Procedure for Policy 7.3 - Responsible Conduct of Research Policy

The official version of this procedure is housed with the University Secretariat.  In the event of a discrepancy, the official version will prevail. Click here for a printable version of this policy. 

---

Approving Authority: Board of Governors & Senate
Responsible Office: Office of the Vice-President (Research)
Responsible Officer: Vice-President (Research)
Original Approval Date: January 27, 2015
Effective Date: June 21, 2023
Date of Most Recent Review: June 21, 2023

1. Process for Dealing with Allegations of Research Misconduct

1.1.  Informal Assistance

1.1.1.  Anyone who believes that Research Misconduct may have occurred may contact the Associate Vice-President, Research Services (AVPRS) to request referral to an advisor, who will provide confidential assistance or advice prior to the potential complainant deciding whether to submit a written allegation. The advisor will be appointed by the AVPRS.

1.2.  Conflict of Interest

1.2.1.  If any of those involved in the decision-making process under this policy (e.g., Dean, AVPRS, Vice-President Research) are in, or are perceived to be in a conflict of interest with respect to the allegation, the decision regarding the conflict of interest shall be made by the person in the position of next highest authority.

1.3.  Allegation(s)

1.3.1.  Submission of an Allegation(s)

1.3.1.1. A Complainant may make an Allegation by submitting the Allegation in writing to the AVPRS. In the event that an Allegation is received by another person, the Allegation shall immediately be referred to the AVPRS. 

1.3.1.2. An Allegation must provide sufficient detail including relevant parties, witnesses, dates, locations, publications, and any other relevant information.

1.3.1.3. The AVPRS will provide the Dean of the college in which the Respondent is appointed a copy of the Allegation if not already received.

1.3.1.4. Allegations submitted anonymously will only proceed if the relevant facts are otherwise independently verifiable without further detail needed from the anonymous Complainant, and if the anonymity of the Complainant does not prejudice the fairness of the Investigation. If the AVPRS, in consultation with the Dean decides to proceed with an anonymous Allegation of Research Misconduct, an anonymous Complainant will not be entitled to participate in the procedures set out in this Policy or receive notice of the status of the Allegation or a report of the outcome of any Inquiry or Investigation conducted in respect of the Allegation, even if the relevant facts of the Allegation are independently verifiable.

1.3.1.5. On receiving the Allegation, and in consultation with the Dean of the college of the Respondent, the AVPRS shall review the Allegation to determine:

1.3.1.5.1. If there is jurisdiction under this Policy. If the allegation does not fall under this Policy, the AVPRS shall advise the Complainant of the appropriate process.

1.3.1.5.2. Whether the Allegation is a Responsible Allegation. If it is determined that the Allegation is not a Responsible Allegation, the AVPRS shall advise the Complainant that the Allegation will be dismissed and why.

1.3.1.6. If multiple Complainants make essentially the same set of Allegations, each Complainant shall submit a written signed statement.  The AVPRS may request of all Complainants that they proceed as one amalgamated Investigation; however, the Allegations can proceed with each Complainant treated separately.

1.3.1.7. If a Complaint has already undergone an Inquiry, Investigation, or both, and the matter has been closed and accepted by the relevant Tri-Agency, the University will not pursue the same Allegation unless new and compelling evidence that could not reasonably have been available at the time of the initial Allegation is brought forward, which will be determined by the AVPRS through the review of documentation of previous Investigations.  The University may take action against a Complainant(s) who continues to submit Allegations in Bad Faith, or when a determination under this Policy has been made that the conduct initially complained of did not constitute Research Misconduct and the subsequent complaint(s) relate to the same or substantially the same kind of conduct.

1.3.1.8. An Allegation of Research Misconduct may be withdrawn at any time but must be done in writing. The withdrawal of an Allegation of Research Misconduct may not stop the Inquiry or Investigation process if the University has a reasonable belief that:

1.3.1.8.1. Research Misconduct has occurred; and/or

1.3.1.8.2. the withdrawal of the allegation may prejudice the Respondent.

1.3.1.9. Nothing in this Policy precludes the Relevant VP, or President, from initiating an Inquiry under this Policy in circumstances in which they reasonably believe that Research Misconduct may have occurred.

1.3.1.10. The AVPRS is responsible for determining whether there is an obligation to report the Allegation to external funding agencies under their policy requirements. If appropriate, the AVPRS may take interim measures to protect the integrity of the Research or the administration of sponsor’(s) funds pending the final determination of the Allegation. These interim measures may include, but are not limited to, freezing or limiting financial accounts or restricting access to Research locations or records. 

