VI. RESEARCH AND CREATIVE ENDEAVOR (Cont.)

VIII. Investigation

a. Committee. The Responsible Administrator shall initiate an Investigation within 30 days of the Inquiry Panel's determination, or the decision of the VPRGS, that an Investigation is warranted. The Responsible Administrator shall appoint an Investigative Committee of not less than three members, chosen for their pertinent expertise. While Investigative Committees will usually be composed of University faculty, they may also include persons other than University faculty when the Responsible Administrator determines that such persons have experience or expertise useful to the Investigation. When a student is the Respondent, at least one student shall be a member of the Investigative Committee. The Investigative Committee shall select one of its members to act as its chairperson.

b. Notifications.

(1) Notification - Internal. The RIO shall notify the Provost, the VPRGS, and the General Counsel of the initiation of the Investigation.

(2) Notification - Funding Source. When the alleged Misconduct involves Research or Creative Activity supported by an external (non-University) funder, the RIO shall also notify the source of the funding of the Investigation before the start of the Investigation. Such notification shall include the name of the Respondent, the general nature of the Allegation, and the relevant grant application, grant number, or other identification for the support.

c. Charge. The Responsible Administrator, with the assistance of the RIO, shall draft a Charge to the Investigative Committee based on the Inquiry report and, if one was issued, the decision of the VPRGS. The Responsible Administrator shall submit a copy of that Charge, the Preliminary Assessment referral, the Inquiry report, and, if one was issued, the overruling decision of the VPRGS to the Investigative Committee and the Respondent at the beginning of the Investigation.

d. Briefing. Before the Investigation begins, an attorney from the Office of the General Counsel and the RIO shall brief the Responsible Administrator and the Investigative Committee on these Procedures, other relevant University regulations, and legal and procedural issues that the Investigative Committee and the Responsible Administrator are likely to encounter in conducting the Investigation.

e. Standard for Determination. The Investigative Committee shall determine if Misconduct occurred, if the Respondent was responsible for it, and the extent, gravity, and actual and potential consequences of the Misconduct. To conclude that Misconduct occurred, a majority of the members of the Investigative Committee must find:

(1) a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant research community; and

(2) that the Misconduct was committed intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly; and

(3) that the Allegation was proven by a Preponderance of the Evidence.

f. Evidence Review. The Investigative Committee shall examine all Evidence that it deems pertinent to the Allegation. At its discretion, the Investigative Committee may also inspect laboratories and examine laboratory specimens, materials, procedures, and methods.

The Respondent will be provided copies of, or supervised access to, all Evidence made available to the Investigative Committee.

g. Testimony.

(1) Interviews or Hearing. When possible, the Investigative Committee shall conduct interviews or a hearing with the Complainant, the Respondent, and other persons, if any, who have material information regarding the Allegation.

(2) Transcript. The RIO shall arrange for the preparation of a transcript of each witness's interview or hearing testimony and shall send the transcript to the witness for comment or correction. The witness shall have seven days after his or her receipt of the transcript to deliver comments on, and corrections of any errors in, the transcript to the RIO. Both the transcript and any such comments and corrections shall be made part of the Misconduct Proceeding Records. The RIO shall give the Respondent a copy of the corrected transcript of any interview or hearing testimony.

h. Assistance for Committee. If the Investigative Committee decides that it needs special scientific or technical expertise to evaluate an Allegation, it shall so advise the RIO, who shall secure for the Investigative Committee the assistance that it requests.

i. RIO and Responsible Administrator. Neither the RIO nor the Responsible Administrator shall participate in the deliberations of the Investigative Committee or vote on whether Misconduct occurred. The Investigative Committee may request the assistance of the RIO during its deliberations and in the preparation of the Investigation report, but shall not seek the RIO's opinion as to whether Misconduct occurred.

j. Timing. The Responsible Administrator and Investigative Committee shall use their best efforts to complete the Investigation within 120 days of its inception.

(1) Extension. If the Investigation cannot be completed in that period, the Responsible Administrator may request an extension from the RIO, in which event the Responsible Administrator shall notify the RIO and the Respondent of the reason for the delay and the date on which the Responsible Administrator expects that the Investigation will be completed. The Responsible Administrator's report about the delay shall be included in the Misconduct Proceeding Records. If the alleged Misconduct involves Research or Creative Activity supported by a federal funding source, the RIO shall notify it of the delay; request an extension; explain why the extension is necessary; and provide a progress report of the Investigative Committee's activities to date and an estimate of the completion date of the Investigation.

(2) Notice of Stay. If the Investigation is stayed and the alleged Misconduct involves Research or Creative Activity supported by a federal funding source, the RIO shall promptly inform it of the date and expected duration of the stay, and of the reason for staying the Investigation.

k. Investigation Report.

(1) Content. The Investigative Committee shall prepare a written Investigation report. It shall include:

(A) the name and position of the Respondent if the Respondent is an employee of the University or the name and degree program of the Respondent if the Respondent is a student at the University;

(B) the relevant application or grant number, if the alleged Misconduct involves sponsored Research or Creative Activity;

(C) a description of the Allegation and the name, if known and not held in confidence, of the Complainant;

(D) a summary of the Evidence reviewed, including, without being limited to, an account of how and from whom it was obtained;

(E) a transcript of each interview or hearing conducted during the Investigation;

(F) for each separate Allegation, an analysis of any explanation offered by the Respondent and the Evidence in support thereof;

(G) an analysis of each separate Allegation pursuant to the standards set forth in Section VIII(e) above;

(H) in an Allegation of serious deviation from accepted practices, a description of the Evidence regarding the accepted practices in the discipline and an analysis of the Allegation in light of such practices;

(I) a copy of these Procedures and any other University policies and procedures relevant to the Investigation.

