Habib University Research Policy Handbook

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

Document History

Revision

Date

Name

Description

Comments

0.1

December 17th, 2013

C T Spracklen

Pre-release draft

1.0

April 28th, 2014

C T Spracklen

Version 1.0

Incomplete – out for review Reviewed by APC

i

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

Table of Contents Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 1 Conduct of Research .................................................................................................................................. 2 1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 2 1.2 Overview ............................................................................................................................................. 2 2 Rights and Responsibilities in the Conduct of Research ............................................................................ 2 2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 2 2.2 Rights of Faculty Members ................................................................................................................. 2 2.3 Responsibilities of Faculty to Staff and Students ................................................................................ 3 Health and Safety .................................................................................................................................. 3 Consulting by Academic Staff - Research.............................................................................................. 3 2.4 Responsibilities to Sponsors ............................................................................................................... 3 Fiscal Obligations .................................................................................................................................. 3 Equipment Control ................................................................................................................................ 4 Proposal Preparation ............................................................................................................................ 4 Certification of Salaries Charged to Sponsored Projects ...................................................................... 4 Technical and Invention Reports .......................................................................................................... 4 Patents and Copyrights ......................................................................................................................... 4 2.5 Other Responsibilities ......................................................................................................................... 4 Conflict of Interest ................................................................................................................................ 4 3 Academic Freedom .................................................................................................................................... 5 3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 5 3.2 Preamble ............................................................................................................................................. 5 3.3 Furtherance of These General Principles ............................................................................................ 5 3.4 Grievance Procedures ......................................................................................................................... 6 4 Openness in Research ................................................................................................................................ 6 4.1 Resolved .............................................................................................................................................. 6 4.2 A Research Program shall be regarded as Requiring Secrecy ............................................................. 7 4.3 Rules Adopted by Habib University .................................................................................................... 7 4.4 Programs of Research Shall Not be Regarded as Unacceptable by Reason of Secrecy ...................... 8 A. Living Human Beings ......................................................................................................................... 8 B. Security Classification ....................................................................................................................... 8 ii

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 C. Publication Delays ............................................................................................................................. 8 D. Confidentiality .................................................................................................................................. 9 E. Private Papers, Documents, Diaries or Analogous Materials ........................................................... 9 4.5 Review ................................................................................................................................................. 9 5 On Academic Authorship ........................................................................................................................... 9 5.1 Committee on Research Resolution .................................................................................................. 10 5.2 Paper by Donald Kennedy, then President of the Office of Research at Stanford University. ......... 10 6 Multi-Authored Research Papers............................................................................................................. 15 6.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 15 6.2 Guidelines ......................................................................................................................................... 15 7 Research Misconduct: Policy on Allegations, Investigations, and Reporting .......................................... 16 7.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 16 7.2 Applicability....................................................................................................................................... 16 7.3 Definitions ......................................................................................................................................... 17 A. Research Misconduct...................................................................................................................... 17 B. Inquiry ............................................................................................................................................. 18 C. Investigation.................................................................................................................................... 18 7.4 Government and other Funding Agency Requirements ................................................................... 18 7.5 Individual Reporting Responsibility .................................................................................................. 18 7.6 Procedure for School Dean’s Review ................................................................................................ 18 A. Preliminary Assessment .................................................................................................................. 19 B. Inquiry ............................................................................................................................................. 19 C. Investigation Procedures ................................................................................................................ 19 7.7 Internal Coordination/Reports to the Dean of Research .................................................................. 20 7.8 Notification to External Agencies...................................................................................................... 21 7.9 Determination of Discipline .............................................................................................................. 23 7.10 Cautions and Assistance.................................................................................................................. 24 8 Nondiscrimination in Research Agreements ........................................................................................... 24 8.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 24 8.2 Provisions for Exceptions in Regard to Citizenship ........................................................................... 25 A. Citizenship Restrictions Established by Training Grants, Scholarships or Fellowships ................... 25 B. Citizenship Restrictions for “Early Career” Type Awards ................................................................ 26 iii

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 C. Citizenship Restrictions in Foreign-Sponsored Research Agreements ........................................... 26 D. Citizenship Restrictions Imposed by Export Control or Other Regulations .................................... 26 E. Other Circumstances ....................................................................................................................... 26 8.3 Review ............................................................................................................................................... 26 9 Retention of and Access to Research Data .............................................................................................. 27 9.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 27 9.2 Definition .......................................................................................................................................... 27 9.3 Applicability ..................................................................................................................................... 27 9.4 Ownership ......................................................................................................................................... 27 9.5 Collection and Retention................................................................................................................... 28 9.6 Access ............................................................................................................................................... 28 9.7 Transfer in the Event a Researcher Leaves Habib ............................................................................ 28 10 Principal Investigatorship ....................................................................................................................... 29 10.1 Principal Investigator Eligibility and Criteria for Exceptions ........................................................... 29 10.2 Principal Investigator Eligibility Policy ............................................................................................ 29 10.3 Exceptions ....................................................................................................................................... 29 A. Exceptions Subject to the Approval of the Department Chair and School Dean ........................... 29 B. Rare Exceptions Subject to the Approval of the Department Chair, School Dean and Dean of Research .............................................................................................................................................. 31 10.4 Project Designations Other Than Principal Investigator ................................................................. 32 A. Associate Investigators ................................................................................................................... 32 B. Co-Investigators .............................................................................................................................. 32 10.5 Review ............................................................................................................................................. 32 11 Acting Principal Investigatorship............................................................................................................ 32 11.1 Eligibility .......................................................................................................................................... 32 12 Fiscal Responsibilities of Principal Investigators .................................................................................... 33 12.1 Preparation and Submission of Proposed Budgets......................................................................... 33 12.2 Responsibilities of the PI ................................................................................................................. 33 12.3 Allowability ..................................................................................................................................... 34 12.4 Cost Sharing .................................................................................................................................... 34 12.5 Commitment of Effort ..................................................................................................................... 34 A. Summer Salary ................................................................................................................................ 35 iv

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 12.6 Estimating Methods ........................................................................................................................ 35 12.7 Budget Justifications ....................................................................................................................... 35 13 Management of Project Expenditures ................................................................................................... 35 13.1 Principal Investigator Responsibilities ............................................................................................ 35 13.2 Authorization of Direct Charges...................................................................................................... 36 13.3 Review of Project Expenditures ...................................................................................................... 36 13.4 Certification of Project Expenditures .............................................................................................. 36 13.5 Charging Salaries to Projects........................................................................................................... 37 13.6 Charging Vacation to Projects ......................................................................................................... 38 13.7 Charging Proposal Expenses to Ongoing Projects .......................................................................... 38 13.8. Monitoring of Funds within Sponsor Funding Limitations............................................................. 38 13.9 No-Cost Time Extensions ................................................................................................................ 39 13.10 Project Close-Out .......................................................................................................................... 39 14 Special Requirements Related to Sponsor Notifications and Prior Approvals ...................................... 40 14.1 Principal Investigator Responsibilities ............................................................................................ 40 A. Communication Related to Project and Funding Status ................................................................. 40 14.2 Accelerated/Slow Spending ............................................................................................................ 41 A. Changes in PI Status ........................................................................................................................ 41 15 Conflicts of Commitment and Interest .................................................................................................. 41 15.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 42 15.2 General Principles ........................................................................................................................... 42 A. Conflict of Commitment ................................................................................................................. 42 B. Conflict of Interest .......................................................................................................................... 42 15.3 Key Provisions - Summary ............................................................................................................... 43 15.4 Discussion and Detail ...................................................................................................................... 45 A. Presence on Campus....................................................................................................................... 45 B. Limitations on Outside Professional Activities ............................................................................... 45 C. Free and Open Exchange of Research Results ................................................................................ 46 D. Appropriate Use of University Resources, Including Facilities, Personnel, Equipment, and Information ......................................................................................................................................... 47 E. Disclosure and Ownership of Intellectual Property ........................................................................ 48

v

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 F. Faculty Disclosure of Financial Interests in Outside Entities Related to Their Institutional Responsibilities ................................................................................................................................... 49 G. Review of Disclosures of Faculty Financial Interests in Outside Entities Related to Their Institutional Responsibilities ............................................................................................................... 51 H. Certification of Compliance with the Conflict of Commitment and Conflict of Interest Policy ..... 52 I. Responsibilities of the School Deans ............................................................................................... 52 J. Responsibilities of the Dean of Research ........................................................................................ 52 K. Appeals of Decisions Made by the Dean of Research ..................................................................... 52 15.5 Attachment A: Habib University Requirements for Faculty Consulting Activities and Agreements ................................................................................................................................................................ 53 15.6 Attachment B: Faculty Investment in Habib Student Companies .................................................. 54 16 Requirements Regarding Financial Disclosures and Funding Agency Notifications .............................. 56 16.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 56 16.2 Investigator Disclosures .................................................................................................................. 56 A. Habib University Implementation, Requirements .......................................................................... 57 B. Agency Notifications ....................................................................................................................... 58 C. Other Requirements ....................................................................................................................... 59 16.3 Investigator Disclosures .................................................................................................................. 60 16.4 Attachment A: Evaluation of Financial Interests ............................................................................ 62 17 Consulting and Other Outside Professional Activities by Members of the Academic Faculty. ............. 63 17.1 Principles and General Standards ................................................................................................... 63 17.2 Definition of ‘Consulting’ ................................................................................................................ 63 A. Publication ...................................................................................................................................... 64 B. Professional Service (Other Outside Professional Activities) ......................................................... 64 C. ‘Moonlighting’ ................................................................................................................................. 65 17.3 Number of Permissible Consulting Days ......................................................................................... 65 17.4 Responsibilities of Faculty Members .............................................................................................. 65 17.5 Guidelines for Policy Implementation ............................................................................................ 65 A. General ........................................................................................................................................... 66 B. Averaging ........................................................................................................................................ 66 C. Consulting During Periods of Part-Time University Employment ................................................... 66 D. Consulting During the Summer or During Periods of Leave without Salary .................................. 66 vi

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 E. Consulting While on Sabbatical Leave ............................................................................................ 66 F. Hourly Consulting ............................................................................................................................ 67 G. Use of University Facilities or Services ........................................................................................... 67 H. Conflict of Interest .......................................................................................................................... 67 17.6 Attachment A: Faculty Consulting Policies, including required Habib University Requirements for Faculty Consulting Activities and Agreements........................................................................................ 68 18 Conflict of Commitment and Interest for Academic Staff and Other Teaching Staff ............................ 69 18.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 69 18.2 Conflict of Commitment ................................................................................................................. 69 18.3 Conflict of Interest .......................................................................................................................... 70 18.4 Further Discussion of Consulting by Academic Staff and Other Teaching Staff ........................... 72 19 University Investments in Start-Up Companies Involving Habib Faculty............................................... 73 19.1 Background ..................................................................................................................................... 73 19.2 Start-ups with Faculty Involvement ................................................................................................ 73 20 Equity Acquisition in Technology Licensing and Distance Learning Agreements .................................. 73 20.1 Policy .............................................................................................................................................. 74 20.2 Technology Licensing Agreements ................................................................................................ 74 20.3 Distance Learning Agreements ....................................................................................................... 74 20.4 Equity .............................................................................................................................................. 75 End Notes:........................................................................................................................................... 77

vii

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

Introduction To further improve the research infrastructure and service to the research community at Habib University, the Office of Research and Continuing Education has developed the Research Policy Handbook. This research handbook is a collection of campus wide research guidelines and policies developed by the ORCE. The Handbook, along with the web version, will provide a quick reference for researchers looking for research related information.

