UNR Faculty Senate Meeting
June 10, 2010
Consent Agenda Item #3a
RATIONALE FOR CHANGE: Revisions update the policy title and amount of a waiver given to UNR
faculty and eligible dependents.
Grants-In-Aid for Summer Session Courses at UNR
2,174
Revised: 5/6/98June 2010
UNR faculty and eligible dependents who register for summer session courses at UNR shall receive a waiver
equivalent to the waiver amount during the previous Spring semester of $125 per credit, provided the
course has a sufficient number of full fee-paying students in order to be offered.
UNR Faculty Senate Meeting
June 10, 2010
Consent Agenda Item #3b
RATIONALE FOR CHANGE: Minor revisions were made in order to clarify policy. Additional language
was added to include privileges afforded to faculty who achieve emeritus status.
Emeritus Status
2,580
Revised: September 2003 May 2010
Emeritus status is to be considered a rank attained afforded to university faculty members and is attained
by a promotion taking place after retirement. The qualifications for this rank are measured in terms of the
individual’s total contribution to the University, based upon both achievement and service. Any member of
the faculty retiring after at least 10 years of full-time service shall be eligible to be recommended by
their supervisor to the relevant dean and/or vice president for emeritus status upon retirement. Any
member of the university faculty who retires after serving the University for less than 10 years may also be
considered for promotion to emeritus status. However, conferral of the emeritus status in this case is regarded
as exceptional. Any member of the faculty retiring after at least 10 years of full-time service shall be
recommended to the president for emeritus status. Recommendations for emeritus status are submitted
on the Recommendation for Emeritus Appointment form, which is routed to the executive vice
president & provost by the dean or administrative officer. The executive vice president & provost then
transmits acts upon the recommendation and informs the faculty member and transmits the appointment
to the president.
Full-time faculty who attain the rank of emeritus faculty are invited to participate in academic events
and ceremonies and are entitled to receive a faculty identification card. Office space may be provided
by individual departments when such space is available.
Emeritus faculty and their dependents are also eligible for grants-in aid.
Faculty who attain the rank of emeritus faculty are afforded certain privileges as outlined below:
University Directory – Emeritus faculty members may be listed in the university’s online Campus
Directory if they choose. Contact information may also be listed if provided by the emeritus faculty.
University Catalog Listing – Emeritus faculty names and official emeritus titles are listed in the
university’s catalog.
Campus ID Card (WolfCard) – Emeritus faculty are entitled to receive a faculty identification card
(WolfCard), which can be obtained at the WolfCard Office in the Joe Crowley Student Union. Emeritus
faculty with WolfCards are entitled to receive Faculty/Staff admission rates, if applicable, for many
university events.
Library Cards – Library cards or WolfCards are required for all transactions. Emeritus faculty can
obtain a library card by showing a letter of affiliation and presenting a photo ID at the library services
desk in the Knowledge Center or at the branch libraries.
Email – Emeritus faculty may elect to maintain their university email account.
Adjunct or Volunteer Status – Emeritus faculty may continue to serve the University in an adjunct or
volunteer capacity, including but not limited to serving on university committees.
Parking – Emeritus faculty may receive free parking and the option to purchase a parking permit for a
closer zone, pending availability.
Office Space – Emeritus faculty may be assigned office space, where available, if the emeritus faculty
member’s planned university activities require the use of office space.
Grants-in-Aid – Emeritus faculty and professional staff, their spouses and financially dependent
children are eligible for grant-in-aid privileges equivalent to those provided in the Board of Regents
Handbook, Title 4, Chapter 3, Section 40.
Lombardi Recreation Pass – UNR campus recreation facilities are available to all emeritus faculty and
retired NSHE employees. Passes must be purchased at the membership desk in the Lombardi
Recreation Center.
Academic Events and Ceremonies – Emeritus faculty are invited to participate in many academic
events and ceremonies.
Lowered Flag – The flags may be lowered upon the death of an emeritus faculty member, at the
discretion of the president.
UNR Faculty Senate Meeting
June 10, 2010
Consent Agenda Item #3c
RATIONALE FOR CHANGE: Revisions were made as a result of an audit in order to bring us into
compliance with the BOR Code.
Pre-Employment Certification
2,641
Revised: June 2010
The Code of the Nevada System of Higher Education (NSHE) requires that all candidates interviewed for academic and
administrative faculty positions execute a Pre-Employment Certification before they are interviewed [Board of Regents
Handbook: Title 2, §5.10.2b]. In addition any candidate hired through a non-search (LOA, grant named, etc.) is required to
complete a Pre-Employment Certification prior to the compliance form being approved.
