Loyola University New Orleans Policy Concerning Misconduct In Scholarship
Part 1. Preamble
Faculty add to the store of human knowledge and the well-being of individuals and society through their efforts in scholarship and scientific research. The pursuit of knowledge is best served when scholars adhere to ethical standards of conduct. While instances of misconduct in scholarship have been uncommon events, many scholars, researchers, universities, grantors and government officials have expressed concern. Loyola University is interested in maintaining high ethical standards in the conduct of scholarship and research and in providing for due process in the investigation of alleged misconduct, as well as complying with federal regulations. For these reasons, Loyola University New Orleans has developed the following policy and procedures for handling allegations of scholarly misconduct.
Part 2. Definitions
The term "misconduct" applies to deviations from accepted professional standards or practices in carrying out research or scholarship. This definition, in conformance with Department of Health and Human Services regulations (42 CFR Part 50), 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.. It does not include error or honest differences in interpretations or judgments of data." In addition, and in conformance with National Science Foundation policies (45 CFR Part 689), misconduct also includes "material failure to comply with Federal requirements for protection of researchers, human subjects, or the public or for ensuring the welfare of laboratory animals" and "failure to meet other material legal requirements governing research." Therefore, this policy does not replace any existing federal government or university regulations or procedures concerning the ethical treatment of human or animal subjects, hazardous materials, fiscal improprieties, or criminal matters.
Part 3. Applicability.
Part 4 through 9, including subparts, apply to all research funded in full or in part by a US government agency having regulations governing scholarly misconduct. Part 10 of this policy applies to all other research and scholarship conducted at Loyola University New Orleans.
The policies and procedures described herein apply to all faculty and staff. Faculty are responsible for any misconduct by student(s) working on supervised projects.
Part 4. General Guidelines and Procedures Guiding an Inquiry and Investigation of Scholarly Misconduct and Resulting Administrative Actions.
4.1 To the maximum extent possible the university will protect the right, the reputation, the professional and institutional standing of those who have reported misconduct (complainants), and attempt to provide confidential treatment (except as provided by law). Also, the university will see that the complainant is protected from harassment from supervisors or colleagues as a result of coming forward with information. The complainant has the right to withdraw the allegation at any time.
4.2 To the maximum extent possible the university will protect the rights, the reputation and the professional and institutional standing, of individuals against whom misconduct is alleged (respondents) by affording them confidential treatment (except as provided by law), a prompt inquiry and, if warranted, a thorough investigation.
4.3 The respondent will receive a copy of the report of an inquiry and/or investigation, or in the case of multiple respondents only those portions of the report(s) pertaining to the individual's own activities. The respondent(s) will be able to respond in writing to the report(s) and the written response(s) will become part of the record.
4.4 Reasonable services and facilities for the conduct of first an inquiry and, if needed, an investigation into an allegation of scholarly misconduct will be furnished by the Senior Vice President and Dean of Faculties.
4.5 Detailed, confidential written records shall be kept of all inquiries and investigation proceedings. All records and reports shall be retained in the Office of the Senior Vice President and Dean of Faculties for at least three years.
Part 5. Procedures Governing Preliminary Inquiries into Allegations of Misconduct in Scholarship.
5.1 The Director of Grants and Research is designated as the definitive recipient of information concerning alleged misconduct. An allegation will be made in writing and signed by the complainant.
5.2 The Director will confidentially counsel any individual who comes forward with information on alleged misconduct. The director will make a decision if the alleged misconduct is within the scope of the university's misconduct policy and attempt to rule out the possibility that an allegation has been made frivolously or maliciously. If the allegation is not within the scope of the policy, the director will attempt to seek a resolution through referrals to Department Chairs, Deans, or the Senior Vice President and Dean of Faculties. The Director will also determine if the allegation is within the jurisdiction of the Human Subjects IRB, the Animal Care and Use Committee, or some other body having special responsibilities, in which case the matter will be handled exclusively by the appropriate body.
5.3 The Director will immediately contact the scholar against whom the allegation has been made. He will also notify the appropriate Dean and the Senior Vice President and Dean of Faculties that a preliminary inquiry is being initiated. The Director may also elect at this time to make secure any evidence relating to the alleged misconduct.
5.4 The Senior Vice President and Dean of Faculties will then move quickly to appoint an ad-hoc committee of three faculty and/or staff individuals at least one of whom shall belong to the faculty of a college other than that in which misconduct is alleged to have occurred. The committee members selected will have no conflicts of interest bearing on the alleged misconduct.
5.5 The ad-hoc committee shall conduct a prompt, confidential and thorough inquiry and submit a written report to the Senior Vice President and Dean of Faculties within 30 days.
5.6. If the ad-hoc committee determines that the allegation is frivolous; that it cannot be substantiated; and/or that there exists insufficient evidence to justify proceeding further, the inquiry shall be terminated.