It is with great pleasure that I offer you the opportunity to use this Handbook when pursuing your research endeavors. As always, I encourage your feedback on this Research Policy Handbook.

Upon receiving additional feedback from the campus, we will revise and update the Handbook in a timely manner.

If you have any questions or would like to discuss any area of research, research compliance, regulatory compliance or other research related issues, please do not hesitate to contact the Office of Research and Continuing Education at orce@habib.edu.pk

Dr. Charles Timothy Spracklen Dean of Research

1

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

1 Conduct of Research 1.1 Introduction The transmission of knowledge and conduct of scholarly inquiry are central and complementary functions of the University. They can be carried out effectively only if scholars are guaranteed certain freedoms and accept corresponding responsibilities.

1.2 Overview The Office of Research of Habib University hereby affirms the following principles concerning research: 

 

Individual scholars should be free to select the subject matter of their research, to seek support from any source for their work, and to form their own findings and conclusions.

These findings and conclusions should be available for scrutiny and criticism as required by the University’s Policy on Openness in Research.

Research techniques should not violate established professional ethics pertaining to the health, safety, privacy and other personal rights of human beings.

The University should foster an environment conducive to research. Where, because of limited resources, the University cannot support all research demands, it should allocate space, facilities, funds and other resources for research programs based on the scholarly and educational merits of the proposed research and not on speculations concerning the political or moral impropriety of the uses which might be made of its results.

The above principles circumscribe the University’s role with respect to University-connected research. They in no way diminish, and indeed they reinforce, the individual researcher’s personal responsibility to assure that the conduct of research, the sources of funding for that research and its perceived applications are consistent with the individual researcher’s judgment and conscience and with established professional ethics.

2 Rights and Responsibilities in the Conduct of Research This section presents a summary of Habib’s policies and practices related to research, including a review of obligations to students, staff and sponsors.

2.1 Introduction Habib has the aspiration to become one of the nation’s most productive research universities. Its success will be due in no small part to the attention our faculty pays to all aspects of the research enterprise, including obligations to the University and to research sponsors.

2.2 Rights of Faculty Members 2

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

To carry out Habib’s research mission effectively, scholars are guaranteed certain freedoms. You have the right to academic freedom in the pursuit and support of research as defined in the statement of Principles Concerning Research, found in this Research Policy Handbook. You have the right to disseminate the results and findings of your research without suppression or modification from external sponsors beyond those provisions explicitly stated in the policy on Openness in Research. As a member of the Faculty of Habib University you have the right to engage in external consulting activities, subject to the University’s, and in some cases your School’s, limitations. It’s important that everyone adheres to both the spirit and the letter of the policy.

Along with these freedoms come corresponding responsibilities:

2.3 Responsibilities of Faculty to Staff and Students Faculty members must be aware of their obligations to staff and students working as part of the research team. It is particularly important that at least annually, each faculty member should review intellectual and tangible property rights and responsibilities (for management of data in all media, for proper authorship attribution, etc.), with all members of the group under his or her direction, including staff, students, postdocs and visiting scholars. Each member has the right to know who is sponsoring the research and supporting his or her salary or stipend.

On an individual level, the best interests of each staff member and student should be of particular concern. The University is committed to demonstrate support and appreciation for its staff. To that end, faculty members are encouraged to provide staff development opportunities and, if possible, a mentor relationship for those in their group.

Health and Safety

Each faculty member is responsible for training members of his or her team in appropriate health and safety procedures for that particular research area and for management of those procedures in his or her laboratory or other workplace. PIs are also responsible to assure the periodic inspection of lab facilities and to cooperate in any inspections by Habib personnel or by external agencies.

Consulting by Academic Staff - Research

Please recall that on an exception basis, members of the Academic Staff-Research occasionally may be permitted to engage in consulting and other outside activities under conditions outlined in the RPH by their respective Deans.

2.4 Responsibilities to Sponsors Fiscal Obligations

Although the legal agreement funding a sponsored project is between the sponsor and Habib University, the overall responsibility for management of a sponsored project within funding limitations rests with the PI. Funds must be expended within the restrictions of the contract or grant 3

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

and if any overdraft should occur, it is the responsibility of the PI to clear the overdraft by transferring charges to an appropriate account.

Equipment Control

The control of both Habib and Government-owned equipment is mandatory under Habib’s externally sponsored contracts and grants as well as under University policy. PIs are responsible for securing necessary approvals for the purchase of the equipment and for proper tagging, inventory and disposal of equipment.

Proposal Preparation

The cost of proposal preparation activities in support of new directions in research may not be charged to sponsored projects. School Deans must ensure that non-sponsored project funds are available to offset the portion of the investigator’s and his or her staff’s salaries from sponsored projects for effort spent preparing proposals to support new directions in research. The cost of proposal preparation efforts for continuing research is appropriately charged to current projects.

Also, should there be questions on which direct costs are subject to indirect costs as proposal budgets are prepared, please refer to the appropriate documents in the Research Policy Handbook.

Certification of Salaries Charged to Sponsored Projects

Habib is required to document effort charged to sponsored projects. It is the responsibility of each School Dean to see that a system is in place to ensure that the PIs in their areas fulfill the requirement for review and certification of salaries and to assure that salaries charged to sponsored projects correspond to effort expended on those projects, within the appropriate limitation for their School.

Technical and Invention Reports

Please remember to submit sponsor-required reports through the Office of Research on a timely basis. If you send the report directly to your project monitor, please send a copy to Office of Research at the same time so that contract and grant files may be complete.

Patents and Copyrights

All participating researchers, including postdocs, students and visiting scholars, must sign Habib’s Patent and Copyright Agreement before the commencement of any research activities.

2.5 Other Responsibilities Conflict of Interest

The key to Habib’s policy pertaining to conflict of interest is the trust in the integrity of the individual faculty member to disclose any situation that could lead to real or apparent conflict of interest. Habib policy requires an annual certification of compliance and disclosure of potentially 4

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

conflicting relationships. In addition, situations which arise during the year in which outside obligations have the potential for conflict with the faculty member’s allegiance and responsibility to the University require a prompt ad hoc disclosure.

3 Academic Freedom This assures the fullest protection of freedom of inquiry, thought, expression, publication and peaceable assembly at Habib University.

3.1 Introduction This Statement on Academic Freedom is proposed and says that “The University’s processes of search and evaluation are designed to produce the best possible persons for membership on the faculty. The Statement on Academic Freedom would in no way change that goal or the practices used to reach it.”

In this case “faculty” refers to titles included in the “professoriate,” defined (in the Habib University Faculty Handbook).

3.2 Preamble Habib University’s central functions of teaching, learning, research and scholarship depend upon an atmosphere in which freedom of inquiry, thought, expression, publication and peaceable assembly are given the fullest protection. Expression of the widest range of viewpoints should be encouraged, free from institutional orthodoxy and from internal or external coercion. Further, the holding of appointments at Habib University should in no way affect the faculty members’ rights assured by the Constitution of Pakistan.

3.3 Furtherance of These General Principles In furtherance of these general principles: Decisions concerning: 1.

2.

3.

4.

The search for, and appointment and promotion of, faculty.

The assignment of teaching and other primarily academic responsibilities.

The support and sponsorship of scholarly research.

Any other granting or withholding of benefits or imposition of burdens shall be made without regard to a person’s political, social, or other views not directly related to academic values or to the assumption of academic responsibilities; without regard to the conduct of a person holding an appointment at Habib unless such conduct is directly related to academic values or to the assumption of academic responsibilities or is determined, in a proceeding pursuant to the Statement on Faculty Discipline, to come within the provisions of that Statement; and without regard to an individual’s race, ethnic origin, sex, or religion.

5

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

3.4 Grievance Procedures The grievance procedures outlined below are designed to assure that decisions by faculty members and administrators comply with the standards of academic freedom established in the RPH. These procedures are internal to the University and are aimed at preserving confidentiality and academic integrity while protecting the rights of individual faculty members. The provisions of the RPH do not create contractual rights subject to review by agencies outside the University. The procedures outlined below, however, constitute the administrative remedies for faculty grievances covered by parallel rights established under applicable laws of Pakistan.

The following procedures shall apply to all grievances (defined as in the Statement on Faculty Grievance Procedures) arising under this Statement on Academic Freedom: 1. The rights herein conferred shall be enforceable only by a person who is directly aggrieved and who holds a faculty (as defined above) position; no other person or persons shall have standing to complain.

2. If any faculty member feels aggrieved by a decision that he or she believes to be in violation of this Statement, he or she may file a grievance pursuant to the Statement on Faculty Grievance Procedures and its attendant standing rules.

3. For grievances brought in whole or in part for alleged violation of the Statement on Academic Freedom, the rules and procedures of the Statement on Faculty Grievance Procedures shall be modified as follows: 





For a grievance not arising out of a negative decision on appointment, reappointment or promotion (and therefore for which consideration by the Advisory Board would otherwise be unavailable), the grievance and appeal structure shall nonetheless include the Advisory Board as to that portion of the grievance raising an alleged violation of the Statement on Academic Freedom.

