Ohio Administrative Code › Title 3344 - Cleveland State University › Chapter 3344-28 - General Policies on Research Misconduct › Section 3344-28-05 - Inquiry

Current through all regulations passed and filed through July 1, 2024
(A) Purpose of the
			 inquiry
Cleveland state university shall inquire immediately into an
				allegation or other evidence of possible academic research misconduct. The
				purpose of the inquiry is to evaluate the situation to determine whether there
				is sufficient evidence of possible academic research misconduct to warrant an
				investigation. The purpose of the inquiry is not to reach a final conclusion of
				whether misconduct occurred or who was responsible.
(B) Appointment of inquiry committee
If the research integrity officer decides that an inquiry
				should be conducted, the research integrity officer shall initiate the process
				by appointing an inquiry committee within ten days of determining that an
				inquiry is necessary. The inquiry committee shall consist of two or more
				individuals who have no real or apparent conflicts of interest in the case, are
				unbiased, and have appropriate qualifications to evaluate the issues raised and
				to interview the principals and the key witnesses as well as to conduct the
				inquiry. Individuals chosen to serve on the inquiry committee may be
				scientists, subject matter experts, or other qualified persons, and they may be
				from inside or outside the university. The inquiry committee selects its own
				chair.
(C) The research
			 integrity officer shall notify the respondent of the proposed committee
			 membership within ten days of making the determination that an inquiry is
			 required. If the respondent submits a written objection to any appointed member
			 of the inquiry committee based on bias or conflict of interest within five
			 working days of receiving the names of the inquiry committee members, the
			 research integrity officer shall determine whether to replace the challenged
			 member with a qualified substitute. The respondent retains the right to lodge a
			 written objection to any substitute within two working days of receipt of
			 notice.
(D) Charge to inquiry
			 committee
The charge to the inquiry committee should specifically limit
				its scope, as required by the "PHS" regulation, to evaluating the facts to
				determine only whether there is sufficient evidence of academic research
				misconduct to warrant an investigation.
(E) The research integrity officer shall
			 define the subject matter of the inquiry in a written charge to the inquiry
			 committee that describes the allegations and any related issues identified
			 during the allegation assessment, defines academic research misconduct, and
			 identifies the name of the respondent. The charge shall state that the purpose
			 of the inquiry committee is to make a preliminary evaluation of the evidence
			 and testimony of the respondent, complainant, and key witnesses to determine
			 only whether there is sufficient evidence of academic research misconduct to
			 warrant an investigation. The purpose is not to determine whether academic
			 research misconduct definitely occurred or who was responsible.
(F) A copy of the charge to the inquiry
			 committee shall be sent to the respondent.
(G) At the inquiry committee's first meeting,
			 the research integrity officer shall review the charge with the committee and
			 shall discuss the allegation(s), any related issues, and the appropriate
			 procedures for conducting the inquiry. It is the responsibility of the research
			 integrity officer to assist the inquiry committee with plans for organizing the
			 inquiry and to answer any questions raised by the inquiry committee members.
			 The research integrity officer and university legal counsel shall be present or
			 available throughout the inquiry process to advise the inquiry committee as
			 needed. The committee also has the right to consult any additional experts it
			 deems necessary.
(H) During the
			 inquiry, if additional information becomes available that substantially changes
			 the subject matter of the inquiry or would suggest additional respondents or
			 require a modification of the initial charge, the inquiry committee shall
			 notify the research integrity officer, who shall determine whether it is
			 necessary to notify the respondent of the new subject matter or to provide
			 notice to additional respondents, to modify the original charge, or to initiate
			 a new inquiry rather than continuing the one currently underway. The respondent
			 shall be notified of any significant change.
(I) Inquiry process
An inquiry normally shall involve interviewing the complainant,
				the respondent, all the key witnesses, as well as examining relevant research
				records and materials. At the beginning of the inquiry process, the inquiry
				committee normally shall invite the respondent to prepare a brief written
				response to the allegations received from the complainant.
(J) Time limit for completing inquiry report
The inquiry committee normally shall complete the inquiry and
				submit its report in writing to the research integrity officer and the
				respondent no more than sixty calendar days following the initiation of the
				inquiry process, with the initiation being defined as the date upon which the
				committee first meets. If the research integrity officer approves an extension
				of tills time limit, the reason for the extension shall be entered into the
				records of the case and the report. The respondent and complainant also shall
				be notified of the extension and its justification.
(K) Inquiry report contents
A written report shall be prepared that states: the name and
				title of each of the inquiry committee members and additional experts
				consulted, if any; the allegations; the "PHS" or other external support; the
				initial charge; a summary of the inquiry process used; a list of the research
				records reviewed; summaries of interviews; a description of the evidence in
				sufficient detail to demonstrate whether an investigation is recommended and
				whether any other actions should be taken if an investigation is not
				recommended; the comments to the first draft from the complainant and
				respondent; and the final report.
(L) Comments by respondent and complainant
(1) The individual(s) against whom the
			 allegation was made is to be given a copy of the report by the research
			 integrity officer. If their identity is known, the person(s) who raised
			 the
(2) Allegation shall be
			 provided with only those sections of the report that address their role and
			 opinions in the inquiry as well as a summary of the inquiry findings. Any
			 comments that the complainant and/or the respondent submit on the report shall
			 become part of the inquiry record.