investigation, he or she will notify the Chancellor, the General Counsel to the University, any sponsoring agency, and, if a pending work is in question, the publisher or any other recipient organization.

III. Formal Investigation and Action

A. If the Dean has determined that further investigation is warranted, he or she will promptly appoint a five member ad hoc committee to conduct a formal investigation, which may include the review of all research with which the individual has been involved. The individuals appointed must be objective and impartial and must possess sufficient competence to understand the research in question. The committee should include one or more persons with expertise in the scientific area in question; persons from at least two different schools of the University; at least one person from outside the University; and no person with prior involvement in the subject matter of the inquiry. If the accused leaves the institution or refuses to cooperate, the investigation will continue according to the prescribed procedures.

B. In conducting the investigation, the committee shall comply with such procedures as may have been promulgated by the President or Chancellor of the University. Because the findings of this committee will serve as the factual basis for any subsequent disciplinary proceedings against the accused individual, the procedures shall be such as will provide a full and fair opportunity for the person to be informed of and defend against the charges. Any such rule shall include, at the minimum, the following provisions:

1. right of the accused to a clear written statement of the charges; 2. right of the accused to appear before the committee and present testimony on his or her behalf;

3. right of the accused to be accompanied by counsel when appearing before the committee;

4. right of the accused to a copy of a tape-recording which shall be made of all testimony; however, the committee shall deliberate and may discuss procedural matters in executive session;

5. right of the accused to examine the committee's file of non-confidential documents, receive a draft of the committee's final report, and comment upon it in writing and/or by appearing before the committee to present arguments in rebuttal;

6. right of the accused to a finding determined by majority vote on the basis of a preponderance of evidence;

7. right of the accused to a prohibition on all committee members, additional staff, and secretarial assistants from disclosing committee proceedings at any time, except as otherwise provided by these rules.

C. The committee shall conduct its investigation with all deliberate speed and submit to the Dean a written report of its findings of fact and conclusions along with the entire file on the case. A copy of the report shall also be submitted to the accused by certified mail, with return receipt. The accused may, if he or she desires, make a statement in writing within ten working days of delivery of the report, and this statement shall be considered by the Dean in conjunction with the committee report. If the Dean finds the report of the committee deficient in any major respect, the Dean may remand the report to the same committee for further consideration or may appoint a new committee. The outcome of the fact-finding shall be reported to any organization given prior notice under the provisions of section II-B.

D. If the Dean agrees that the allegations are without merit, he or she shall make all reasonable efforts to protect or restore the reputation of accused parties. If the Dean finds that allegations were made in bad faith, he or she shall recommend appropriate action against the reporters in accord with the relevant disciplinary regulations of the University.

E. If the Dean agrees that the alleged misconduct is substantiated by a thorough investigation, he or she shall recommend sanctions including but not limited to the following: dismissal, suspension, reprimand, limitation on grant submissions, suspension or monitoring of research. The Dean shall submit this recommendation to the disciplinary committee or administrator appropriate to the employment status of the accused:

1. The procedure to be followed in the case of faculty misconduct is as outlined in Title IV of the University's Statement in Regard to Academic Freedom and Tenure (as amended by the addendum to this report), unless the Dean recommends dismissal of a tenured faculty member, in which case he or she shall follow University rules set forth in Title III of the University's Statement in Regard to Academic Freedom and Tenure.

2. In the case of students implicated in an inquiry into misconduct, the outcome of fact-finding and the Dean's finding that allegations are substantiated, shall be reported to the discipline committee (or its equivalent) of the School in which the student is enrolled.

3. In the case of all other employees implicated in an inquiry of misconduct, the outcome of fact-finding and the Dean's finding that allegations are substantiated shall be referred to the appropriate Dean or Vice President for action in accordance with applicable procedure.

F. Because of the special and technical nature of the facts and issues in these cases, the hearing committees provided for in Titles III and IV of the University's Statement in Regard to Academic Freedom and Tenure (see page 25, NYU Faculty Handbook), the disciplinary committees established pursuant to the various school disciplinary procedures, or the Dean or Vice President responsible for disciplinary action with respect to other employees shall not re-find the facts, but shall treat the report of the formal investigative committee, established in section III-A of this report, as the factual basis for their proceedings. If the Title III or IV hearing committee or, in the case of students or non-faculty employees, the relevant discipline committee or administrator, finds the report to be inadequate, the discipline committee or administrator shall refer the report back to the Dean of the affected school for clarification or augmentation.

G. When a decision reached by the hearing committee under Title III or IV or other appropriate person or committee in the case of a non-faculty employee or student has become final, the Dean shall notify the individuals and agencies listed in section of the decision. In addition, if alleged misconduct is substantiated, the dean shall notify editors of any other affected journals and publications as well as institutions, individuals, and sponsoring agencies with which the individual has been affiliated.

H. Any appeal shall proceed under the appropriate provisions of Title III or IV (as amended) or other applicable rule in the case of a non-faculty employee or student.