1.3.1.11. For Allegations of Research Misconduct  sponsored wholly or in part by external funding agencies and organizations such as NSERC, SSHRC, CIHR or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services/ U.S. Public Health Service (PHS), if deemed by the AVPRS to be required, any additional requirements of those agencies pertaining to the institutional Inquiry process, Investigation process, timelines and reporting beyond those outlined in this Policy will be followed and met.

1.3.2.  Inquiry Stage

1.3.2.1. If the Allegation is under the jurisdiction of this Policy and it is a Responsible Allegation, the Dean shall provide a copy of the written allegation to the Respondent within three (3) working days along with a copy of the relevant Research Misconduct policy and procedures with a copy to the AVPRS.

1.3.2.2. Within ten (10) working days of receiving the written Allegation, the Dean shall initiate an Inquiry to determine whether the Allegation appears sufficiently founded to warrant an Investigation: 

1.3.2.2.1. The Dean will appoint the Associate Dean Research and Graduate Studies (ADRGS) to assist with the Inquiry stage. If the ADRGS has a conflict of interest in the outcome of the matter, or there is a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of the ADRGS, the Dean will appoint a member of their executive with relevant experience.

1.3.2.2.2. The Dean will inform Faculty and Academic Staff Relations (FASR) where the Respondent is a faculty member or academic staff; Human Resources where the Respondent is non-academic staff; and the Assistant Vice-President Graduate and Post-Doctoral Studies where the Respondent is a graduate student or post-doctoral scholar. Appropriate employment agreement and student policies will be followed.

1.3.2.2.3. The Inquiry usually involves interviewing the Respondent and Complainant, if applicable, and potentially key witnesses, as well as an examination of relevant records and materials. The scope of the Inquiry does not normally include conducting exhaustive interviews and analyses. The Inquiry will be conducted in accordance with the relevant provisions of applicable employee groups and agreements (e.g., UGFA Collective Agreement).

1.3.2.3. Should the Dean be unable to fulfill their role, the ADRGS, in consultation with the AVPRS, will complete the Inquiry.

1.3.2.4. The Inquiry should be completed within twenty (20) working days of the Inquiry being initiated. Under extenuating circumstances an extension may be requested from the AVPRS.

1.3.2.5. Within ten (10) working days of completion of the Inquiry, the Dean shall decide whether to dismiss the Allegation or proceed to Investigation of the allegation (“Dean’s Decision”). A copy of the Dean’s Decision, typically excluding reasons, will be provided to the Complainant, if applicable.

1.3.2.6. Within ten (10) working days of completion of the Inquiry, the Dean will provide a report which includes the reasons for the Dean’s Decision and a summary of the evidence used to support the Dean’s Decision (“Inquiry Report”). A draft of the Inquiry Report shall be submitted to the AVPRS for review. The final version of the Inquiry Report will be submitted to the AVPRS and the Respondent. The Inquiry Report shall include a summary of the Allegation(s), the Respondent’s response to the Allegation(s), individuals involved (unless anonymous), relevant evidence, and the Dean’s Decision whether to proceed with an Investigation based on the evidence.

1.3.2.7. If the Dean’s Decision is to proceed with an Investigation, the Dean will meet with the Respondent and, if desired, their bargaining unit or employee association.  Such a meeting should take place within ten (10) working days of the receipt of the Inquiry Report.

1.3.2.8. The Allegation may be resolved during the Inquiry, with approval from the AVPRS, under the following circumstances:

1.3.2.8.1. the Allegation is deemed an Honest Error;

1.3.2.8.2. the Allegation is not a Responsible Allegation or the Allegation is under the jurisdiction of a different policy; or

1.3.2.8.3. the Respondent admits to and accepts responsibility for the alleged breach of responsible conduct of Research and further Investigation would not uncover any new information pertinent to the matter.

1.3.2.9. Should Section 1.3.2.8.3 occur, the Dean, in consultation with the AVPRS will:

1.3.2.9.1. consider if the Respondent’s admission is sufficient for a finding of breach of responsible conduct of Research;

1.3.2.9.2. inform the Complainant (if applicable); and

1.3.2.9.3. take appropriate steps in accordance with the Respondent’s employment agreement or collective agreement to address the breach (see Section 1.4).

1.3.3.  Investigation Stage

1.3.3.1. If it is determined that an Investigation is warranted pursuant to Section 1.3.2 and typically no later than fifteen (15) working days from receipt of the Inquiry Report, the AVPRS will be responsible for establishing an Investigative Committee that shall normally include, at a minimum:

1.3.3.1.1. the AVPRS (or their designate, normally the Associate Vice President Agri-Food Alliance, or Assistant Vice-President Research Innovation and Knowledge Mobilization) who has experience with Research Misconduct and/or Research-related policies;

1.3.3.1.2. a member of the Senate Research Board, who is member of the University of Guelph Faculty Association; and

1.3.3.1.3. an external member with Research-related expertise and/or appropriate administrative background with no current affiliation with the University to serve on the Committee. 