5.52. If the ad-hoc committee further determines that allegations made by the complainant(s) have not been made in good faith, the committee will state this in the report to the Senior Vice President.
5.53. If the ad-hoc committee concludes in its report that the alleged misconduct merits further investigation, the Senior Vice President and Dean of Faculties shall immediately so inform the complainant, the respondent, their immediate supervisors or Chairperson, Dean, and the university legal counsel.
Part 6. Interim Administrative Actions
Depending on the magnitude of possible misconduct, especially with regard to situations concerning immediate health hazards and/or allegations of criminal conduct, the Senior Vice- President and Dean of Faculties may take interim administrative actions designed to protect the public or the university. Potential actions may include the following. (1) Research activities of the respondent may be ordered suspended, pending the outcome of an investigation. (2) Evidence related to the misconduct case may be secured. (3) In the case of research supported by a US government agency, the awarding agency shall be notified (i) that a preliminary inquiry has been completed, (ii) that the alleged misconduct has been judged worthy of further investigation, and (iii) that a formal investigation will begin.
Part 7. Procedures Governing Investigations into Allegations of Scholarly Misconduct
7.1 The Senior Vice President and Dean of Faculties, in consultation with the member of the ad-hoc committee convened to conduct the preliminary inquiry, will appoint such additional faculty, and in the case of a staff respondent staff members as (s)he deems necessary to ensure the availability of expertise appropriate to the nature of the allegation. The committee members shall have no conflicts of interest relative to the case. The expanded committee shall include not less that three tenured members of the faculty, of whom at least one shall belong to the faculty of a college other than that in which misconduct is alleged to have occurred.
7.2 The committee shall hold its first meeting not longer that 30 days after the ad-hoc committee has submitted its report. The committee may seek the advice of university legal counsel in determining its procedures, and shall convey them in writing to all relevant parties at the earliest opportunity. The committee may also seek advice from persons not employed by the university.
7.3 In the event of research funded by the US government agency the committee may send status reports during the course of the investigation to the Senior Vice President and Dean of Faculties for transmittal to the appropriate agency. The committee and the Senior Vice President and Dean of Faculties shall send such status reports to the appropriate agency (i) if warranted by the seriousness of the misconduct, (ii) if immediate health hazards are involved, (iii) if the granting agency's resources, reputation, or other interest require protection, (iv) if federal actions may be needed to protect the interests of a subject of the investigation or of others potentially affected; (v) if the scientific or scholarly community or the public should be informed; (vi) if it is probable that the alleged incident is going to be reported publicly, or (vii) if the committee believes that it cannot complete the investigation and a final report within 120 days. The agency shall be informed within 24 hours in the event of reasonable indications of criminal violations.
7.4 At the conclusion of their investigation, which will normally lasts no more than 120 days, the committee shall submit a written report to the Senior Vice-President and Dean of Faculties.
7.5 The report shall contain the committee's findings as to the facts of the case, and (if appropriate) their recommendations as to remedies for any infractions they determine to occurred.
7.42 If the report finds that the complainant has made allegations that are not in good faith, this will be included in the report.
7.43 In the event a respondent resigns from employment or leaves at the expiration of a contract the investigation will continue to its conclusion.
Part 8. Appeal of the Findings of the Investigation of Scholarly Misconduct.
A person found to have engaged in scholarly misconduct may appeal the findings of the committee to the President. A written appeal must be filed within 15 days of the committee's report. The decision of the President, including the adoption of any disciplinary action, shall be final.
Part 9. Final Actions Based on the Report of a Committee Conducting an Investigation
9.1 If an allegation of scholarly misconduct is not substantiated after an investigation, all proceedings will be discontinued and Loyola University will undertake diligent efforts, as appropriate, to protect and restore the reputations of all those previously involved in the investigation.
9.2 If scholarly misconduct is determined to have occurred, sanctions will be imposed by the Senior Vice-President and Dean of Faculties or the President in accordance with university personnel policies and the University's Faculty Handbook.
9.3 In the case of Federally funded research, the awarding agency shall be notified and appropriate restitution will be made. The funding agency may invoke the right to conduct its own investigation and/or to impose sanctions of its own on the individual researcher (including criminal sanctions), on a division of the university, or on Loyola University as a whole.
Part 10. Policy Applicable to Scholarly Misconduct on Projects Not Funded by a US Government Agency Having A Policy on Scholarly Misconduct.
All provisions of above policy apply, with the exception of Parts 7.3, 7.5, and 9.3 and all deadlines (in numbers of days) applicable to the commencement or conclusion of any inquiry or investigation, or any other milestones which are a part of the procedures described above.
Assurance: Approved by President James C. Carter, S.J. and sent to the Department of Health and Human Services effective January 1, 1990.