Any falsification, misrepresentation, or material omission in a candidate’s application materials or making other false or
fraudulent representations in securing employment may be grounds for disqualification of candidacy or (if discovered after
the date of hire) invalidation of any employment contract, without recourse or appeal under Title 2, Chapter 6 of the NSHE
Code.
The following refers to candidates who disclose information on the Pre-Employment Certification.
Criminal History
1. When a candidate discloses a record of a criminal conviction, the search committee coordinator/chair must forward the
form to the Assistant Vice President, Faculty Human Resources.
2. The Assistant Vice President, Faculty Human Resources shall convene a committee of appropriate personnel for the
purpose of determining if the conviction is directly related to the job function and if the candidate should be excluded
from further consideration.
3. Each case will be considered on its own merits including applicability to the position, seriousness of the offense,
recency, and conduct since the offense and other pertinent information. The appointing authority shall be responsible for
making the final decision after considering the recommendations of the Assistant Vice President, Faculty Human
Resources.
Nepotism
1. When a candidate discloses employment of relatives on the Pre-Employment Certification, the search committee
coordinator/chair must forward the form to the Director, Faculty Human Resources.
2. The Director, Faculty Human Resources reviews the candidate’s relationship with other employees as it relates to the
NSHE nepotism policy.
3. If the hiring of a candidate would violate the nepotism policy, the candidate will be excluded from further consideration
for that position.
4. Any information that is disclosed under the Disclosure of the Employment of Relatives section on the Pre-Employment
Certification is public record.
UNR Faculty Senate Meeting
June 10, 2010
Consent Agenda Item #3d
RATIONALE FOR CHANGE: As a result of an audit, language was needed to address deadlines for
submitting overload PAFs.
Additional Compensation, Supplemental Pay, and Overloads
2,695
Revised: February June 2010
Administrative Faculty:
1. Teaching at UNR: Administrative faculty who want to engage in teaching activities at the request of an instructional unit
of the University of Nevada Reno, including Extended Studies, may do so upon approval of their immediate supervisors.
The faculty member may request additional compensation if the instructional activity is not in the faculty member’s
home department and is in addition to his/her regular work duty. Where additional compensation may be paid, the
following procedures apply:
a. the administrative faculty member’s regular job requirements will be maintained and fulfilled;
b. the administrative faculty member may teach no more than one class per semester, summer session included. The
one class may carry up to five credits, but not more than five. Consistent with policy for academic faculty, several
courses taught through Extended Studies may be considered ‘one class,’ but only up to a total of three credits. If the
teaching or teaching-related activity does not carry formal credits, the activity will be assigned a “credit
equivalency” under the following guidelines:
1 credit equivalency = 16 contact hours (workshops, seminars, etc.)
1 credit equivalency = 32-48 lab/hands-on experience hours
Extended Studies Credit Equivalency Rates for hands-on experience programs
4 hours (1/2 day) session = 1/10 credit equivalency
8 hours (1 day) session = 2/10 credit equivalency
16 hours (2 day) session = 4/10 credit equivalency
5 day session = 1 credit equivalency
c. the administrative faculty member must submit a Request for Instructional Compensation form to his/her supervisor
for approval, after having obtained signature from the requesting department chair or dean (the form may be
obtained on the Human Resources website );
d. the academic unit or Extended Studies must submit a PAF and Terms of Employment contract with the approved
request form to Human Resources for processing. Compensation for instructional activities will be the same as that
for Letters of Appointment. The department in which the instruction takes place is responsible for the additional
compensation except for Extended Studies classes. If the faculty member is less than 100% FTE, the FTE will be
increased; any pay exceeding 100% of base would be processed as an overload. The PAF for a faculty member who
is less than 100% FTE should be prepared through the faculty member’s home department.
2. Teaching within NSHE: Administrative faculty who engage in teaching activities for other components of the
Nevada System of Higher Education may do so upon approval of their immediate supervisors. The faculty member
may request additional compensation if the instructional activity is in addition to his/her regular work duty. Where
additional compensation may be paid, the same procedures as pertain to teaching at UNR apply (paragraph 1 above)
with the exception that there is no limit on the number of courses or credits taught per semester.
ACADEMIC AND ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL
Additional Compensation, Supplemental Pay, and Overloads, Continued
2,695
Academic Faculty:
1. The following guidelines apply to earning additional compensation from university administered funds for providing
specialized professional services and shall be interpreted consistently with those established in the federal government's
Circular A-21.
a. Administrative stipends: “A” contract and “B” contract academic faculty members may receive additional
compensation in the form of administrative stipends as approved through the stipend policy (see section 2,550).
b. Over-load teaching during the contract year: In special cases, the dean or director may grant special permission for
an “A” contract or “B” contract academic faculty member to teach and receive additional compensation during the
contract year for additional course(s) per semester either in the faculty member’s home department or another
academic department including Extended Studies. The maximum overload for a full time member of the academic
faculty is a three-credit course per semester. Exceptions must be approved by the Provost’s Office. Several courses
taught through Extended Studies may be considered ‘one class,’ but only up to a total of three credits. If the
teaching or teaching-related activity does not carry formal credits, the activity will be assigned a “credit
equivalency” under the following guidelines:
1 credit equivalency = 16 contact hours (workshops, seminars, etc.)
