This communication is to remind the research community of UMDNJ about the University's policy on reporting and dealing with instances of research misconduct.

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification or plagiarism in proposing, performing or reviewing research, or in reporting research results. Research misconduct does not include honest error, conflicting data, differences of opinion, or differences in interpretations or judgments about data or experimental design. Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting them. Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record. Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results or words without giving appropriate credit. Authorship or credit disputes, and "self-plagiarism" of an author's work from one paper to another or from a paper to a grant application are not ordinarily considered plagiarism. The complete University policy on research misconduct is available on the web at
www.umdnj.edu/oppmweb/Policies/HTML/AcademicAff/00-01-20-60_00.html.

Campus Committees on Research Integrity are in place for Newark, Piscataway/New Brunswick, and Camden/Stratford. The role of these committees is to receive and act upon allegations of research misconduct. The names, addresses and telephone numbers for all Campus Committee members are listed below.

Allegations of research misconduct are handled in a multi-stage process. In the first stage, the Campus Committee Chair performs a preliminary assessment to determine whether the allegation falls within the definition of research misconduct as set forth in the federal regulations and in the University policy, and whether the allegation is sufficiently credible and specific so that potential evidence of research misconduct may be identified to proceed with an inquiry. The second stage is an inquiry, conducted by the Campus Committee. This is an information-gathering and fact-finding activity to determine if an allegation of research misconduct has substance and warrants further investigation. If the committee finds after the inquiry that sufficient credible evidence of research misconduct exists, the Committee makes a recommendation to the Executive Vice President for Academic and Clinical Affairs that a formal investigation be conducted according to procedures outlined in the University policy. The person making the allegation and the respondent are informed of the outcome of the inquiry. If the Executive Vice President for Academic and Clinical Affairs decides to conduct an investigation, he/she appoints a special panel for this purpose. The investigation is a formal, thorough and documented examination and evaluation of all relevant facts, research records and other evidence to determine if a recommendation should be made that research misconduct has occurred. The investigative panel sends its recommendation to the Executive Vice President for Academic and Clinical Affairs who makes the final decision and takes appropriate action.

Reporting Research Misconduct
Should an individual become aware of or suspect research misconduct, the details of the misconduct should be reported, in writing if possible, to any member of the appropriate Campus Committee on Research Integrity. Members of your Campus Committee may, in addition, be contacted informally at any time. Initially, the identity of a complainant can be kept confidential. Should the allegation lead to an inquiry or investigation, testimony by the complainant may be required. The University is committed to the protection of good-faith whistleblowers. However, allegations which prove to be untrue and which are found to have been made in bad faith (i.e., the intentional filing of an allegation which the complainant knew or had reason to know was false; or an allegation made with reckless disregard for or willful ignorance of facts that would disprove the allegation) will be subject to appropriate disciplinary actions by the University.

CAMPUS COMMITTEES ON RESEARCH INTEGRITY
(TO WHOM ALLEGATIONS OF RESEARCH MISCONDUCT SHOULD BE MADE)

UMDNJ RESEARCH OMBUDSPERSONS

What is a "Research Ombudsperson" at UMDNJ?
Research ombudspersons at UMDNJ are senior faculty members with extensive research experience and stature within the research community who are designated by their deans to hear problems, concerns, complaints, disputes and questions from any individual (faculty, non-faculty staff, postdocs, housestaff, students) concerning research activities, and to act in a neutral and confidential role to help achieve equitable and acceptable solutions. The research ombudsperson has the support of his/her dean and of the University's Office of Academic Affairs, and can approach any individual within the University in search of solutions. He/she does not represent either the individual or the school or University, but impartially considers the interests of all parties. Solutions are achieved by recommendations to the party or parties, not decisions or actions by the ombudsperson. Methods used to achieve solutions include sympathetic listening, influence, persuasion, advice, conciliation, referral, negotiation and/or mediation. The research ombuds role is a resource additional or alternative to that provided by department chairs, research mentors, research deans and deans.

Confidentiality:
Confidentiality of visits to and information shared with the research ombudsperson will be maintained to the extent possible. No permanent or official records, files or notes will be kept. However, there are limits to the confidentiality of the research ombudsperson role at UMDNJ, including:

	threat of harm to an individual or individuals
	threat of harm to the University
	evidence of a potential crime, research misconduct or serious breach of University policy.

While appropriate action must be taken in the above situations, anonymity of the reporter, if desired, will be maintained if possible.

Relationship to Campus Committees on Research Integrity:

	If an issue brought to the research ombudsperson is a report of potential research misconduct, the ombudsperson will make every effort to ensure that the appropriate Committee on Research Integrity receives the information, maintaining anonymity of the complainant if desired and if possible.
	If an issue brought first to a Committee on Research Integrity does not fall under the University's definition of research misconduct, the Committee can offer to refer the matter to the research ombudsperson.

Problems that do not involve research:
Research ombudspersons are prepared to help with issues and problems concerning research. Other individuals and offices at the Schools, patient care units and University, including each School's student/housestaff ombudsperson, are dedicated to assisting individuals with other types of issues, such as general interpersonal problems, employment matters, sexual harassment, discrimination, academic problems, health/mental health/substance abuse, legal questions, crime, etc. The research ombudspersons will offer to refer individuals with non-research-related problems to these other offices or individuals as appropriate.

UMDNJ'S RESEARCH OMBUDSPERSONS