(2) Misconduct Finding. If the Investigative Committee finds that Misconduct occurred, the Investigation report must include:

(A) the Investigative Committee's determination that:

(i) there was a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant research community; and

(ii) the Misconduct was committed intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly; and

(iii) the Allegation was proven by a Preponderance of the Evidence; and

(B) a determination whether any part of the Research Record needs correction or retraction as a result of the finding of Misconduct, and, if so, an explanation of that correction or retraction.

(3) No Misconduct Found. If the Investigative Committee does not find that Misconduct occurred, it shall explain the reasons for its decision in the Investigation report, with specific reference to the pertinent criteria set forth in Section VIII(e) above.

(4) Draft Report; Comments. The RIO shall send the Respondent a copy of the draft Investigation report. The Respondent may return comments on the draft Investigation report to the RIO within 30 days of receipt of the draft Investigation report. If the Respondent comments on the draft Investigation report, the Investigative Committee shall consider such comments and make any changes in the Investigation report it deems appropriate in light of such comments. The Respondent's comments shall be included as an appendix to the final Investigation report.

(5) VPRGS Opinion on Final Draft Report.

(A) After making any changes it deems appropriate in the draft Investigation report in light of the Respondent's comments, the Investigative Committee shall prepare a final draft of the Investigation report. The RIO shall send the VPRGS a copy of the final draft of the Investigation report, attaching any RIO comments regarding procedural questions and concerns. Within 14 days after delivery of the final draft Investigation report to the VPRGS, the VPRGS may submit an opinion to the RIO, the Responsible Administrator, and the Investigative Committee on either or both of the following two grounds:

(i) If the VPRGS, with advice from the Office of the General Counsel, finds that the final draft Investigation report reflects procedural error by the Investigative Committee in conducting the Investigation, the VPRGS shall so inform the RIO and shall identify and explain the Investigative Committee's procedural error. The Investigative Committee shall either correct the error before completing the Investigation and the Investigation report or shall notify the VPRGS in, or concurrently with the issuance of, the final Investigation report that it does not believe a material procedural error occurred.

(ii) If the VPRGS finds that the Investigative Committee's determination, as set forth in the final draft Investigation report, is substantively wrong because the Evidence does not support the Investigative Committee's determination, then the VPRGS shall so inform the RIO and shall identify and explain the reason the VPRGS believes the Investigative Committee's determination to be in error. The Investigative Committee shall reconsider its decision in light of the opinion by the VPRGS. If the Investigative Committee changes its determination in light of the opinion by the VPRGS, it shall submit a new draft of the Investigation report to the Respondent for further comment. If it does not change its determination in light of the opinion by the VPRGS, the Investigative Committee shall respond to the opinion by the VPRGS in completing the Investigation report and make any changes in the Investigation report that it deems appropriate in light of the opinion by the VPRGS.

(B) The opinion by the VPRGS shall be included as an appendix to the final Investigation report.

(6) Dissent. Any member of the Investigative Committee who does not agree with the determination of the majority of the Investigative Committee may file a dissent to the Investigation report.

l. Bad Faith. If a majority of the members of the Investigative Committee concludes that the Complainant acted in Bad Faith in making the Allegation, or that the Complainant or any witness acted in Bad Faith during any Misconduct Proceeding, the Investigative Committee shall refer the matter for administrative review and appropriate action as set forth in Section XII(a)(1) below.

m. Final Report; VPRGS Overrule.

(1) Copy to VPRGS. The RIO shall send the VPRGS a copy of the final Investigation report.

(2) Overrule; New Investigation. If the VPRGS believes the Investigative Committee's determination is wrong, the VPRGS may, within 14 days of receiving the final Investigation report, issue a written decision to the Responsible Administrator overruling the Investigative Committee for stated cause and instructing the Responsible Administrator to impanel another Investigative Committee immediately.

(3) Second Investigative Committee. If a second Investigative Committee is impaneled, it shall conduct a new Investigation. Subject to the Respondent's right to appeal pursuant to Section IX below, the second Investigative Committee's determination shall be binding.

n. Distribution of Final Report; Comments. The RIO shall send a copy of the final Investigation report to the Respondent. The Respondent may deliver comments on the Investigation report to the RIO within 14 days of the delivery of the final Investigation report to the Respondent. The RIO shall include any such comments in the Misconduct Proceeding Records.

o. Notifications.

(1) Complainant. Promptly after completion of the Investigation, the RIO shall notify the Complainant of its outcome and provide the Complainant with a brief summary of the Investigation report, including those portions of the Investigation report that address the Complainant's role and testimony, if any, in the Investigation.

(2) Federal Support. When the alleged Misconduct involves Research or Creative Activity supported by a federal funding source, the RIO shall submit the Investigation report to it. It may accept the Investigation report, ask for clarification or additional information, which shall be provided by the RIO, or commence its own independent investigation.

(3) Other Funding Source. When the Alleged Misconduct involves Research or Creative Activity supported by a non- federal funding source, the RIO shall notify it of the outcome of the Investigation promptly after the completion of the Investigation and provide it with a brief summary of the Investigation report and such other information, if any, as it may request in response to the RIO's notification.