To the extent that a grievance or appeal does not involve a violation of this Statement (that is, relating to the search for, and appointment and promotion of, faculty), the Advisory Board may, at its option, refer the grievance to any faculty member or committee of faculty members as it deems appropriate, which faculty member or committee of faculty members shall consider the matter and make recommendations to the President directly.

For each grievance or appeal raising an alleged violation of the Statement on Academic Freedom, the Standards for Review of the Statement on Faculty Grievance Procedures shall be expanded to include the consideration: “Did the decision give weight to one or more of the factors ruled out of proper consideration of the Statement on Academic Freedom?”

4 Openness in Research This section expresses Habib’s commitment to openness in research; defines and prohibits secrecy, including limitations on publishability of results; specifies certain circumstances which are acceptable under this policy.

4.1 Resolved 6

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

That the principles of openness in research – the principle of freedom of access by all interested persons to the underlying data, to the processes and to the final results of research – is one of overriding importance. Accordingly, it is the decision of Habib University that that principle be implemented to the fullest extent practicable and that no program of research that requires secrecy (as hereafter defined) be conducted at Habib University, subject to the exceptions set forth later in this Resolution.

4.2 A Research Program shall be regarded as Requiring Secrecy That a research program shall be regarded as requiring secrecy: 1. If any part of the sponsoring or granting documents that establish the project is not freely publishable.

2. If there is a reasonable basis for expectation that any documents to be generated in the course of the research project will be subjected by an outside sponsor to restrictions on publication for a period in excess of that reasonably required (i.e., more than 90 days) for the sponsor to ascertain whether information he or she is entitled to have treated as confidential would be disclosed by publication.

3. If access will be required in the course of the project to confidential data so centrally related to the research that a member of the research group who was not privy to the confidential data would be unable to participate fully in all of the intellectually significant portions of the project.

4.3 Rules Adopted by Habib University 1. No research on a thesis or dissertation should be undertaken if, at the time the topic is set, there is any substantial possibility that it will lead to a secret thesis or dissertation.

2. No secret thesis or dissertation should be accepted as the basis for a degree unless, in the judgment of the Office of Research, the imposition of secrecy could not reasonably have been foreseen until the work was so far advanced that modification of the thesis topic would have resulted in substantial inequity to the student.

3. Scholarly activities not accessible for scrutiny by the Office of Research should not be considered in connection with appointments, reappointments or promotions.

4. The University should enter no contract and accept no grant to carry out research if the grant or contract restrains the freedom of the University to disclose the:    

Existence of the contract or grant or, General nature of the inquiry to be conducted or, Identity of the outside contracting or granting entity or, The research results;

Provided that this clause shall not apply either (a) to anonymous gifts or grants that do not call for the performance of specified lines of inquiry, or (b) to research grants or contracts from individuals

7

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

or non-governmental entities who request anonymity out of a justifiable motivation to protect individual privacy.

4.4 Programs of Research Shall Not be Regarded as Unacceptable by Reason of Secrecy A program of research, appropriate to the University on other grounds, shall not be regarded as unacceptable by reason of secrecy merely because one or more of the following circumstances exists: A. Living Human Beings

In a program of research involving the examination, through interview techniques or otherwise, of a living human being reasonable provision may be made to protect the rights of that individual to privacy.

B. Security Classification

In a program of research, the purposes of which would be significantly advanced by access to information generated elsewhere which had been subjected to security classification, provision may be made for security clearance and for access to that information on the part of one of several of the participating investigators provided that the classified information is peripheral to the research program in the following sense: the relationship between the classified data and the overall research endeavor must be sufficiently remote so that:  

A member of the research group who did not hold a security clearance would nevertheless be able to participate fully in all of the intellectually significant portions of the project; and There is no substantial basis for an expectation that any part of the final results of the research, or any but a trivial part of the research processes, will be subject to restriction on publication more enduring than those described previously.

C. Publication Delays

In a program of sponsored research, provision may be made in the contractual agreement between Habib and the sponsor for a delay in the publication of research results, in the following circumstances: 1. For a short delay (the period of delay not to exceed 90 days), for patenting purposes or for sponsor review of and comment on manuscripts, providing that no basis exists at the beginning of the project to expect that the sponsor would attempt either to suppress publication or to impose substantive changes in the manuscripts.

2. For a longer delay in the case of multi-site research (the period of delay not to exceed 24 months from the completion of research at all sites), where a publication committee receives data from participating sites and makes decisions about joint publications. Such delays are permitted only if the Habib investigator is assured the ability to publish without restrictions after the specified delay.

8

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 3. When it is in the best interests of the research, the Dean of Research may approve contractual arrangements that could lead to longer publication delays. Requests for the Dean to approve such contractual arrangements should include:   

The rationale for the request.

A description of who will have authority over publication decisions, and A statement of the provisions that will allow the investigator to publish within a defined period of time, regardless of other considerations.

Under no circumstances should a faculty member engage a student or trainee in a project governed by an extended publication delay agreement or contractual arrangement that could present a barrier to the timely submission of the student’s thesis or dissertation or to the publication of a trainee’s work.

D. Confidentiality

If, in a program of research, an outside person or entity has made available to the investigator confidential information, provision may be made to preserve confidentiality and/or a short delay in the publication of research results during which time the information source may examine the proposed publication in order to assure that the investigator has not disclosed, intentionally or unintentionally, any portion of the confidential information supplied, provided that any such provision for delay must contain assurance from the information source that he will conduct his review as expeditiously as possible, that he will not attempt to thwart publication for any reason except to protect confidential information previously supplied and that he will indicate with specificity a sentence or sentences which he contends constitute such a disclosure.

E. Private Papers, Documents, Diaries or Analogous Materials

If, in a program of research, private papers, documents, diaries or analogous materials have been provided to the investigator, provision may be made to preserve the confidentiality of those materials for the purpose of protecting the individual privacy of the author, or of the addressee, or of the immediate family of either the author or the addressee.

4.5 Review This policy shall be reviewed at least annually by the Office of Research in one of its meetings.

This meeting and others primarily devoted to considering a revision of research policy shall be announced publicly through the website of the Office of Research and/or other suitable means.

5 On Academic Authorship This section presents a systematic discussion of two related issues: first, the allocation of responsibility and credit for scholarly work; and second, those forces that are pushing toward a level of complexity in the conduct of research at which it becomes difficult to determine responsibility of authorship.

9

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

5.1 Committee on Research Resolution The Office of Research examined the issues and resolved that:   



Copies of the Kennedy paper (see next section) shall be widely circulated to encourage discussion of authorship before research projects commence No attempt shall be made to establish University guidelines to define “significant intellectual contribution” or impose formal mechanisms for determining authorship Faculty shall be reminded of their responsibilities to insure authorship rights and responsibilities of students – both undergraduate and postgraduate, as well as other employed research staff.

Periodic surveys shall be conducted to determine if academic authorship problems emerge in the future.

5.2 Paper by Donald Kennedy, then President of the Office of Research at Stanford University.

“Dear Friends: For some time, I have felt a need for systematic discussion within this faculty of two related issues: first, the allocation of responsibility and credit for scholarly work; and second, those forces that, in many disciplines, are pushing us toward a level of complexity in the conduct of research at which it becomes difficult to determine responsibility of authorship.

I am sure you are aware of the national attention given to cases involving misconduct and alleged misconduct in the production and publication of research results. You may not know that at Stanford we have been hearing increasing numbers of complaints and disagreements between students (postdoctoral, graduate, and undergraduate) and their faculty sponsors over credit for work to which both may have contributed.

The pattern of research in many fields is changing. Large laboratories may be under the general directorship of one or two individuals but often include relatively independent work being performed by groups of shifting composition. These changes often produce exciting developments, but at the same time they pose novel problems for the allocation of credit and responsibility.

Increased administrative burdens on principal investigators, arising in part out of more onerous government regulation, may also contribute – by decreasing the time available for active participation in research, just when its importance to academic careers is increasing.

For these and perhaps other reasons, matters of authorship, attribution, and acknowledgment have become more complex; responsibility for work in which we are less personally involved has become more common; and the customs prevailing in different fields have diverged. It is also likely that the incentive for claiming credit has increased.

In the past, appropriate standards in these matters have been determined by the individuals involved, based upon traditions that have grown up in the profession as a whole and in the separate 10

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

fields. But the steady stream of problems now coming before me suggests that isolated individual judgments by faculty members may no longer be adequate. So I write this memorandum in the hope that it may initiate discussion among my colleagues.

Let me first describe how these problems tend to arise. Some actions, of course, remain relatively simple to label – and to condemn. One who has had no connection with a research project but presents its methods, data, or conclusions as his or her own has committed plagiarism; if the writings of another are taken essentially verbatim, there may be copyright infringement as well. I do not think our common understanding about the straightforward theft of intellectual product has been eroded.

But there are more difficult cases, and they generally involve the allocation of credit for work to which several individuals have contributed something. Often, one participant claims that the joint effort permits publication without the consent of the others, or publication as a sole author, or publication without acknowledgment of the contribution of others.

The following scenario is not atypical: Graduate student S is working in Professor P’s laboratory on an experimental problem within P’s general field of interest and competence. Perhaps S has a research assistantship funded by P’s grant. S conducts an experiment, gathers a set of interesting data, and writes up the results as part of what is expected to become a doctoral dissertation. S discusses the results with Professor P, who subsequently incorporates the data and new findings in a symposium article (or perhaps a grant application), with a cursory acknowledgment of S’s role, or none. S considers that original data from an independent experiment was wrongfully appropriated by P. P views the work as having been done with his support, in his laboratory, within the conceptual framework devised by him, and accordingly views the results as a joint intellectual product in which both have full rights of authorship. Cases of this kind are especially resistant to easy solution because we are such a diverse and complex scholarly community. Each of us will think of factors not given in this bare sketch that would incline us toward one view or the other – but they will not always be the same factors.

Notions about how to handle joint student and faculty work in laboratories in organic chemistry at Stanford and at MIT will resemble one another much more closely than do those applying to organic chemistry and, say, economics within either institution.

In some disciplines it is quite customary for graduate students to publish their own research results by themselves, even when their work involves fairly close supervision by a faculty member – and in others, the professor’s name goes on virtually every paper produced in the laboratory.