1.3.3.2. At least one member of the Investigative Committee shall have expertise in the discipline of the Respondent. This may be one of the members above, or one additional member with expertise in the discipline.

1.3.3.3. Once formed, the Investigative Committee shall choose a Chair.

1.3.3.4. The Respondent and Complainant will be advised of the composition of the Investigation Committee and will have five (5) working days to challenge, in writing, the participation of one or more individual(s) on the Investigation Committee on the grounds that the individual(s) has a conflict of interest in the outcome of the matter or that there is a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of that individual(s).  If the challenge is with respect to the external member, the AVPRS will consider the challenge and reply in writing either upholding it or denying it. If the challenge is with respect to other Investigative Committee members, it shall be dealt in accordance with Section 1.2. In either case, the written challenge and response will become part of the record for the Investigative stage.

1.3.3.5. The Investigation Committee shall have the discretion to establish in each case an Investigation procedure suitable to the circumstances, provided that in every case, its discretion will be exercised in accordance with the following practices:

1.3.3.5.1. use diligent efforts to ensure 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 the allegation;

1.3.3.5.2. take reasonable steps to ensure an impartial and unbiased Investigation;

1.3.3.5.3. provide the Respondent and the Complainant opportunity to supply evidence;

1.3.3.5.4. interview Witnesses identified by the Respondent and/or Complainant, and/or any other individuals who have information regarding any relevant aspects of the Investigation and/or individuals the Investigation Committee determines would provide evidence germane to the Investigation;

1.3.3.5.5. invite one or more arms-length Experts to assist it in the analysis of evidence, if deemed necessary;

1.3.3.5.6. give opportunity to the Respondent, Complainant, and/or Witness(es) to be accompanied by an Advisor of their choosing, subject to the Investigative Committee determining there is no conflict of interest applicable to the person acting as Advisor;

1.3.3.5.7. proceed with the Investigation in the absence of the Respondent or such other person fails to attend the Investigation without reasonable explanation;

1.3.3.5.8. diligently pursue all significant issues relevant to the Investigation and, if deemed necessary, expand the scope of the Investigation as the result of new Allegations or information that arises during the Investigation; and

1.3.3.5.9. keep the Investigation confidential to the extent possible.

1.3.3.6. Within sixty-five (65) working days of the establishment of the Investigation Committee, the Investigation Committee shall issue a Preliminary Report to the Respondent containing the following:

1.3.3.6.1. the full complaint;

1.3.3.6.2. a list of the Investigative Committee members and their credentials;

1.3.3.6.3. a list of the individuals who contributed evidentiary materials to the Investigation or were interviewed as Witnesses;

1.3.3.6.4. a summary of relevant evidence;

1.3.3.6.5. a description of the process and timelines for the Investigation;

1.3.3.6.6. a summary of the Respondent’s response to the Allegations;

1.3.3.6.7. a summary of the Investigative Committee’s findings and reasons for the findings;

1.3.3.6.8. a determination of whether Research Misconduct occurred; and

1.3.3.6.9. if applicable, recommendations on Remedial Action to be taken to correct the scientific or scholarly record in the matter in question and/or recommendations of changes to procedures or practices to avoid similar situations in the future, which may include, without limitation:

• requiring that the Respondent correct the Research record and provide proof that the Research record has either been corrected or withdrawn from all pending relevant publications (including theses);
• notifying publishers of publications in which the involved Research was reported;
• withdrawing all pending relevant publications;
• notifying co-investigators, collaborators, students and other project personnel of the decision;
• ensuring the unit(s) involved is (are) informed of appropriate practices for promoting the proper conduct of Research;
• requiring the co-supervision of graduate students;
• withdrawing specific Research Privileges;
• restitution of funds as appropriate;
• informing any outside funding agencies or institutions of the results of the Investigation and of actions to be taken; and/or
• informing any sponsor of the Research that is the subject of the Complaint of the results of the Inquiry and of actions to be taken.

1.3.3.6.10. The Preliminary Report will not include recommendations with respect to Disciplinary Actions to be taken in respect of the Respondent under applicable University policies or procedures.

