- Initiation and Purpose of the Inquiry
Following the preliminary assessment, if the Research Integrity Officer determines that the allegation provides sufficient information to allow specific follow-up, he or she will immediately initiate the inquiry process. In initiating the inquiry, the Research Integrity Officer will clearly identify the original allegation and any related issues to be evaluated. The purpose of the inquiry is to make a preliminary evaluation of the available evidence and testimony of the respondent, whistleblower, and key witnesses to determine whether there is sufficient evidence of possible research misconduct to warrant an investigation. The purpose of the inquiry is not to reach a conclusion about whether misconduct definitely occurred or who was responsible. The findings of the inquiry must be set forth in an inquiry report.
- Sequestration of the Research Records
After determining that an allegation falls within the definition of misconduct within the relevant discipline and/or the funding source’s definition, the Research Integrity Officer must ensure that all original research records and materials relevant to the allegation are immediately secured. The Research Integrity Officer may consult with the funding agency (if any) for advice and assistance in this regard.
- Appointment of the Inquiry Committee
The Research Integrity Officer, in consultation with other institutional officials as appropriate, will appoint an inquiry committee and committee chair within 10 days of the initiation of the inquiry.
The inquiry committee should consist of individuals who do not have real or apparent conflicts of interest in the case, are unbiased, and have the necessary expertise to evaluate the evidence and issues related to the allegation, interview the principals and key witnesses, and conduct the inquiry. These individuals may be subject matter experts, administrators, lawyers, or other qualified persons, and they may be from inside or outside the institution.
The Research Integrity Officer will notify the respondent of the proposed committee membership within 10 days. If the respondent submits a written objection to any appointed member of the inquiry committee based on bias or conflict of interest within five days, the Research Integrity Officer will determine whether to replace the challenged member with a qualified substitute.
- Charge to the Committee and the First Meeting
The Research Integrity Officer will prepare a charge for the inquiry committee that describes the allegations and any related issues identified during the allegation assessment. This document will state that the purpose of the inquiry is to make a preliminary evaluation of the evidence and the testimony of the respondent, whistleblower, and key witnesses to determine whether there is sufficient evidence of possible research misconduct to warrant an investigation as may be required by College policy or funding source regulations. The purpose is not to determine whether research misconduct occurred or who was responsible, but to evaluate the reliability of existing evidence and testimony. If the evidence is determined reliable and sufficient, an investigation may be launched.
At the inquiry committee's first meeting, the Research Integrity Officer will read the charge, discuss the allegations and related issues, review the appropriate procedures for conducting the inquiry, assist the committee with organizing the inquiry, and answer questions raised by the committee. The Research Integrity Officer and institutional counsel will be available to advise the committee as needed.
- Inquiry Process
The inquiry committee will normally interview the whistleblower, the respondent(s), and key witnesses as well as examine relevant research records and materials. The inquiry committee will evaluate the evidence and testimony. After consultation with the Research Integrity Officer and institutional counsel, the committee members will decide whether there is sufficient evidence of possible research misconduct to recommend further investigation.