This heterogeneity of custom sometimes makes it very difficult to decide, in disagreements like the one between S and P, whether we are dealing with professional misconduct (the wrongful appropriation of another’s intellectual product) or whether we are in a domain of ethical judgments about the proper allocation of credit between joint researchers – judgments so close that they should be resolved by personal values, etiquette, and generosity, rather than by a faculty disciplinary process. It is especially difficult for the disputing parties to see a matter in the same way.

11

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

The resulting level of bitterness can be very high, and the University should bend every effort toward its reduction. Although we probably cannot hope for a set of specific rules that could set criteria for the shared ownership of intellectual product in all scholarly disciplines some clarification ought to be possible. Here are some propositions that I think are generally true: First In settings like ours, research and training are closely related, deeply interpenetrating functions.

The research apprenticeship undertaken by any student – undergraduate, graduate, or postdoctoral – in the academic domain of a faculty sponsor has as one of its purposes the training and development of the student. The other purpose, of course, is the advancement of the scholarly program of which the faculty member is the leader. The relationship between the two is complementary; but the functions of the student participation, and its value to the student on the one hand and the faculty member on the other, will vary.

In particular, the functions served and the kinds of benefits to each party change with the student’s academic level. In some fields, for instance, undergraduates and beginning graduate students rarely contribute significantly to the intellectual design and content of advanced research; they can be useful as “hands.” The benefits they realize may chiefly be that of becoming familiar with fairly routine procedures, learning the methodology of research, the operation of any relevant equipment, and absorbing the “culture” of the discipline. These are substantial benefits, and the contributions they make are helpful to the enterprise without being essentially scholarly. However, we also should be cognizant of our primary responsibility to our students and alert to opportunities to involve them as early as possible in the genuinely intellectual aspects of the discipline. If we keep using them for routine tasks long after they have gained command over them – or if we fail to recognize by appropriate credit in publications that they have progressed and are making intellectual contributions – the relationship becomes exploitative. And even in the case of undergraduates or beginning graduate students, there will be situations in which they are in fact contributing to the intellectual content of the project, and thus functioning as colleagues. To fail to maximize all these opportunities for our students is to default on one of our central missions as educators.

Second There is a cluster of questions about authorship and intellectual “ownership” that includes these, among others: What level of contribution by the various parties to a research enterprise qualifies for (co) authorship of the product? What circumstances entitle one to independent or first publication or to the use of data in another publication or project without attribution? In considering these, I am struck by the seamlessness that often characterizes collaborative research, and I wonder if we would do better if we gave thought – and voice – to our assumptions at the outset, even as we understand that those initial assumptions may well change as the course of research progresses.

Even at its beginning, it is often difficult to trace the source of the ideas and insights from which a research project originates; it is hard to say what was identifiably generated by one individual and what was “in the air” in the intellectual domain. Although my personal experience is with the 12

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

natural sciences, I know that ideas in the social sciences and the humanities are likely to be of similarly elusive, and mixed, parentage. In those sciences where the gathering of experimental data is a regular part of the work, there are matters of experimental concept, design, instrumentation, hands-on execution, and data interpretation; in other fields, an idea is shaped and developed as it is committed to writing, so that the original inspiration may defy reconstruction by the time the project is completed. One member of an experimental team that includes a professor, graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, and technicians may provide an absolutely critical skill, without which the entire venture could not proceed; one contributor to a scholarly project may have had an idea that was essential to the working out of the problem - even though by the time the project is completed it may have so changed from the original conception that the germinal idea is no longer central. The more interactive the process, the less we can retrospectively divide the work into parts corresponding to particular roles or contributions.

Furthermore, faculty members often rely on their own familiarity with the conventions of the discipline regarding co-authorship and other forms of credit, forgetting that students and other participants in a project may be unacquainted with them. Again, I wonder whether departments or laboratories could ameliorate the bitterness of disappointed expectations by a general discussion, in advance, of the ground rules. The understanding in my laboratory was this: If I had contributed to the idea of the project and had also contributed significantly to the hands-on work, co-authorship was justified; but any coauthor had to have a complete enough grasp of the whole effort to defend it effectively in a scientific meeting. This test, or course, is tailored to an experimental science and surely is not the only one applicable even there. Whatever the agreement, it is necessary also that there be a prior understanding of the scope of the particular project or sub-project – that is, both should know the anticipated product to which the agreement applies.

Third Another aspect of the same cluster of issues – who may publish first, who must consent, what connections with the work need be acknowledged and how – is associated particularly with review articles, books (or chapters of books), or symposium contributions, especially “state of the discipline” pieces. Opportunities to produce more comprehensive works of this kind come mainly to senior scholars. In describing the significant developments in one’s field, there is a natural tendency to include work done by oneself and one’s students and junior associates. In the usual case, the scope of the topic is broad enough so that including all associates as coauthors is impractical and/or silly (although in a few cases it may be managed). Where the piece deals with data or results of others that are already published as a paper or dissertation, or have been accepted for publication, then employing them with appropriate citation is obviously proper.

If the material is yet unpublished but will be issued as a joint work, I think it is generally accepted that any of its prospective coauthors may refer to it, even at length, in a separate work of sole authorship – provided that its joint origin is prominently acknowledged and provided that the opportunity for regular scholarly publication is not preempted. Common courtesy as well as an appropriate concern for the welfare of coauthors of the yet-unpublished work – especially, of course, if they are one’s own students – requires that they be consulted and that reasonable requests be accommodated. If the material is as yet unpublished and if it will not be a joint work, permission must be obtained for any extended discussion and should be obtained as a matter of courtesy even 13

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

for a passing notice. (Acknowledgment of the source is always essential, of course; if one permits it to be understood that the work is one’s own, I think we are back to plagiarism of the simple kind.)

Fourth There is a tight coupling between authorship and responsibility. Let us suppose that the name of a faculty member has been included on a paper resulting from the relatively independent experiments done by a student or fellow. If the data are then shown to be faulty, or worse, invented, it seems clear to me that the faculty member is responsible. Indeed, as Provost Albert Hastorf's 1984 memorandum on academic fraud pointed out, faculty members are generally responsible for the scholarly conduct of staff and students involved in their research enterprises. When one assumes co-authorship, a still higher duty of certainty prevails. The defense of minimal participation in work done in one’s laboratory is generally questionable; surely it is entirely inapplicable when one is coauthor of the disputed work.

Once again, however, clarity is clouded by differences in disciplinary culture. An individual’s place in the list of authors of a work may or may not be a meaningful signal about the degree of contribution: in some fields the authorship sequence is rich in meaning, elsewhere it may be entirely empty. Even within a discipline, customs vary: In most biological papers, the sequence of authors is in approximate order of extent of contribution; but there is also a tradition that places the chief of the laboratory last regardless of the relative weight of contribution, and at least one leading journal extracts all meaning from sequence by requiring alphabetical listing of authors.

But those complexities only underscore the importance of establishing sound principles for determining co-authorship and provide further reason for extreme care by faculty members. While I understand the need to respect the nuances that readers (including prospective employers) will derive from author sequence in a journal article, it does seem to me that as a prima facie matter, each coauthor of a work is accountable for its authenticity and quality. Shared credit should entail shared responsibility. Where, by custom or agreement, that is not the case – in fields where 10 or more names regularly appear on a single paper as coauthors, for example, or where the work is a collaboration between scholars from different fields who lack intimate command of one another’s areas – some explicit disclosure of that fact would seem desirable.

Finally, let me offer an observation on a different topic, one that has an oblique relationship to the issues considered above. I note that the pressures have increased – unacceptably, in some disciplines – to produce immense lists of publications. Those who have served on the Advisory Board, or who have seen promotion and tenure files from throughout the University for other reasons, will know the extraordinary range in numbers of publications. In the humanities, most social sciences, and some natural sciences, only a handful of works will be listed. In some Medical School departments especially, there may be more than 100 publications in a period of five or six years.

Again, the functions and traditions of publication vary by field: In some, it is (or seems) important that each small step be documented and circulated as soon as possible. In other disciplines, even primary research work is published only after extensive collection of data and the attainment of 14

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

some theoretical outcome. Works of the same size can, of course, be more or less significant, as scholars in the field will immediately discern.

Nonetheless, I think the exaggerated growth of publications in some fields has become pathological, and I would like to see the problem addressed here at Stanford and, perhaps, in conference with our colleagues elsewhere. It seems likely that the pressure to have a list of publications several pages long to achieve tenure, or to produce a dozen or more papers a year to maintain one’s status as a productive scholar, may lead to the kinds of behavior mentioned above: to the seizing of authorial credit where it is not due and, perhaps, to ungenerous attempts to exclude others from authorship. Indeed, there are suggestions that it contributes to the likelihood of outright academic fraud. It is very well to say that such behavior is improper even in the face of great pressure. We do say it, and mean it. But should we not question the propriety of letting the pressure continue to increase, and address ourselves to means of relieving it while maintaining (indeed, enhancing) the quality of scholarly output?

These reflections do not cover the full range of problems in connection with authorship, acknowledgment, and use of intellectual product. As I said, I hope they will provoke discussion and, if not resolution, at least steps toward the expression of commonly held principles. Surely many problems can be ameliorated by a constant awareness of the special duty of faculty to foster the intellectual growth and independence of their students, by a habit of generosity in giving as much credit to their contributions as is consistent with realistic appraisal, and by the meticulous observation of strict standards of citation and acknowledgment. Others are harder; they may ultimately yield, if at all, only to the careful development of consensus about the ethics of our profession.

To begin our consideration of these issues, I am asking the Committee on Research to examine them during the coming academic year and to forward their views to the Provost and to me. We shall then discuss their further disposition with the Academic Senate.�

6 Multi-Authored Research Papers This presents guidelines for manuscripts produced by multi-investigator research teams, addressing coherence, review, co-authorship, and maintenance of data.

6.1 Introduction Multi-investigator research teams differ significantly from the individual faculty/graduate student research teams, which are the norm at Habib. In particular, the former often consist of colleagues from different disciplines who perform different, specialized functions. It is possible for participants to have little knowledge or understanding of parts of the work performed by their colleagues. Sometimes, there is no single person who understands all the research.