1 credit equivalency = 32-48 lab/hands-on experience hours
Extended Studies Credit Equivalency Rates for hands-on experience programs
4 hours (1/2 day) session = 1/10 credit equivalency
8 hours (1 day) session = 2/10 credit equivalency
16 hours (2 day) session = 4/10 credit equivalency
5 day session = 1 credit equivalency
c. Additional compensation on non-contract days- “B” contract faculty:
i.
"B" contract faculty may earn additional compensation from university administered funds on days they are not
already on contract, i.e., semester break, spring recess, and summer.
ii.
The definition of the contract year for purposes of this section is consistent with the definitions found in sections
2,509 and 2,550 and means all class days during the period identified in the university calendar from the
beginning of a semester to the end of a semester, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays.
iii.
Rates of compensation for such services are approved by the dean or other appropriate administrator through
written proposals in advance of agreements being made final. If the project is interdisciplinary, approval from
each dean or administrator must be obtained. Faculty members may earn no more than their daily rate per day.
The daily rate is calculated by dividing the current academic year base salary by the number of working days in
the academic year.
ACADEMIC AND ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL
Additional Compensation, Supplemental Pay, and Overloads, Continued
2,695
2. Maximum amount of additional compensation from university administered funds:
a. "B" contract faculty are permitted to earn a maximum of 50% of their base salary as additional compensation
(typically from stipends, overload teaching and non-contract days) paid through university administered funds from
July 1 through June 30 of each year.
b. “A” contract faculty are permitted to earn a maximum of 30% of their base salary as additional compensation
(typically from stipends and overload teaching) paid through university administered funds from July 1 through June
30 of each year.
c. Payment of additional compensation is made via a personnel/payroll action form (PAF) and Terms of Employment
contract. The reason for the additional compensation must be stated clearly in the “comment section”.
Deadlines to File Overload PAFs:
All effort extended during non-contract periods must be confirmed via the effort reporting process. It is the
responsibility of the PI to submit a PAF in accordance with the deadlines stated below. Late PAFs will not be
processed.
May Reporting Term: “B” Faculty working during their non-contract days in December, January, and Spring
Break must submit a PAF to Human Resources no later than the 1st business day in April.
September Reporting Term: “B” Faculty working during their non-contract days in May, June, July and/or
August must submit a PAF to Human Resources no later than the 1st business day in September.
It is not acceptable to store effort from a semester and pay overload during a non-contract day. Semester effort
must be reported on a semester effort report. Overload must be earned during non-contract days.
UNR Faculty Senate Meeting
June 10, 2010
Consent Agenda Item #3e
RATIONALE FOR CHANGE: A minor revision was made in order to update the allowable amount for
the use of external vendors from $50 to $100 as approved in the catering contract.
Food Service
5,312
Revised: May 2010
The university-contracted food service shall have the exclusive right to provide food service on the university campus with
the exception of:
1. Food purchased for a single event through any client account that is less than $100 may be purchased from an outside
vendor if preferred. The client shall indemnify the food services contractor for such purchases as provided for in Section
6.7 of the agreement between the Board of Regents, NSHE and the food services contractor. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, campus policy does not allow outside vendors to make deliveries on campus.
2. Food that is donated and not being resold.
3. Food purchased with personal funds and not being resold. This exception shall not apply at the Lawlor Events Center
and catering sites at the Joe Crowley Student Union.
4. Other specific event exceptions as approved (in advance of event) by the appropriate manager of the affected food
service operation and mutually agreeable with the food services contractor.
5. The client reserves the right to sponsor certain social events and other functions that may serve food and beverage, where
such events and functions exclude the food services contractor, provided they meet the following criteria:
a.
b.
c.
d.
No cover or other admission charges.
No cost to the client.
No use of client food service facilities.
Approval by the institution's president or his/her designee.
6. In late fall and early spring, not to exceed three times in each semester, the UNR student government may request a
dispensation for items purchased at cost or below for special student functions. These items normally consist of steaks
and/or chicken and the purchases are handled by students in the ASUN office directly with outside vendors.
7. All student organizations recognized by either the Associated Students of the University of Nevada (ASUN) or the
Graduate Student Association (GSA) are exempt from the exclusivity clause for catering under this contract except for
events where alcohol is served. Such student organizations cannot co-sponsor with other groups so that these groups can
avoid the exclusivity clause.
