Ohio Admin. Code 3344-28-04 - General policies

(A) Responsibility to report misconduct.

All employees or individuals associated with Cleveland state university are required to report observed, suspected, or apparent academic research misconduct to the research integrity officer. If an individual is uncertain whether a suspected incident of misconduct falls within the definition, he or she may call contact the research integrity officer to discuss the suspected misconduct informally. If the circumstances described by the individual do not meet the definition of academic research misconduct, the research integrity officer will refer the individual or allegation to other offices or officials with appropriate responsibility for resolving the problem in question.

(B) Evidentiary standard.

For each allegation, Clear and convincing evidence is required the evidentiary standard for a finding that academic research misconduct has occurred is that there was a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant research community; and that the misconduct was committed intentionally, knowingly or recklessly; and that the allegation is proven by a preponderance of the evidence.

(C) Preliminary assessment

Upon receiving an allegation of academic research misconduct, the research integrity officer shall immediately assess the information to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to warrant an inquiry. In assessing the allegation, the research integrity officer also shall determine whether "PHS" PHS support or "PHS" PHS applications for funding are involved, and whether the allegation falls under the "PHS" PHS definition of misconduct in science.

(D) Cooperation with inquiries and investigations.

All Cleveland state university employees shall cooperate with the research integrity officer in the review of allegations and the conduct of inquiries and investigations. Employees have an obligation to provide relevant evidence to the research integrity officer or other institutional officials on misconduct allegations.

(E) Protection of respondents.

Inquiries and investigations will be conducted ' in a manner that will ensure fair treatment to the respondent(s) of the inquiry or investigation and confidentiality to the extent possible, insofar as is permitted by the laws of the state of Ohio, consistent with protecting public health and safety and with carrying out the inquiry or investigation.

(F) If the respondent is found not to have committed academic research misconduct, or if after an allegation of academic research misconduct has been made, there is no inquiry and/or investigation because the "RIO" RIO or the deciding official has determined that none is warranted, after consultation with the respondent the university shall undertake efforts, as it deems appropriate in its sole discretion, to restore the reputation of the respondent.

(G) Institutional employees who are accused of academic research misconduct may at any time consult private legal counsel and/or another member of the university community for personal advice during interviews or meetings on the case, or private legal counsel for personal advice during investigative hearings.

(H) Protection of complainants.

At any time, an employee may have confidential discussions and consultation with the research integrity officer about concerns of possible misconduct and will be counseled about appropriate procedures to report allegations.

(I) The research integrity officer will monitor the treatment of individuals who bring allegations of misconduct or inadequate institutional response thereto, or who cooperate in inquiries or investigations. The university is required to protect from retaliatory actions those persons who, in good faith, make allegations. The research integrity officer will ensure that those making an allegation in good faith or cooperating with an inquiry or investigation into an allegation of academic research misconduct will not be retaliated against in the terms and conditions of their employment or other institutional status at Cleveland state university. Instances of apparent retaliation will be reviewed by the research integrity officer for appropriate action.

(J) If retaliation is confirmed, complainants will be consulted regarding appropriate corrective actions to be taken on their behalf to restore or protect their positions or reputations.

(K) Securing data and evidence.

The first step after determining that an allegation falls within the definition of academic research misconduct is to sequester all relevant research records and materials. The "PHS" office of research integrity can provide advice and assistance in this regard. The research integrity officer shall ensure immediate securing of all relevant materials.

(L) Any such actions taken prior to a final determination should be devised and taken as to create minimal interference with the regular research activities of the respondent and other involved parties.

Notes

Ohio Admin. Code 3344-28-04

Effective: 4/7/2025
Promulgated Under: 111.15
Statutory Authority: 111.15
Rule Amplifies: 3344
Prior Effective Dates: 09/13/1997, 03/17/2017