6.2 Guidelines

15

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

With this in mind, the Office of Research has drawn up the following guidelines for scholarly manuscripts emanating from multi-investigator research. We have endeavored to keep these simple and fundamental. As a consequence, the guidelines appear applicable to all scholarly collaborations in which multiple authorship is anticipated.

1. Principal investigators and senior faculty have special responsibilities to assure the overall cohesiveness and validity of the publications on which they appear as coauthors.

2. All authors in a group effort have a shared responsibility for the published result and should have the opportunity to review all sample preparation procedures and data, as well as all data acquisition and analysis procedures.

3. Each author in a group effort should have access to the manuscript prior to its being submitted for publication, and should agree to his or her inclusion as a coauthor. All the participants in the program should know that the paper is being prepared for publication.

4. Early in the project, each research group should define appropriate practices for the maintenance of data.

7 Research Misconduct: Policy on Allegations, Investigations, and Reporting This presents procedures for reporting and investigating allegations of research misconduct and for the required notifications to government agencies of such allegations and investigations.

7.1 Introduction Each member of the University community has a responsibility to foster an environment which promotes intellectual honesty and integrity and which does not tolerate misconduct in any aspect of research or scholarly endeavor.

Research misconduct is extremely troubling – in spite of its infrequency – because when it occurs, it is very destructive of the standards we attempt to instill in our students, of the esteem in which academic science in general is held by the public and of the financial support of the government and other sponsors for academic research. The importance of integrity in research cannot be overemphasized.

7.2 Applicability Habib’s definition of research misconduct and procedures for investigating and reporting allegations of misconduct, conform to the definitions and regulations of those government and other funding agencies which have policies on this subject. Habib policy is applicable to: 1. Research proposed, conducted or reported at Habib by Habib University-related individuals, i.e., those with an appointment or official affiliation with Habib University, including faculty, academic staff, students, postdoctoral scholars, visiting scholars who make significant use of university research resources (including participation in any 16

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

sponsored project awarded to Habib University), and those with any other Habib University teaching and/or research titles such as adjunct clinical or consulting appointments; 2. Research proposed, conducted or reported elsewhere by such Habib University-related individuals as part of their Habib University-related duties or activities; and 3. At the discretion of the University, to research proposed, conducted or reported where such research is claimed, cited or implied to have been done at Habib, or where a Habib appointment or official affiliation is claimed, cited or implied in connection with the research.

7.3 Definitions A. Research Misconduct

“Research misconduct” is defined as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.  



Fabrication means making up data or results and recording or reporting them.

Falsification means 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 means the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.

Research misconduct does not include honest error or honest differences in interpretations or judgments of data.

A finding of research misconduct requires that:   

There is a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant research community.

The misconduct is committed intentionally, or knowingly, or recklessly.

The allegation is proven by a preponderance of the evidence. (Habib University’s disciplinary procedures may establish a different standard of proof for disciplinary actions.)

This policy addresses only research misconduct. Habib’s statement on faculty discipline has been interpreted to include such other misdeeds as reckless disregard for accuracy, failure to supervise adequately and other lapses from professional conduct or neglect of academic duties. Findings (pursuant to this research misconduct procedure) of serious academic deficiencies in proposing, conducting or reporting research – but not constituting research misconduct – are to be addressed by the cognizant dean, or by initiating the relevant disciplinary process, as appropriate. Allegations or suspicions of misconduct outside the scope of this policy should be referred for investigation to the cognizant dean, provost or president; the process of investigation and reporting obligations may differ from those required for research misconduct cases.

17

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 B. Inquiry

An inquiry consists of preliminary information-gathering and preliminary fact-finding to determine whether an allegation or an apparent instance of misconduct has substance. The outcome of an inquiry is a determination as to whether or not an investigation is to be conducted.

C. Investigation

An investigation is a formal examination and evaluation of relevant facts to determine whether or not misconduct has taken place.

7.4 Government and other Funding Agency Requirements Some government and other funding agencies have their own policies regarding research misconduct and require notification to the agency in the event of such an allegation or investigation. Where required, this notification will be made by the Provost and Dean of Research (herein referred to as the Dean of Research). See later, Internal Coordination/Reports to the Dean of Research and also Notification to External Agencies.

While government and other funding agencies recognize that the primary responsibility for the prevention and detection of misconduct and for the conduct of inquiries and investigations, rests with the awarded institution, a number of agencies have retained the right to initiate their own investigations at any time.

7.5 Individual Reporting Responsibility Any individual who believes an act of research misconduct has occurred or is occurring should notify the dean of the appropriate school, who, after preliminary assessment indicating grounds to proceed, should immediately begin an inquiry and so inform the Dean of Research, who acts on behalf of the Provost. Reporting such concerns in good faith is a service to the University and to the larger academic community and will not jeopardize anyone’s employment. Habib University prohibits retaliation of any kind against a person who, acting in good faith, reports or provides information about suspected or alleged misconduct.

7.6 Procedure for School Dean’s Review The dean’s review of an allegation of research misconduct and, if called for, the inquiry and investigation may be carried out personally or through such standing or ad hoc arrangements as each dean deems best. (See the later section, Cautions and Assistance.)

The processes described below should be carried out in a manner that is thorough, competent, objective, fair and appropriately protective of the confidentiality and reputations of all participants.

Such assessments, inquiries and investigations should be coordinated with the office of the Dean of Research to assure that they are carried out in conformance with applicable regulations (if any) in cases where the research is funded by a government or other agency.

18

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 A. Preliminary Assessment

Upon receipt of an allegation, the school dean should assess the information presented to determine whether it constitutes alleged research misconduct as defined by this policy and whether the allegation is sufficiently credible and specific so that potential evidence of research misconduct may be identified. If both of these criteria are met, the school dean shall immediately begin an inquiry and shall so inform the Dean of Research, identifying any outside funding source(s) for the research that is the subject of the allegation.

B. Inquiry

An inquiry is to determine whether a formal investigation is warranted and will be guided by the following: 1. As noted above, the school dean shall identify any outside funding source(s) for the research that is the subject of the inquiry.

2. Those conducting such inquiries or investigations are promptly to take all reasonable and practical steps to obtain custody of the research records and/or evidence needed to conduct the misconduct proceeding, inventory the records and evidence and sequester them in an appropriate manner.

3. At the time of, or before the beginning of an inquiry, the accused individual (hereafter “the respondent”) shall be informed of the allegations and be invited to comment on them. The respondent shall also be provided with a copy of the draft report of the inquiry and be given an opportunity to comment on the findings for the consideration of those conducting the inquiry. In so doing, best efforts shall be made (where feasible) to protect the confidence of the individual(s) who brought forward the complaint (hereafter “the complainant(s)”).

4. Other relevant individuals, including the complainant(s), if known, should be interviewed.

5. The final report, including a recommendation as to whether or not a full investigation is warranted, is to be submitted by the school dean to the Dean of Research within 60 days of receipt of the allegation. (If this time frame is not possible in a particular case, the reasons are to be documented and the Dean of Research so informed.) The final report shall include any comments provided by the respondent in response to the draft report.

6. The documentation should include sufficient detail to permit a later assessment of the determination of whether or not a full investigation was warranted. It should describe the information reviewed, include a summary of the interviews conducted, state conclusions reached and indicate whether or not the school dean believes an investigation is warranted.

7. The final report of the inquiry and a copy of the documentation are to be transmitted to the Dean of Research and maintained in the school for seven years.

8. Unless the Dean of Research has further concerns, a dean’s recommendation that an investigation is not warranted will be final.

C. Investigation Procedures

If the inquiry leads to the conclusion that an investigation is warranted, it will be guided by the following considerations:

19

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 1. The formal investigation should begin within 30 days of the completion of the inquiry and after written notice to the respondent. The investigation is to be completed and the final report sent to the Dean of Research within 90 days (from the start of an investigation). If an investigation cannot be completed within this time frame, the Dean of Research should be notified as soon as possible. In such cases, it may be necessary for the Dean of Research to request an extension of time from the funding agencies.

2. An investigation should normally include an examination of the relevant documentation, including but not limited to relevant research data and proposals, publications, correspondence and memoranda of telephone calls.

3. Complainants, respondents and witnesses who may have information related to the matter should be interviewed. Complete written summaries of each interview should be provided to the individual being questioned and any comments should be appended to the summary, or reflected in a revised summary if the interviewer agrees. The summaries must be retained by the school dean.

4. All significant issues should be pursued until the investigator is reasonably certain that he or she has amassed all necessary and appropriate information.

5. A draft written report of findings shall be made available to the respondent with the opportunity to provide comments for the consideration of those conducting the investigation. Where identified and appropriate, complainants should also receive the portions of the draft report which concern the role or opinions they had in the investigation. Any comments on the draft from the respondent (and from the complainants, if applicable) shall be appended to the final report.

NOTE: If there is more than one respondent and their involvements are found not to be identical, separate draft reports should be prepared if practical, in order to preserve confidentiality.

6. In addition to the interview summaries and comments by the respondent and complainant(s) (if applicable) on the draft report, the final written report should include:   

A description of the policies and procedures followed.

How and from whom relevant information was obtained.

The findings and basis for them.

7. If either the school dean or the Dean of Research considers that sanctions may be warranted, the Dean of Research shall refer the final report to the University official who makes that determination (see later section). The report should be sufficient for the appropriate University officer to determine whether disciplinary action is called for. If any sanctions result, the Dean of Research shall be informed and he or she should append that information to the final report.

7.7 Internal Coordination/Reports to the Dean of Research In order to assure compliance with external notification requirements, school deans must report the following circumstances to the Dean of Research in a timely manner:     

Commencement of an inquiry.

Conclusion of an inquiry.

Commencement of an investigation.

Consultation if an investigation will take more than 90 days to complete.

Conclusion of an investigation.

20

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

If termination of an inquiry or investigation before its completion is contemplated for any reason, this should be reported and discussed with the Dean of Research.

In addition, the Dean of Research is to be advised at once if any of the following circumstances is discovered:      

An immediate health hazard.

An immediate need to protect government, other agencies or University funds or equipment.

An immediate need to protect the integrity of the research and/or the research misconduct proceeding.

An immediate need to protect the interests of those involved in the research misconduct proceeding.

Likelihood that an alleged incident will be reported publicly.

A reasonable indication of a possible criminal violation.