All invoices submitted by the university contracted food service shall be paid within 10 days of the invoice date. In the event
invoices are not paid within 30 days of the invoice date, interest will be charged to the ordering department.
UNR Faculty Senate Meeting
June 10, 2010
Consent Agenda Item #3f
RATIONALE FOR CHANGE: As a result of an audit, language was needed to address training for all
investigators conducting research involving human subjects, or data or biological specimens to.
Policy on the Use of Human Subjects in Research,
Development and Related Activities
6,510
Revised: October 2005 June 2010
All members of an academic community engaged in research, development, and related activities
involving the use of human subjects have obligations to their subjects and to the University. This
policy is intended to give broad guidelines for conducting such activity activities.
University policy requires that researchers respect and protect the rights and welfare of individuals
recruited for, or participating in, research conducted by or under the auspices of the University of
Nevada, Reno (UNR), including the University of Nevada School of Medicine (UNSOM). In the review
and conduct of research, actions by the University and the UNSOM will be are guided by the
principles (i.e., respect for persons, beneficence, and justice) set forth in the Ethical Principles and
Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research (often referred to as the "Belmont
Report") and will are performed in accordance with the Department of Health and Human Services
(DHHS) policy, Title 45 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 46 (also known as the “Common
Rule”) and with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) policy, Title 21 CFR Part 50 and Title 21
CFR Part 56. In addition, the actions of the University will shall also conform to all other applicable
federal, State, and local laws and regulations.
To conduct this responsibility effectively, the President of the University has appointed the Vice
President for Research as the Institutional Official to ensure that the university’s human research
protection program is appropriately supported and its federal-wide assurance filed with the
Department of Health and Human Services is executed. The Institutional Official has the authority to
act for the institution and to assume on behalf of the institution the obligations imposed by the federal
regulations pertaining to human research protection; however, the Institutional Official or other
organizational officials may not approve research that has not been previously approved by one of
the Institutional Review Boards (known as IRBs).
The human research protection program maintains federally sanctioned Internal Review Boards IRBs
(known as IRBs). The primary functions of the Institutional Review Boards IRBs are administrative,
educational, and consultative. Their purpose will be is to facilitate ethical research and optimum
protection of human subjects while also insuring the academic freedom of researchers and
instructors.
The IRBs shall review and have authority to approve, require modifications in (to secure approval), or
disapprove all human research activities overseen and conducted by the University and its affiliates
for which the IRB(s) serve as the “IRB of Record”; to suspend or terminate approval of research that
is not conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or that has been associated with
unexpected serious harm to subjects; to require that information given to the subjects as a part of
informed consent is done so in accordance with the federal regulations and university policy,
including observing or having a third party observe the consent process of the conduct of research.
The Institutional Review Boards IRBs will are not be concerned with the quality, direction, or scope of
activities being proposed, except when such consideration is required as part of the actual protection
of human research subjects. Accordingly, the IRBs must decide whether a proposed research,
development, or related activity places human subjects at risk.
INSTRUCTION / RESEARCH PROCEDURES
Policy on the Use of Human Subjects in Research,
Development and Related Activities, Continued
6,510
The expression "subject at risk" means any person(s) who may be exposed to the possibility of any
type of personal harm as a consequence of participation as a research subject. Members of the
Institutional Review Boards IRBs reviewing activities involving the use of human subjects have
obligations to ensure that the following principles are applied in their deliberations:
a. The rights and welfare of human subjects are adequately protected;
b. The risks to the subject(s), in the judgment of the review committee, are outweighed by the
potential benefits, either to the subject directly or to advancing scientific understanding in
general,
c. The confidentiality of the subject is maintained; and
d. The informed consent of all subjects is obtained through methods that are both adequate and
proper. Such consent is voluntary and subjects are free to withdraw and discontinue
participation in a specific research project at any time.
The University of Nevada, Reno UNR Policies and Procedures for Human Research Protection
details the policies and regulations governing research with human subjects and the requirements for
submitting research proposals for review by the UNR Institutional Review Boards IRBs. These
policies and procedures, administered by the UNR Office of Human Research Protection, apply to all
research involving human subjects, regardless of sponsorship and performance site, if University of
Nevada, Reno UNR or University of Nevada School of Medicine UNSOM faculty, staff, students, or
facilities are involved. In accordance with these policies and procedures, it is the responsibility of the
administrative heads of these units or the academic deans to which these units report to assist in a
continuing review of all activities involving the use of human subjects.
Departments, research institutes, and public service branches of the University of Nevada, Reno
UNR may conduct research, development, and related activities for which the support is obtained
from appropriated and federal pass-through monies or from endowments and gifts to the university. It
is the responsibility of the University of Nevada, Reno UNR faculty and students planning to submit
proposals involving the use of human subjects to any sponsor to have their proposals and protocols
submitted to the appropriate University of Nevada, Reno UNR Institutional Review Board IRB in
accordance with sponsor guidelines and University university policy. Financial support for any
research activity involving the use of human subjects may not be released until the researcher has
satisfied all requirements for human subjects research protection.