1.3.3.7. A copy of the Preliminary Report will be provided to the Vice-President Research.

1.3.3.8. If the Preliminary Report upholds the Allegation in whole or in part, within ten (10) working days of the delivery of the Preliminary Report to the Respondent, the Investigative Committee together with the appropriate Human Resources or Faculty and Academic Staff Relations representatives, will meet with the Respondent, and bargaining unit or employee association as applicable, to discuss the Preliminary Report.  At the meeting, the Respondent will be invited to provide a written response within ten (10) working days regarding factual errors in the Preliminary Report, which will be appended to the Preliminary Report. Subsequent to the receipt of the Respondent’s response, if any, the Investigation Committee may carry out further Investigation within fifteen (15) working days regarding information arising out of the Respondent’s response, which may form part of the Investigation Committee Report (see Section 1.3.4).

1.3.4. Investigation Committee Report

1.3.4.1. The Investigation Committee will issue the Investigation Committee Report that will comprise the Final Decision, any required revisions to the Preliminary Report and the following information within ten (10) working days of the completion of the Investigation:

1.3.4.1.1. the full complaint;

1.3.4.1.2. a list of the Investigative Committee members and their credentials;

1.3.4.1.3. a list of the individuals who contributed evidentiary materials to the Investigation or were interviewed as Witnesses;

1.3.4.1.4. a summary of relevant evidence;

1.3.4.1.5. a description of the process and timelines for the Investigation;

1.3.4.1.6. a summary of the Respondent’s response to the Allegations;

1.3.4.1.7. a summary of the Investigative Committee’s findings and reasons for the findings; and

1.3.4.1.8. if applicable, recommendations for Remedial Action (see Section 1.3.3.6.9).

1.3.4.2. A copy of the Investigation Committee Report will be provided to the Respondent and the Vice-President Research. The latter will provide feedback to the Investigation Committee as to whether proper procedures have been followed within five (5) working days. A copy of the Final Decision will be provided to the Complainant.

1.4. Action on Substantiated Allegations

1.4.1.  Disciplinary Action

1.4.1.1.  If the Respondent is a member of a bargaining unit or employee association, decisions concerning discipline associated with a finding of Research Misconduct will be made according to the requirements of the applicable collective agreement. For faculty who are members of UGFA, decisions on discipline will be made by the Provost and Vice-President Academic, considering the Investigation Committee Report. If the Respondent is a faculty member, but not a member of a bargaining unit, disciplinary measures will be determined by the Vice-President (Research) in consultation with the Provost and Vice-President Academic. If the Respondent is a member of staff, but not a member of a bargaining unit, disciplinary measures will be determined by the Vice-President (Research) in consultation with the appropriate administrator (i.e., Relevant VP). In the case of students and post-doctoral scholars, any Disciplinary Actions will be determined by the Dean responsible for the student or post-doctoral scholars in consultation with the AVPRS.

1.4.1.2. The Relevant VP shall notify the Dean and/or AVPRS of their decision regarding discipline in writing within fifteen (15) working days of receipt of the Investigation Committee Report. 

1.4.2.  Remedial Action

1.4.2.1. If the Final Decision upholds the Allegation in whole or in part, the Dean and AVPRS, following consultation with Human Resources or Faculty and Academic Staff Relations if appropriate, will finalise the required Remedial Action.

1.4.3.  Final Report

1.4.3.1. The Dean and AVPRS will prepare a Final Report, which will include the Investigation Committee Report, Remedial Action and Disciplinary Action, if any. The Dean and appropriate Human Resources or Faculty and Academic Staff Relations representatives, shall meet with the Respondent, and bargaining unit or employee association as applicable, to provide the Final Report.

1.5. Appeals

Complainants do not have the right to appeal any decision under this Policy.

1.5.1.  Appeal of Final Decision or of Remedial Action

1.5.1.1. The Respondent may appeal the Final Decision, or the decision on Remedial Action, or both, to the Vice-President Research. The appeal must be submitted within ten (10) working days of receipt of the Final Report. Appeals must be made in writing and set out the grounds for appeal. Appeals will only be considered on the grounds of procedural error, bias, or if substantive new evidence has arisen that was not previously available and would likely have affected the decision under appeal.

1.5.1.2. The appeal shall go to an ad hoc Appeal Committee to be created and chaired by the Vice-President Research within ten (10) working days of receiving the appeal. The Appeal Committee will be composed of three individuals (in addition to the Chair) who may include Associate Deans of Research and Graduate Studies. At least one member shall have expertise in the discipline of the Respondent. No member should have been involved in any earlier step of the Allegation, Inquiry, or Investigation, nor be known to be in any actual or potential conflict of interest with the Respondent. The Respondent will be advised of the composition of the Appeal Committee and will have five (5) working days to challenge, in writing to the Vice-President Research, the participation of one or more individual(s) on the Appeal Committee on the grounds that the individual(s) has a potential conflict of interest in the outcome of the matter or that there is a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of that individual(s). The ad hoc Appeal Committee shall establish such procedures as may be necessary for a fair determination of the appeal and will communicate them to the Respondent in a timely manner. The Respondent may be accompanied by an Advisor of their choosing, subject to the Appeal Committee determining there is no conflict of interest applicable to the person acting as Advisor.

