Prepared by the Office of Vice President for Research
This is a NEW Executive Policy
December 14, 2010
Executive Policy – Academic Affairs
Page 1 of 3
E#___
I.
Whistleblower and Retaliation Policy
INTRODUCTION
As a public institution the University of Hawai`i (herein referred to as the University)
has a responsibility to conduct its affairs ethically and in compliance with all laws and
regulations. This responsibility also extends to all faculty, staff, and students of the
University, who are expected to conduct themselves in an ethical and legal manner.
This policy provides both procedures and protection for all University employees and
other members of the University community who may make a good faith disclosure
of suspected misconduct that is in violation of University, State, and or Federal laws
and regulations.
II.
SCOPE & PURPOSE
This policy supplements existing Hawai`i Employment Practices Law, Hawai`i
Revised Statutes (HRS) § 378-62 and protects complainants or reporting individuals
from interference, punishment, or retaliatory academic or employment action.
The purposes of this policy are to:
A. Comply with the HRS § 378-62, Office of Research Integrity (ORI)
Whistleblowers Guidelines, Federal Whistleblower Bill of rights, and with 42
CFR Part 50.103 (d) (13);
B. Provide procedures for the reporting and investigation of disclosures of improper
conduct on the part of the University or any of its employees;
C. Protect any University employee or individual who makes a good faith disclosure
of suspected wrongful conduct from any form of retaliation, threat of retaliation,
or any form of adverse action from a supervisor, administrator, faculty, staff, or
student member of the University community.
More inclusively this policy serves to:



encourage an atmosphere that allows individuals to disclose violations of the law
and misconduct under University policies,
protect individuals from retaliation by adverse academic or employment action
taken as a result of having disclosed wrongful conduct,
provide individuals who believe they have been retaliated against a process to
seek assistance and support.
E#
Page 2 of 3
III.
DEFINITIONS
A. Good faith allegation – An allegation of misconduct made with a belief in the
truth of the allegation. The whistleblower (complainant) has a reasonable basis
for believing that the allegation falls under the definition of misconduct, or is a
violation of law, or policy. An allegation is not in good faith if made with
reckless disregard for or willful ignorance of facts that would disprove the
allegation.
B. Interference – Direct or indirect use of authority or influence to obstruct an
individual’s right to make a protected disclosure.
C. Protected disclosure – A good faith communication about actual or suspected
wrongful conduct carried out by a University member based on reasonable belief
that the conduct has both occurred and is wrongful under applicable law and/or
University policy. This may include: violation of State or Federal law; violation
of University policy; gross misconduct including corruption, bribery, theft, misuse
of University property, fraudulent claims, fraud or gross incompetence, economic
waste, or other forms of gross inefficiency or conditions that may significantly
endanger the health or safety of University employees, students, and the general
public.
D. Retaliation – Any adverse action or credible threat of an adverse action taken by
an institution or institutional member, in response to a whistleblower’s good faith
allegation of misconduct. It does not include an institution’s decision to
investigate a good faith allegation of misconduct.
E. Whistleblower – Also referred to as Complainant or Informant in Executive
Policy E5.211, an individual who makes an allegation or indicates an intent to
make an allegation or what is perceived to be an allegation while a member of the
institution at which the alleged wrongful conduct occurred.
IV.
POLICY GUIDELINES
These guidelines set forth the University’s approach for handling whistleblower
retaliation complaints. Individuals who make a good faith report are protected from
retaliatory academic or employment action including discharge, reassignment,
demotion, suspension, harassment, or other discrimination. In cases where
allegations involve PHS funds, the Office of Research Integrity’s (ORI)
Whistleblower’s Policy and protections will apply in addition to this policy. This
policy is not designed to provide an additional avenue for seeking redress on a claim
that has already been adjudicated under another existing policy.
A. Confidentiality
Disclosures made by a complainant are considered to be strictly confidential by
the UH. Concerns will remain confidential, consistent with the need to conduct
an adequate investigation. Consideration will be given to the seriousness,
E#
Page 3 of 3
credibility, and likelihood of confirming the disclosure. The University regards
confidentiality as fundamentally critical for both whistleblowers and respondents.
Where research or scholarly misconduct is involved, both parties shall abide by
confidentiality guidelines stated in Executive Policy E5.211.
B. Process for Filing a Complaint
A protected disclosure may be filed with the whistleblower’s Department Chair,
Unit Dean or Director, Research Integrity Officer (RIO), Ethics Committee
member, or with any Senior Administrator of the University. Regardless of where
the disclosure is made, the complaint may be forwarded to the RIO, who is
charged with reviewing all allegations of scientific or ethical misconduct,
conflicts of interest, and responsible conduct of research. Individuals are
encouraged to make their disclosure report in writing so that all issues and facts
surrounding the complaint are clearly communicated.
C. Process for Review of the Complaint
A protected disclosure of potential misconduct that is not covered under other
existing policies will be evaluated following the same standards that would apply
to allegations of ethical and/or research and scholarly misconduct as outlined in
Executive Policy E5.211. After a disclosure has been received, the RIO will
conduct a preliminary assessment of the allegation to determine the course of the
investigation, should one be warranted. After complaints are disclosed,
whistleblowers are advised to continue to perform assigned duties responsibly.
Guidance of where and how to file a disclosure can be obtained from the Office of
the Vice Chancellor for Research and Graduate Education.
Steps that may be taken as interim measures, when situations warrant, to protect
complainants during investigations may include:
1. Temporary relocation
2. Reassignment, or temporary shift to another supervisor
3. Changing graduate advisors (students)
4. Alternative work/research schedule
D. Protection from Retaliation
The University will not tolerate: 1) retaliatory actions against any employee or
constituent for making a good faith allegation of misconduct, or 2) direct or
indirect use or attempted use of official authority, or influence of an employee’s
position or office for the purpose of interfering with the rights of another
employee or constituent who wishes to make a protected disclosure. Complaints
of retaliation should include all details relevant to the allegation including the date
and nature of the retaliation, the name of the individual(s) involved, and the
names of any witness(s) or individual(s) who may have direct knowledge of the
retaliatory acts.
E. Sanctions for Making a False Claim
Making a false complaint, or one not in good faith, is considered to be a serious
ethical misconduct violation and will be treated accordingly.