University contributions to the training of students or to the resolution of questions concerning the
human condition may involve the participation of humans in teaching and research experiences, in
studies on human behavior, or on the influence of man-made or natural environmental factors on
human welfare. The responsibilities of the teacher or researcher and the rights of the students or
subjects researched are properly defined through a policy relating to each cooperator:
1. The multiple values of human participation in research are recognized. Thus, students in a given
class may be invited to serve as human subjects in research when such participation meets the
pedagogical purposes of the course. Students will also be are advised that they may complete an
alternative assignment requiring an equivalent effort on their part if they are unable or unwilling to
participate as a subject.
2. As members of the academic community, students directing research, development, or related
activities also have obligations to their subjects and to the university University. The immediate
supervisor or faculty advisor must inform students involved in the above activities of the university
policy and of the procedures for obtaining approval of from one of the Institutional Review Boards
IRBs.
3. Although answering to the administrative units, faculty and students involved in the use of
human subjects are the responsible parties for the development of research procedures and
for submitting protocols of these activities for approval.
4. The University of Nevada, Reno is committed to providing training and on going educational
process for investigators and members of their research team, as well as IRB members and
the staff of the UNR Office Of Hyman Research Protection (UNR OHRP), related to ethical
concerns and regulatory and institutional requirements for the protection of human subjects. All
investigators and members of their research team must meet the UNR continuing education
requirement every two years after certification of Initial Education for as long as they are
involved in human subject research.
UNR is committed to ensuring that initial and continuing educational opportunities related to
ethical concerns and regulatory and institutional requirements for the protection of human
subjects are provided to researchers, IRB members, and staff of the UNR Office of Human
Research Protection. All investigators and study personnel conducting research involving
human subjects, or data or biological specimens derived from such research, must maintain
certification of human research protection training.
UNR Faculty Senate Meeting
June 10, 2010
Consent Agenda Item #3g
RATIONALE FOR CHANGE: As a result of an audit, language was needed to address training for all
university personnel and volunteers working on research.
Policy on Training for Research Compliance
6,514
Revised: June 2010
It is the policy of the University of Nevada, Reno that all faculty, staff, students, postdoctoral scholars and
volunteers working on research receive training in the subject areas applicable to their roles and responsibilities.
The subject areas include but are not limited to:





Responsible Conduct of Research
Effort Reporting/Grants Management
Conflict of Interest
Animal, Human, and rDNA Research
Appropriate Safety Training
The Office of the Vice President for Research is responsible for coordinating the training sessions and maintaining
the database of participants.
Faculty, staff, students, postdoctoral scholars and volunteers must have a verifiable record of appropriate training.
It is the responsibility of the college deans to ensure that their respective college receive the training. Personnel
who have failed to receive the training may be subject to contract review and appropriate action.
UNR Faculty Senate Meeting
June 10, 2010
Consent Agenda Item #3h
RATIONALE FOR CHANGE: Revisions were made are as a result of an external audit and include the
new federal mandate on Responsible Conduct of Research training.
Ethical Standards in the Conduct of Research
6,515
Revised: June 2010
Scholarly misconduct can neither be condoned nor tolerated at UNR. Scholars and researchers bear the primary
responsibility for the monitoring and rigorous evaluation of procedures and results of research and other scholarly activities
under their supervision. All members of the university community adhere to the university's strict standards of integrity of
academic scholarship and research and must feel ethically obligated to report (in accordance with the procedures set forth in
this policy) any fraudulent acts when they are known or are suspected to have occurred.
A. Rights and Responsibilities of Scholars and Researchers:
1. Within the framework of the existing policies of the system and the University, including review guidelines, scholars
and researchers are free to:
a.
b.
c.
d.
Choose the subject of research or scholarly activity;
Seek the resources necessary to conduct such activity, and to exercise control over those resources;
Initiate and conduct such activity;
Disseminate the results of such activity in an appropriate manner.
INSTRUCTION / RESEARCH PROCEDURES
Ethical Standards in the Conduct of Research, Continued
6,515
2. With the freedom to conduct and manage scholarly activities and research comes the academic responsibility for:
a. Maintaining professional integrity within and external to the University;
b. Honoring professional obligations to the University and, when relevant, to external benefactors and funding entities.
B. Ethical Standards of Performance in Research and Scholarship:
Researchers and scholars shall seek to uphold the following general ethical standards in the performance of their activities:
1. Project directors must comply with all internal and external requirements for protecting the public, human subjects and
project personnel, and for ensuring the welfare of laboratory animals.