In emergency situations, deans are authorized to take all appropriate actions, including notifying external agencies directly, if conference with the Dean of Research is not possible in a timely manner. (See Section, Notification to External Agencies, below.) The Dean of Research is also authorized to take all appropriate actions.

The dean shall also take interim action as necessary to protect government or other funds and the purposes of the government or other grant or contract that may be involved. Such action is administrative and not disciplinary. The school dean shall inform the Dean of Research of such actions.

If, during an investigation, facts come to light that could affect current or potential funding of the people under investigation, or that may, in the dean’s judgment, need to be disclosed in order to ensure proper use of research funds or protection of the public interest, these facts should be reported to the Dean of Research as they are learned.

7.8 Notification to External Agencies Habib University will comply with the applicable requirements and regulations of its funding agencies and will cooperate with those agencies in the agencies’ own procedures in regard to research misconduct. In any particular situation, school deans are advised to review current regulations and requirements and to consult with the Dean of Research.

Under circumstances not involving government or other external funding agencies, the President will make the decision whether information about the charges and their disposition will be disclosed publicly or to specific parties, including the research sponsor. This decision will normally be made upon the conclusion of the final report. However, if required by urgent circumstances, such a disclosure may be made at any time. The President may consult with the Office of Research to the extent feasible and appropriate in such cases. Absent such urgent need, Habib University will not make interim reports to outside agencies unless required by external regulation.

21

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

In accord with the requirements of government and other funding agencies, in cases involving research funded by those agencies, the agency will be informed in the following situations. Except as specifically described at the end of this section, the following notifications to government and other funding agencies will be made only by the Dean of Research, acting on behalf of the Provost and on the basis of the information provided by the school dean: 1. Outcome of an Inquiry

Government and other external funding agencies will be notified of the outcome of an inquiry involving funds from their agency only if that outcome includes the recommendation to conduct a full investigation. (Documentation from inquiries, even those that do not recommend further investigation, will be made available by the Dean of Research upon an agency’s request.)

2. Commencement of an Investigation

Written notification will be provided to government or other funding agencies upon determination that an investigation will be conducted. This notice is to be provided on or before the commencement of the investigation, and must include all information required by the agency.

Generally, this notice must include at least the following: name(s) and position(s) of the respondent(s); general nature of the allegation(s); the agency support including any proposal or award numbers; the basis for the recommendation of an investigation; any comments by the respondent. This information will be held in confidence to the extent permitted by law.

3. Written Request for a Time Extension

Although regulations generally permit 120 days for completion of the investigation and submission of the final report, Habib requires deans to consult with the Dean of Research if it appears that the final report will take more than 90 days to complete. This allows 30 days for the disciplinary process, if it is decided to pursue one. The final report to the funding agency must include a statement about the sanction (if any) imposed by the institution. If the investigation and determination of discipline are likely to take more time than specified by the relevant funding agency’s regulations to complete, the Dean of Research will so notify the funding agency, including reasons for the delay, interim progress reports, the estimated date of completion of the report and any other necessary information. If an extension is granted, the agency may (if so provided by its regulations) require the submission of periodic interim reports, or the agency may undertake its own investigation prior to the University’s completion of its investigation.

4. Interim Reports

Government or other funding agencies must be apprised during an investigation of facts that may affect current or potential funding of the individual(s) under investigation, or that may need to be disclosed in order to ensure proper use of federal funds or protection of the public interest.

5. Early Termination

22

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

Government or other funding agencies must be notified of any decision to terminate an inquiry or investigation prior to the completion of all relevant requirements. This notice must include the reasons for such action. Some agencies have retained the right to investigate the matter further on their own.

6. Final Outcome

Government and other funding agencies will be notified of the final outcome of an investigation involving their funded project(s), and provided with a complete copy of the final report.

7. Special Emergency Notifications

In addition, funding agencies will be informed at any stage of an inquiry or investigation if any of the following is discovered:      

An immediate health hazard.

An immediate need to protect the agency’s or University funds or equipment.

An immediate need to protect the integrity of the research and/or the research misconduct proceeding.

An immediate need to protect the interests of those involved in the research misconduct proceeding.

A likelihood that an alleged incident is going to be reported publicly.

A reasonable indication of possible criminal activity.

In special emergency circumstances as defined above, the school dean should attempt to reach the Dean of Research (by phone if necessary; in writing/email, if possible). However, each dean is authorized to make such reports directly to the agency and to so inform the Dean of Research afterwards, if, in the judgment of the dean, such action is necessary.

7.9 Determination of Discipline The determination as to whether discipline is to be imposed is governed by existing University policies. In cases involving faculty, disciplinary sanctions may only be imposed through the faculty disciplinary process. The Dean of Research will refer cases of significant student misconduct to the necessary Student Officer. Cases involving staff members will be referred to the appropriate Dean or Provost. As noted above, serious academic deficiencies not constituting research misconduct are to be addressed by the relevant school dean, or by initiating the relevant disciplinary process as appropriate.

Government or other funding agencies have retained the right to impose additional sanctions, beyond those applied by the institution, upon investigators or institutions, if they deem such action appropriate in situations involving funding from their respective agencies; such agencies may also have standards of proof that differ from those used in Habib’s disciplinary proceedings.

23

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

In addition, in cases where research misconduct is found, the school dean and/or the Dean of Research may take all other appropriate actions (including the correction of the public record) as deemed necessary and advisable to address the consequences of the research misconduct.

7.10 Cautions and Assistance The gathering and assessing of information in cases of alleged research misconduct can be extremely difficult. It is essential to protect the professional reputations of those involved, as well as the interests of the public and of any who might be harmed by the alleged misconduct. In the course of conducting inquiries or investigations, the following provisions are applicable:   

Expert assistance should be sought as necessary to conduct a thorough and authoritative evaluation of all evidence.

Precautions should be taken to avoid unresolved personal, professional or financial conflicts of interest on the part of those involved in the inquiry or investigation.

The anonymity of respondents and, if they wish it, the confidentiality of complainants shall be protected (where feasible) and care shall be taken to protect the positions and reputations of those involved in the research (including research subjects) and in the research misconduct proceeding from harm (including retaliation). Except as required in the reporting provisions above, only those directly involved in an inquiry or investigation or with a need to know should be aware that the process is being conducted or have any access to information obtained during its course. Where appropriate, efforts will be made to restore the reputations of the respondent(s) when allegations are not confirmed.

Because this policy is designed primarily to protect the integrity of the public research record, instances of alleged research misconduct by students in practicum-type courses and in coursework and classroom activities, may in many cases be better addressed through student Honor Code or other procedures, rather than through the procedures of this policy. Such determination of applicability or non-applicability should be made in light of the particular facts and circumstances of a student’s case.

8 Nondiscrimination in Research Agreements Habib University does not engage in research agreements which permit discrimination on the basis of any characteristic protected by law and does not limit participation in research on the basis of citizenship.

8.1 Introduction Habib University does not discriminate on the basis of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical, or mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, or any other characteristic protected by law, in connection with any aspect of employment at Habib, or in its research agreements. Habib also prohibits discrimination for any of these reasons in the admission of students and in the administration of its educational policies and programs.

24

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

In addition and in accordance with its policy on Openness in Research, Habib does not limit participation in research activities on the basis of citizenship. This commitment to an open research environment supports the principle of freedom of access by all interested persons to the underlying data, to the processes and to the final results of research and preserves the ability of Habib faculty to select the best qualified individuals to participate in research, including student participants.

Therefore, as a general proposition, Habib does not enter into research agreements which permit discrimination on the basis of citizenship against individuals engaged in research activities proposed or conducted under its auspices.

8.2 Provisions for Exceptions in Regard to Citizenship In the following circumstances, where and to the extent permitted by applicable law and consistent with the principle stated above of freedom of access and participation, an exception to this policy may be considered in regard to citizenship restrictions.

A. Citizenship Restrictions Established by Training Grants, Scholarships or Fellowships

The Pakistani Government has established funding mechanisms as a primary means of supporting graduate and postdoctoral research training to help ensure that a diverse and highly trained workforce is available to assume leadership roles related to the nation’s research agenda.

Typically, these funding mechanisms include training grants, fellowships and scholarships within particular disciplines with the restriction that students to be supported by these funds must be Pakistani citizens (or permanent residents). In addition, other organizations, including foreign governments, may provide support in the form of scholarships or fellowships to students meeting certain citizenship requirements.
 Several differences should be noted between the funding being described in this category and research project funding.

1. Although they may focus on particular disciplines, training grants, scholarships and fellowships do not require the accomplishment of specific research Statements of Work. Their purpose is the training and support of student researchers, as opposed to the accomplishment of technical objectives. These awards may be considered as a form of financial aid to the individuals being supported.

2. Unlike students funded to work on research projects (Graduate Research Assistants), the students funded on training grants, scholarships, or fellowships are not paid a salary as student employees.

Rather, their support is provided typically through the payment of a stipend to help meet living expenses, and the direct payment of some or all of the student’s tuition and fees.

Habib University may, in general and without prior review and approval beyond normal process, submit proposals for, and accept the award of such training grants, scholarships, and fellowships in support of the education of its students.

25

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 B. Citizenship Restrictions for “Early Career” Type Awards

Similar to the training awards described above, several agencies award financial support for the explicit purpose of advancing the development within certain disciplines of individuals at the early stages of their academic careers. Typically such awards are limited to individuals within a certain period of time from the receipt of a doctoral degree or an initial academic appointment. They are awarded to support the individual, rather than to accomplish a specified Statement of Work. As with training grants, some such awards are limited to Pakistani citizens or permanent residents.

Habib University may, in general and without prior review and approval beyond normal process, submit proposals for, and accept the award of such “Young Faculty”, “Young Investigator”, or “Early Career”-type awards. Acceptance of such an award does not limit the recipient’s ability to conduct his or her research program in compliance with Habib University policies.

C. Citizenship Restrictions in Foreign-Sponsored Research Agreements

If a sponsoring country restricts entry of citizens of other nations into its country, the Principal Investigator should try to organize the research project and the University should try to draw up the agreement in such ways as to eliminate or reduce as far as practicable the discriminatory effect of those restrictions on participating Habib personnel.

In such cases, the Office of Research will review the proposed research agreement for purposes of assessing any discriminatory impact. If, in its judgment, the proposed agreement would have a potentially significant discriminatory impact on Habib personnel because of restrictions on travel

by Habib employees or students into the sponsoring country as part of the research activity, the Office of Research will refer the proposal to the Provost and Dean of Research to determine whether the proposed research agreement will be accepted.

