A.

If No Academic Misconduct is Found (federal or state funding)
Within 10 working days of receipt of the CoI report, the VPR shall furnish the report to the Respondent with the VPR’s decision, including sanctions, if appropriate. The VPR shall inform the Respondent, Complainant, and the appropriate Dean that allegations of misconduct were not supported. The VPR, through the Research Integrity Officer, shall inform all federal or state agencies, sponsors, or other external entities initially informed of the Investigation, that the allegations of misconduct were not supported. If the allegations are deemed to have been maliciously motivated, the Committee will report those findings to the VPR. If the allegations, however incorrect, are deemed to have been made in good faith, no additional measures are indicated and efforts will be made to prevent retaliatory actions. In publicizing the findings of no misconduct, the University will be guided by whether public announcements will be harmful or beneficial in restoring any reputation(s) that may have been damaged. Usually, such decision will rest with the Respondent.

1.

The VPR shall consider the recommendations of the CoI and shall be responsible for determining and implementing any sanctions. Within 10 working days of receipt of the report from the CoI, the VPR shall notify the Respondent and the President, in writing, of the recommended sanctions, if any. A copy of the report will accompany the VPR’s decision.

2.

The University must impose sanctions that are appropriate to the seriousness of the misconduct, including, but not limited to, one or more of the following:

a.

Letter of reprimand in file.

b.

Removal from particular project.

c.

Special monitoring of future work.

d.

Letter of reprimand with public notice.

e.

Probation for a specified period with conditions.

f.

Suspension of rights and responsibilities for a specified period, with or without salary.

g.

Financial restitution.

h.

Termination of employment/enrollment.

3.

4.

a.

Sponsoring agencies, funding sources.

b.

Co-authors, co-investigators, collaborators, departments, campus University publications.

c.

Editors of journals in which fraudulent research was published.

d.

State professional licensing boards.

e.

Editors of journals or other publications, other institutions, sponsoring agencies, and funding sources with which the individual has been affiliated.

f.

Professional societies.

5.

Sanctions that prevent the Respondent from fulfilling his/her obligations as an employee of the University shall not be imposed during the Inquiry or Investigation phase unless it is necessary to prevent harm to the Respondent or to others.

C.

Appeal (federal or state funding)
Respondents may appeal the sanctions of the CoI to the Standing Committee on Faculty Rights (SCFR).

1.

Under section 605.3(9) of the State Board of Higher Education(SBHE) Policies, the Respondent may appeal to SCFR “[i]f the administration determines that the conduct of a faculty member . . . provides reasonable cause for imposition of a sanction, the administration shall inform the faculty member in writing of the sanction and the reasons for the sanction. . . . If the sanction is imposed without a [SCFR] hearing . . .”, the faculty member may request a SCFR review by following the SBHE policy and the University’s implementation, both of which may be found in the University’s Faculty Handbook.

2.

If initiated, the review of imposed sanctions by SCFR concludes review under this Policy.

[Return to Top]

[Return to Index]