2. To promote and preserve a university climate for creativity and productivity with high ethical standards, scholars and
researchers must not fall below accepted professional standards in proposing their activities, carrying them out, and
reporting their results. Primary data must be scrupulously collected and retained.
3. All participants in scholarly/research activity must avoid both intentional and negligent behavior which may result in
violation of the law; dishonesty or fraud; fabrication, falsification, or misrepresentation of data; or plagiarism.
4. Cooperative efforts require mutual attention to the integrity of the scholarly processes involved. Joint authorship entails
joint responsibility; each author claiming shared credit must be aware of the risk of shared discredit.
5. Senior scholars and researchers must avoid exploitation of junior colleagues and students. Claims of credit and coauthorship should reflect actual involvement, responsibility, and effort.
6. Project directors must be free to manage their sponsored funding to the maximum extent allowed by the funding agency
and the rules of the University yet, they must be knowledgeable of and responsive to the demands and requirements of
financial responsibility and accountability.
7. Present or proposed activities or relationships which may present a conflict of interest, affect the objectivity of research
or scholarship, give the appearance of being motivated by private financial gain, or involve unacceptable commitments
for a scholar/researcher, must be disclosed and approved at the appropriate administrative levels prior to a commitment
to or initiation of such activities or relationships.
8. As part of its efforts to promote research integrity, the University provides training in the Responsible Conduct of
Research (RCR) that covers the following nine instructional areas:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
Data Acquisition, Management, Sharing and Ownership
Conflict of Interest and Commitment
Human Subjects
Animal Welfare
Research Misconduct
Publication Practices and Responsible Authorship
Mentor/Trainee Responsibilities
Peer Review
Collaborative Science
The National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) require training in the RCR
for certain types of grants.
The NSF requirements apply to all undergraduates, graduate students, and postdoctoral researchers who will be
supported by NSF to conduct research. The University will verify that those students (undergraduates and
graduates) and postdoctoral researchers who receive NSF funds (support from salary and/or stipends to conduct
research on NSF grants) will obtain RCR training.
NIH policy requires that all trainees, fellows, participants, and scholars receiving support through any
NIH training, career development award (individual or institutional), research education grant, and
dissertation research grant must receive instruction in responsible conduct of research. Research
faculty will participate in RCR instruction in ways that will foster their role as a mentor.
Definitions:
A. For the purposes of this policy, the operant definition of "misconduct," "scholarly misconduct," or "scientific
misconduct" shall be consistent with the prohibited activities as set forth in Chapter 6 of the Nevada System of Higher
Education (NSHE) Code and with supplementary definitions which specifically address the requirements of federal
agencies.
B. Section 6.2.2 of the NSHE Code cites grounds for instituting disciplinary action against "...members of the community
of the System, including but not limited to the faculty and students..." Specific to this policy is the prohibition against
"acts of academic dishonesty, including but not limited to cheating, plagiarism, falsifying research data or results, or
assisting others to do the same."
C. Regulation 42 Congressional Federal Record (CFR) Part 50, Subpart A - Responsibilities of Public Health Service
(PHS) Awardee and Applicant Institutions for Dealing With and Reporting Possible Misconduct in Science defines
"misconduct" or "misconduct in science" as "...fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other practices that seriously
deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the scientific community for proposing, conducting, or reporting
research. It does not include honest error or honest differences in interpretations or judgments of data." [42 CFR 50.102]
D. Further definitions of acts associated with misconduct in science are to be found in the 1982 Association of American
Universities policy statement. These definitions are:
1. Falsification of data - ranging from fabrication of data to deceptively selective reporting, and including the
purposeful omission of conflicting data with the intent to falsify results.
2. Plagiarism - representation of another’s work as one's own.
3. Misappropriation of other's ideas - the unauthorized use of privileged information (such as violation of
confidentiality in peer review), however obtained.
E. Except as stated under Ethical Standards in Section B.1, this policy does not cover other transgressions such as:
1. Material failure to comply with requirements for protection of researchers, human subjects, or the public or for
ensuring the welfare of laboratory animals;
2. Intentional misuse of public funds;
3. Failure to meet other material legal requirements governing research.
Allegations and instances of misconduct in these areas are covered by the policies and practices of the applicable committees
and/or organizational units responsible for oversight and control.
Procedures for Dealing with Allegations of Misconduct or Violations of Ethical Standards in Research and
Scholarship:
Allegations of misconduct shall be dealt with in strict accordance with the provisions of Chapter 6 of the NSHE Code.
Allegations of misconduct in science that involve research or other projects sponsored by agencies of the PHS are
specifically addressed in the Preamble of this section.