D. Citizenship Restrictions Imposed by Export Control or Other Regulations

In rare circumstances, the conduct of research may require that a member of the research group must meet certain citizenship requirements in order to obtain or have access to certain proprietary or Government-restricted information, where that information is subject to security classification, export control, or other regulatory restrictions. Such information or access may be accepted only to the extent that the provisions of Habib’s Openness in Research policy are met.

E. Other Circumstances

In the rare event that (consistent with applicable law and with the principle of freedom of access to and participation in research) other circumstances arise in which a Principal Investigator wishes to request an exception to the nondiscrimination policy defined here in regard to citizenship, that request shall be sent for review and preliminary approval to the faculty member’s school dean, and shall then be forwarded to the Provost and Dean of Research for his or her determination.

8.3 Review 26

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

The Office of Research shall review the implementation of the above policy, and report its findings to the Academic Planning Committee every three years.

9 Retention of and Access to Research Data Establishes University policy to assure that research data is appropriately recorded, archived for a reasonable period of time and available for review under the appropriate circumstances.

9.1 Introduction Accurate and appropriate research records are an essential component of any research project. Both the University and the PI have responsibilities and rights concerning access to, use of, and maintenance of original research data.

Except where precluded by the specific terms of sponsorship or other agreements, tangible research property, including the scientific data and other records of research conducted under the auspices of Habib University, belongs to Habib. The PI is responsible for the maintenance and retention of research data in accord with this policy.

9.2 Definition Research data include laboratory notebooks, as well as any other records that are necessary for the reconstruction and evaluation of reported results of research and the events and processes leading to those results, regardless of the form or the media on which they may be recorded. Habib must retain research data in sufficient detail and for an adequate period of time to enable appropriate responses to questions about accuracy, authenticity, primacy, and compliance with laws and regulations governing the conduct of the research. It is the responsibility of the PI to determine what needs to be retained under this policy.

9.3 Applicability This policy shall apply to all Habib University faculty, staff, students and any other persons at Habib University involved in the design, conduct or reporting of research at or under the auspices of Habib University and it shall apply to all research projects on which those individuals work, regardless of the source of funding for the project.

Where research is funded by a contract with Habib University that includes specific provision(s) regarding ownership, retention of and access to technical data, the provision(s) of that agreement will supersede this policy.

9.4 Ownership The University’s ownership and stewardship of the scientific record for projects conducted at the University, under the auspices of the University, or with University resources are based on both 27

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

regulation and sound management principles. Habib’s responsibilities include but are not limited to:     

Complying with the terms of sponsored project agreements.

Ensuring the appropriate use of radioactive and other dangerous materials, and the like.

Protecting the rights of students, postdoctoral scholars and staff, including, but not limited to, their rights to access to data from research in which they participated.

Securing intellectual property rights.

Facilitating the investigation of charges, such as scientific misconduct or conflict of interest.

9.5 Collection and Retention The PI is responsible for the collection, management and retention of research data. PIs should adopt an orderly system of data organization and should communicate the chosen system to all members of a research group and to the appropriate administrative personnel, where applicable.

Particularly for long-term research projects, PIs should establish and maintain procedures for the protection of essential records in the event of a natural disaster or other emergency.

Research data must be archived for a minimum of three years after the final project close-out, with original data retained wherever possible. In addition, any of the following circumstances may justify longer periods of retention: 1. Data must be kept for as long as may be necessary to protect any intellectual property resulting from the work.

2. If any charges regarding the research arise, such as allegations of scientific misconduct or conflict of interest, data must be retained until such charges are fully resolved.

3. If a student is involved, data must be retained at least until the degree is awarded or it is clear that the student has abandoned the work.

Beyond the period of retention specified here, the destruction of the research record is at the discretion of the PI and his or her department or laboratory.

Records will normally be retained in the unit where they are produced. Research records must be retained on the Habib University campus, or in facilities under the auspices of Habib University, unless specific permission to do otherwise is granted by the Provost and Dean of Research.

9.6 Access Where necessary to assure needed and appropriate access, the University has the option to take custody of the data in a manner specified by the Provost and Dean of Research.

9.7 Transfer in the Event a Researcher Leaves Habib

28

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

When individuals involved in research projects at Habib leave the University, they may take copies of research data for projects on which they have worked. Original data, however, must be retained at Habib University by the PI. If a PI leaves Habib University and a project is to be moved to another institution, ownership of the data may be transferred with the approval of the Provost and Dean of Research, and with written agreement from the PI’s new institution that guarantees: 1) its acceptance of custodial responsibilities for the data and 2) Habib access to the data, should that become necessary.

10 Principal Investigatorship 10.1 Principal Investigator Eligibility and Criteria for Exceptions This section of the Research Policy Document establishes the policy that principal investigatorship or co-principal investigatorship on externally funded projects is limited to members of the Habib University faculty, with specific exceptions.

10.2 Principal Investigator Eligibility Policy Eligibility to act as a principal investigator (PI) or co-principal investigator (Co-PI) on externally funded projects is a privilege limited to members of the Habib University faculty. This policy limitation is in place because PIs are responsible for determining the intellectual direction of the research and scholarship and for the training of graduate students.

The designation of “PI” or “Co-PI” for any member of the Academic Staff, or other individual who is not a member of the Habib University’s full-time faculty, requires specific approval by the relevant department chair, school dean and, in some cases, the Dean of Research, as described below.

10.3 Exceptions There are two kinds of exceptions to the PI eligibility policy. The first deals with those situations in which exceptions may be granted by the department chair and dean if all of the prescribed conditions are in place. The second category of exception represents all other situations which require the approval of the department chair, school dean, and Dean of Research. Exceptions in this second category rarely will be granted.

A. Exceptions Subject to the Approval of the Department Chair and School Dean

Requests for PI eligibility for researchers who are not members of the faculty (e.g., Postdoctoral Scholars, Instructors or other researchers) in the following situations may be made on a case-bycase basis by the relevant member of the faculty who has oversight responsibility for the proposed PI.

29

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

Such requests are subject to the written approval of the department chair and cognizant dean. (In those cases where the proposals arise from areas outside a school dean’s jurisdiction, the Dean of Research will act as the equivalent of the school dean in approving such requests.) The approval of the department chair and the dean shall not be pro forma, but shall take into account the academic quality of the proposal, the qualifications of the proposed PI and the relevance and importance of the proposal to other activities of the University. Such requests will be made only for a particular project with a specified project period. Documentation of the chair and dean’s approval must accompany proposals submitted to the Office of Research.

1. Conferences, Exhibits, Workshops or Public Events

Researchers who are not members of the faculty may be approved to serve as PIs on externally sponsored projects whose sole purpose is to fund short conferences, exhibits, workshops, or other public events of a character appropriate to the University.

2. Specific Projects Which Are Part of Large Interdisciplinary Programs

Researchers who are not members of the faculty may be approved to serve as PIs on projects within the scope of a large interdisciplinary program. For this purpose a “large interdisciplinary program” is defined as a research program which: a) is directed by a member of the faculty, b) has an expected duration beyond the involvement of any individual faculty participant, c) has more than one faculty member involved, and d) requires expertise in more than one discipline or technical area. All of the following conditions must be met in order for the department chair and school dean to approve PI exceptions in such cases: 1. The proposed project must be a demonstrably important component of the success of the overall interdisciplinary program, as defined above.

2. There is no member of the Academic faculty associated with the large interdisciplinary project who is qualified to take responsibility for the scientific direction of the prospective research project.

3. No incremental space will be required for the project.

4. For each graduate student participating on the project, a qualified faculty member has been identified to assure that the student’s research program and the education derived from it are consistent with the degree for which the student is a candidate.

5. Exceptions approved under this provision will be reported to the Dean of Research on an annual basis.

3. Career Development Awards

Researchers who are not members of the Academic faculty may be approved to serve as PIs on a class of projects generically referred to as Career Development Awards, whose stated purpose is to advance the individual’s scientific career. Such petitions may be approved if the project is to be carried out under the mentorship of an established faculty investigator who is named in the proposal and if the project can be conducted within the overall intellectual scope and laboratory space of the faculty mentor. Typically in these cases the awards cover only the individual’s salary and incidental expenses, but not incremental staff or students.

30

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 B. Rare Exceptions Subject to the Approval of the Department Chair, School Dean and Dean of Research

In addition to the foregoing, rare exceptions to the PI eligibility policy may be made at the discretion of the Dean of Research in unusual and non-recurring situations that meet a particular need or opportunity for the University. Such requests will be considered only for a specific project with a specific project period. Examples of rare exceptions that have been granted are: proposals submitted by visiting faculty members and other senior visitors for a limited period of time; proposals submitted by a faculty candidate selected by a department but not yet approved by the Provost, Advisory Board, and President; permission for administrators to submit proposals in support of a project in their area (e.g., the Habib University Press); special cases of sponsored instruction; and situations where an Academic faculty investigator ceases to be available and it is necessary for the proposed PI to oversee an orderly phase out of a project.
 Requests for such exceptions should be made by a member of the Academic faculty on behalf of the proposed PI. Such requests are subject to the approval of the cognizant department chair, school dean, and the Dean of Research.

In all cases, the following six criteria must be met: 1. Criteria for Granting Rare Exceptions 1. The proposed research must meet a programmatic need of Habib University. Meeting a programmatic need means addressing an area of investigation that is not currently covered at Habib University and is endorsed by a sponsoring member of the Academic faculty as directly relevant to and supportive of the research or teaching programs of the faculty. Research that may be important in its own right and for which outside funding is available will not be judged as meeting the programmatic need criterion unless it facilitates the ongoing objectives of the University in an identifiable and direct way.

2. The proposed research cannot be funded and/or conducted effectively at Habib University unless the proposed individual is the PI. Among other things, this generally will mean that there is no member of the Academic faculty available to take the responsibility for the scientific direction of the project.

3. The proposed PI’s qualifications to direct the project provide assurance that the work will be conducted in accord with the standards of excellence of the University.

4. No incremental space will be required for the project.

5. For each graduate student participating in the project, a qualified faculty member has been identified to assure that the student’s research program and the education derived from it are consistent with the degree for which the student is a candidate.