1.5.1.3. The Appeal Committee will have access to all the reports of the Investigation Committee. If new substantive evidence is introduced, the Appeal Committee may investigate it further. The Appeal Committee shall make an Appeal Decision (i.e., a determination of whether Research Misconduct occurred) normally within twenty (20) working days from the receipt of the appeal Appeals will only be judged on the grounds of procedural error, bias, or if substantive new evidence has arisen that was not previously available and would likely have affected the decision under appeal. The Appeal Decision shall be final with no further appeal.

1.5.2.  Appeal of Discipline or Process

1.5.2.1. Respondents who are members of a University bargaining unit or employee association and who dispute the process, remedial action, or Disciplinary Action decided by the Provost and Vice-President (Academic) or Relevant VP under Section 1.4.1 may have processes available to them under the relevant collective or employment agreement.

1.5.2.2. Respondents who are students and who wish to dispute any Disciplinary Action, may appeal to the Senate Committee on Student Petitions.

1.5.2.3. Respondents who do not fall under Sections 1.5.2.1 and 1.5.2.2  and who wish to dispute any Disciplinary Action, may appeal to the Vice-President Research.

1.6.  Final Decision of No Research Misconduct

1.6.1.  When an Investigation determines that no Research Misconduct occurred, in addition to the provision of the Final Decision to the Respondent and Complainant, the AVPRS in consultation with the Investigation Committee, Dean, and UGFA (if applicable) shall protect the reputation and credibility of the Respondent including written notification of findings to all agencies, publishers, or individuals who are known by the University to have been involved  in the Allegation or the Investigation.

2. Record of Decisions

2.1.  Recording of the Final Decision and Remedial Action

Records of the Final Decision and decision regarding Remedial Action will be held according to the status of the Respondent as follows:  

2.1.1.  for Respondents who are members of UGFA, records will be held in accordance with the UGFA Collective Agreement;

2.1.2.  for Respondents who are University staff, records will be held in the Human Resources Division in accordance with relevant University policies and collective agreements;

2.1.3.  for Respondents who are University students, records will be held in the Registrar’s Office or Office of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies;

2.1.4.  for Respondents who do not fall under Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2, and 2.1.3, records will be held by the Office of the Vice-President (Research) ad infinitum.

2.2.  Recording of Disciplinary Decisions

2.2.1.  Records related to decision of discipline by a Relevant VP under Section 1.4.1 will be held in accordance with applicable collective agreements, employee agreements, or other relevant University policies or practices.

3. Reporting to External Bodies

3.1.  Compliance with Regulatory Bodies

3.1.1.  The University shall comply with the relevant reporting requirements for Research Misconduct of external funding agencies and organizations such as NSERC, SSHRC and CIHR and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services/U.S. Public Health Service (PHS). The University will, to the extent required under these reporting requirements, submit a report on each Investigation it conducts in response to an allegation of breaches related to a funding application submitted to the applicable agency or to an activity funded by an agency.

3.2.  Report Content

3.2.1.  Pursuant to Section 3.1, the AVPRS, will be responsible for the submission of any such report. Subject to any applicable laws including privacy laws, the report may include the following information:

3.2.1.1. the specific allegation(s), a summary of the finding(s) and reasons for the finding(s);

3.2.1.2. the process and timelines followed for the Inquiry and/or Investigation;

3.2.1.3. the Respondent’s response to the Allegation, Investigation and findings, and any measures the Respondent has taken to rectify the breach; and

3.2.1.4. the Investigation Committee’s decisions and recommendations, and actions taken by the University.

3.2.2.  The report will not include any personal information about the Researcher, or any other person, that is not material to the University’s findings.

3.3.   Reporting to Regulatory Bodies and Confidentiality

3.3.1.  Neither Researchers nor the University will enter into any confidentiality agreements or other agreements related to an Inquiry or Investigation that prevent the University from meeting Research Misconduct reporting requirements to funding sponsors, in particular to the Tri-Agencies through Secretariat for Responsible Conduct of Research and the U.S. Office of Research Integrity.

3.4.  Reporting to Senate

3.4.1.  An annual report summarizing the number of Allegations of Research Misconduct and their disposition will be provided to Senate for information.