The following procedural statements incorporate the appropriate sections of the NSHE Code in delineating the university's
administrative process for the reporting of allegations of scholarly misconduct; for the fair, swift, and accurate consideration
of such allegations; and for initiating the actions recommended after the consideration of allegations is complete. These
statements further incorporate the practices and procedures required under the compliance rules issued by the various federal
funding agencies.
A. Confidentiality: The maintenance of confidentiality is the guiding principle for this process, to protect both those who
make the allegations and those against whom the allegations are made. As few people as are reasonable shall be
involved in the process, and all records dealing with an allegation, its review, and its disposition shall be treated in
accordance with Section 6.15 of the NSHE Code.
B. Reporting of Allegations: Reports of allegations of scientific misconduct must be filed with the Associate Vice
President for Research (the designated university administrative officer in accordance with NSHE Code 6.7.1).
Allegations must be in writing and must contain the elements of information as required in NSHE Code 6.8.1.
C. Inquiry: The inquiry is the initial step after an allegation is made. It is an informal process intended to assess the
probable validity of the allegation. It is performed by the Associate Vice President for Research to whom the allegation
was made and in accordance with the provisions of the NSHE Code 6.8.2.
D. Investigation: If on the basis of the preliminary findings the Associate Vice President for Research feels a formal
investigation should be initiated, the following steps shall be undertaken:
1. The Associate Vice President for Research recommends to the president that a general or special hearing be held in
accordance with the NSHE Code 6.8.2(d). The President then decides whether to proceed with the recommended
hearing in accordance with the NSHE Code 6.8.2(e) & (f).
2. If the decision is made to proceed with a general or special hearing, the Associate Vice President for Research shall
convene the hearing in accordance with the NSHE Code section 6.9. The Associate Vice President for Research
shall also notify the Office of Sponsored Projects of the pending action, so that any required notifications to
funding agencies may be accomplished.
3. In the case of a general hearing, a general hearing officer shall be appointed as specified in the NSHE Code 6.10. In
the case of a special hearing, the hearing officer and committee shall be appointed as specified in the NSHE Code
6.12. For hearings dealing with allegations of misconduct in science, the following special considerations shall be
made concerning the selection of the hearing committee.
a. Care must be taken to ensure that there are no real or apparent conflicts of interest on the part of the committee
members.
b. In the case of a special hearing, the special hearing committee should include persons having sufficient
acquaintance with research and scholarship in the discipline in question so that the allegation may be properly
assessed.
4. When the investigation is conducted by special hearing, all procedures concerning inquiry, findings, disposition, and
appeal shall be in strict accordance with the appropriate provisions of Chapter 6 of the NSHE Code.
E. Appeal: If the Associate Vice President for Research determines during the inquiry process that evidence of scientific
misconduct is insufficient and recommends to the president that a formal investigation is not warranted, the individual
who made the allegation may appeal this decision to the president. Appeals from the decision of the president shall be
made in accordance with Section 6.14 of the NSHE Code.
Special Procedures for Dealing with Allegations of Misconduct in Science Relating to Research or Other Projects
Sponsored by Agencies of the PHS:
The following procedures apply to allegations of scientific misconduct made against UNR faculty investigators, associates,
and other personnel in connection with work on a research or other sponsored project supported by a funding agency of the
PHS.
UNR shall comply with the established administrative process for reviewing, investigating, and reporting allegations of
misconduct in science as set forth in Chapter 6 of the NSHE Code. UNR also shall supplement and modify practices and
procedures within its authority in order to meet any special requirements set forth in the compliance rules of funding
agencies. The following are summaries of special requirements of 42 CFR Part 50, Subpart A - Responsibility of PHS
Awardee and Applicant Institutions for Dealing with and Reporting Possible Misconduct in Science.
A. Institutional Assurance: UNR shall submit annually to the PHS Office of Scientific Integrity (OSI):
1. An assurance of compliance;
2. Such aggregate information on allegations, inquiries, and investigations as may be prescribed;
3. A copy of this policy, if requested.
B. Role of the Office of the Associate Vice President for Research: It is essential that the Associate Vice President for
Research be informed immediately upon disclosure of allegations of scientific misconduct if these allegations in any way
involve project activities sponsored by a funding agency of the PHS. The Associate Vice President for Research must
initiate an inquiry and determine whether an investigation is warranted. All allegations and subsequent administrative
acts must be adequately documented and maintained for a period of three years. The Associate Vice President for
Research shall also be responsible for coordinating and submitting all notifications and reports required under 42 CFR
Part 50, Subpart A.
C. Specific Requirements for Inquiries, Investigations, and Reporting: In following its established procedures, UNR
shall ensure that the following specific requirements are met:
1. Immediate inquiry into an allegation or other evidence of possible misconduct and completion of the inquiry within
60 calendar days of its initiation unless circumstances clearly warrant a longer period. [42 CFR 50.103(d) (1)]
2. Protecting, to the maximum extent possible, the privacy of those who in good faith report apparent misconduct. [42
CFR 50.103 (d)(2)]
3. Affording the affected individual(s) confidential treatment to the maximum extent possible, a prompt and thorough
investigation, and an opportunity to comment on allegations and findings of the inquiry and/or the investigation. [42
CFR 50.103(d) (3)].
4. Notification of OSI when, on the basis of the initial inquiry, it is determined that an investigation is warranted. [42
CFR 40.103.(d) (4)]
5. Notification of OSI within 24 hours of obtaining any reasonable indication of possible criminal violations. [42 CFR
50.103(d) (5)]
6. Maintaining for a period of at least 3 years sufficiently detailed information of inquiries to permit a later assessment
of the reasons for determining that an investigation was not warranted [42 CFR 50.103 (d) (6)].
7. Undertaking an investigation within 30 days of the completion of the inquiry, if findings from that inquiry provide
sufficient basis for conducting an investigation. [42 CFR 50.103 (d) (7)]
8. Securing the necessary and appropriate expertise to carry out a thorough and authoritative evaluation of the relevant
evidence in an inquiry or investigation. [42 CFR 50.103 (d) (8)]
9. Taking precautions against real or apparent conflicts of interest on the part of those involved in the inquiry or
investigation. [42 CFR 50.103(d)(9)]
10. Preparing and maintaining the documentation to substantiate the investigation's findings. [42 CFR50.103(d) (10)]
11. Taking interim administrative actions, as appropriate, to protect federal funds and ensure that the purposes of the
federal financial assistance are carried out. [42 CFR 50.103(d) (11)]
12. Keeping the OSI apprised of any developments during the course of the investigation which disclose facts that may
affect current or potential funding or that the PHS needs to know to ensure appropriate use of federal funds an
otherwise protect the public interest. [42 CFR 50.103(d) (12)]
13. Undertaking diligent efforts, as appropriate, to restore the reputations of persons alleged to have engaged in
misconduct when allegations are not confirmed, and also undertaking diligent efforts to protect the positions and
reputations of those persons who, in good faith, make allegations. [42 CFR 50.103(d) (13)]
14. Imposing appropriate sanctions on individuals when an allegation of misconduct has been substantiated. [42 CFR
50.103 (d) (14)]
15. Notifying the OSI of the final outcome of the investigation. [42 CFR 50.103 (d) (15)]
D. Requirements for Reporting to OSI:
1. A decision to initiate an investigation must be reported in writing to the director of OSI, on or before the date the
investigation begins. [42 CFR 50.104(a)(1)]
2. An investigation should ordinarily be completed within 120 days of its initiation. [42 CFR 50.104(a)(2)]
3. If an inquiry or investigation is to be terminated for any reason without completing all relevant requirements under
50.103(d), a report of such planned termination, including a description of the reasons for such termination, shall be
made to OSI, which will then decide whether further investigation should be undertaken. [42 CFR 50.104(a) (3)]
4. The final report submitted to the OSI must describe: [42 CFR 50.104(a) (4)]
a. The policies and procedures under which the investigation was conducted;
b. How and from whom information was obtained relevant to the investigation;
c. The findings and the basis for the findings;
d. Include the actual text or an accurate summary of the views of any individual(s) found to have engaged in
misconduct, as well as a description of any sanctions taken by the institution.
5. If it is determined that it will not be possible to complete the investigation in 120 days, a written request for
extension must be submitted to OSI. The request must include an explanation for the delay that includes an interim
report on the progress to date and an estimate for the date of completion of the report and other necessary steps. [42
CFR 50.104(a) (5)]
6. OSI will review the final report to determine whether the investigation has been performed in a timely manner and
with sufficient objectivity, thoroughness, and competence. OSI may then request clarification or additional
information and, if necessary, perform its own investigation. [42 CFR 50.104(a) (6)]
7. In addition to sanctions the university may decide to impose, the Department of Health and Human Services may
also impose sanctions of its own upon investigators or the university based upon authorities it possesses or may
possess. [42 CFR 50.104(a) (7)]
8. Prompt notification to the OSI must be made if it is ascertained at any stage of the inquiry or investigation that any
of the following conditions exist: [42 CFR 50.104(b)]
a. There is an immediate health hazard involved;
b. There in an immediate need to protect federal funds or equipment;
c. There is an immediate need to protect the interests of the person(s) making the allegations or of the individual(s)
who is the subject of the allegations as well as his/her co-investigators and associates, if any;
d. It is probable that the alleged incident is going to be reported publicly;
e. There is reasonable indication of possible criminal violation (see reporting requirement under [42 CFR
50.103(d)(5)]).