6. The research must be designed and conducted in such a way that work can be discontinued when programmatic need ends or if the sponsoring faculty member ceases to be available.

Exceptions to the PI eligibility policy will be rare in situations other than those described in Sections above. A written copy of any such requests, along with the justification and approvals of the sponsoring faculty member, the chair, school dean and Dean of Research should accompany the sponsored project proposal submitted to the Office of Research.

31

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

10.4 Project Designations Other Than Principal Investigator Establishment of project teams is the Principal Investigator’s responsibility. In this regard, the PI will consider such factors as project requirements, sponsor guidelines related to key project personnel and the qualifications and contributions of participating researchers, among other factors. Habib University considers co-principal investigators (Co-PIs) to be equivalent to principal investigators in all regards; eligibility for co-principal investigator status is therefore the same as for principal investigator status, as defined in this policy. Other project designations are at the discretion of the Principal Investigator, and may include, for example: A. Associate Investigators

In circumstances where this designation would be consistent with sponsor guidelines, the PI may designate members of the Academic Staff-Teaching, Academic Staff-Research, Academic Staff Libraries, Postdoctoral Scholars, Instructors or other researchers as “Associate Investigators” on sponsored projects.

B. Co-Investigators

Senior members of the Academic Staff-Research and senior members of the Academic Staff Libraries may also be designated by their Academic faculty supervisors as “Co-Investigators” on those externally-funded projects in which such senior Academic staff members (Research or Libraries) carry substantial project leadership roles. It is not expected that this designation will normally be used for Postdoctoral Scholars, Instructors or other researchers, although such designation may be used in cases where the researcher is performing in such a role and the designation is allowed by the sponsor.

10.5 Review The PI Eligibility and Criteria for Exceptions policy, including all modifications, should be reviewed by the Academic Planning Committee at intervals not to exceed ten years.

11 Acting Principal Investigatorship This establishes the policy that acting principal investigatorship is subject to the same criteria for eligibility as regular PIship.

11.1 Eligibility Some questions have arisen regarding eligibility criteria for acting principal investigator status on sponsored projects during the regular PI’s sabbatical or other leave from the University. Ordinarily, if a faculty member is absent from campus for a period of less than three months, he or she retains the title of PI for the project. Even if the leave period exceeds three months, in some cases, the regular PI may still retain responsibility for the overall intellectual and fiduciary direction of the project, with the sponsor’s permission.

32

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

Occasionally a member of the PI’s staff may be designated as acting project manager during the PI’s leave. This would be appropriate if the staff member is asked to assume the day-to-day administrative tasks of the project while still adhering to the overall goals, objectives and protocol outlined by the PI before his or her departure.

If the regular PI’s absence from Habib does not permit a sufficient level of involvement in the sponsored activity, another faculty member should assume the role of Acting PI. That is, Acting PIship is subject to the same criteria for eligibility as is regular PIship. Designation of individuals as acting PIs who are not ordinarily eligible to be regular PIs requires the prior approval of the cognizant dean and the Provost and Dean of Research according to the criteria outlined in RPH, PI Eligibility and Criteria for Exceptions.

Responsibilities for the intellectual direction of externally sponsored teaching and research activities must rest with the faculty and should not be delegated to others, even on a temporary basis, without prior approval.

12 Fiscal Responsibilities of Principal Investigators 12.1 Preparation and Submission of Proposed Budgets This section summarizes some of the obligations imposed on Principal Investigators by law and

by Habib policy. It establishes guidelines for the preparation and submission of proposed budgets, including consideration of allowability, cost sharing, commitment of effort and estimating methods.

12.2 Responsibilities of the PI At Habib, the Principal Investigator (PI) has overall responsibility for the technical and fiscal management of a sponsored project. This includes the management of the project within funding limitations, adherence to reporting requirements and assurance that the sponsor will be notified when significant conditions related to project status change. This document addresses specific responsibilities concerned with the financial management of sponsored projects. While responsibility for the day-to-day management of project finances may be delegated to administrative or other staff, accountability for compliance with Habib University policy and sponsor requirements ultimately rests with the PI. In proposing budgets for sponsored projects, the PI assures Habib University and the potential sponsor that project finances are represented as accurately as possible. In addition, specific requirements, including cost principles as defined by any relevant Government and sponsor regulations and requirements, must be adhered to at the proposal stage, as well as when funds are expended.

Habib University requires all Principal Investigators to review their obligations for stewardship of sponsor funds and compliance with applicable regulations.

33

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

12.3 Allowability Proposals should not include expenses which the government or the sponsor has identified as unallowable. Similarly, expenses which are to be considered as indirect expenses, e.g., certain types of office supplies and clerical salaries, may not be proposed and budgeted as direct expenses, unless they meet the criteria defined in the RPH, Charging for Administrative and Technical Expenses.

12.4 Cost Sharing Proposed budgets should delineate the complete committed cost of the project, identifying the amount requested from the sponsor, and other costs that Habib University commits to pay. A commitment to use Habib University resources to pay any portion of project costs that would otherwise be borne by the sponsor must be identified and tracked as cost sharing. At the time such awards are finalized, PIs must assure that department funds are identified and separately budgeted for those expenses. Voluntary effort above and beyond what was committed does not have to be treated as cost sharing. (See RPH: ‘Cost Sharing Policy’).

12.5 Commitment of Effort Habib University requires a commitment of effort on the part of the PI during the period in which the work is being performed. This effort may be expended during the academic year, summer quarter only, or both. Committed effort shall be direct charged or cost shared.

The requirement of PI effort does NOT extend to:   

Equipment grants.

Seed grants for students/postdocs where the faculty mentor is named as PI, dissertation support, training grants or other awards intended as ‘student augmentation’.

Limited-purpose awards characterized by Habib University as Other Sponsored Activities, including travel grants, conference support, etc. (see RPH, Categories of Sponsored Projects for definition and further examples).

In preparing proposals, PIs must not over commit themselves or others. Distribution of effort must take into account the time required for teaching and campus citizenship.

Individual schools may have their own thresholds for how much FTE faculty members must reserve for non-research activities. Research-only faculty on 12-month appointments may typically charge up to 95% to sponsored projects year round. See below for requirements for summer salary.

PIs may submit proposals on the assumption that not all will be awarded, but, at the time of award, a reasonable representation of time to be devoted to the project, whether that effort will be paid for by the sponsor or by Habib University, is necessary. Subsequent changes in levels of effort may also require advance notification to and approval by sponsors (see RPH ‘Special Requirements Related to Sponsor Notifications and Prior Approvals’).

34

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

For more information and Frequently Asked Questions on Faculty Effort, see the ‘Related Items’ section below.

A. Summer Salary

A faculty member who is on a nine-month appointment may be paid from government and/or nongovernment sponsored projects for no more than 90% during any of the summer months. Salary charged to sponsored projects during the summer months must be consistent with effort expended during the same period.

12.6 Estimating Methods When estimating the costs to be budgeted for project expenses, estimating methods must be consistent with Habib University accounting practices and must allow expenditures to be accumulated and reported to at least the same level of detail as the estimate.

12.7 Budget Justifications Habib University is obligated to treat types of expenses consistently as either direct or indirect costs. If a proposed budget includes the direct expenditure of project funds for costs that would normally be charged indirectly, e.g., clerical and administrative expenses, general-purpose equipment, or operations and maintenance, then those items must be supported in the proposal by an explicit budget justification. In addition, when administrative and clerical costs are being proposed to a federal sponsor, the proposal must include an explanation of the activities which allow the project to be classified as ‘major’ (see RPH: ‘Charging for Administrative and Technical Expenses’).

This section is not intended to override sponsor requirements related to proposals.

13 Management of Project Expenditures This policy summarizes some of the obligations imposed on Principal Investigators by Habib University policy including review and certification of direct charges and cost-shared expenditures, charging of salary and vacation, monitoring of funds within the sponsor’s funding limitations and project closeout.

13.1 Principal Investigator Responsibilities The PI has overall responsibility for the technical and fiscal management of a sponsored project.

This includes the management of the project within funding limitations, adherence to reporting requirements and assurance that the sponsor will be notified when significant conditions related to project status change. This document addresses specific responsibilities concerned with the financial management of sponsored projects. While responsibility for the day-to-day management of project finances may be delegated to administrative or other staff, accountability for compliance with Habib University policy and sponsor requirements ultimately rests with the PI. 35

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

Habib University requires all Principal Investigators to review their obligations for stewardship of sponsor funds and compliance with applicable regulations. For that purpose, specialized briefings are conducted. Individuals may also certify their review of this material entitled ‘Stewardship and Compliance for Principal Investigators’

13.2 Authorization of Direct Charges To authorize the expenditure of funds to be charged directly to sponsored projects, the originating department must assure that:        

The estimated charge is reasonable and necessary.

The expenditure is allowable by the funding source.

The expenditure is allocable to the project, i.e., provides benefit to the project.

The funds are available within the authorized award amount and funding limitations.

The justification for the expenditure is documented.

The method of allocation of costs is appropriate and documented.

The charge is coded with the correct Expenditure Type and charged to the correct Project-TaskAward (PTA).

The charge has been processed through the appropriate University system.

See below in Related Items: Authorizing Expenditures.

13.3 Review of Project Expenditures Expenditure Statements are the official record of project expenses and the basis for cost reimbursements to Habib University.

Expenditures for sponsored projects and cost sharing accounts must be reviewed by a knowledgeable individual, i.e., the PI or designee, so that adjustments can be made in a timely manner, and that rates of expenditures can be monitored to assure availability of funds. To be considered timely, monthly expenditures must be reviewed within two months of the end of the month being reviewed.

This review is documented by means of the reviewer’s signature on a Quarterly Expenditure Statement.

Any questionable charges must be brought promptly to the PI’s attention, and, if needed, corrected by an appropriate transfer. Transfers should be initiated as soon as possible after a need has been identified. Whenever expenses are moved to or between sponsored accounts, the PI must assure that the project which ultimately pays the expense is the project which benefited from that expense and that there is adequate documentation to support the appropriateness of the transaction.

Procedures governing transfers of expense are defined in RPH, ‘Cost Transfer Policy for Sponsored Projects’.

13.4 Certification of Project Expenditures 36

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

In addition, sponsored project and cost sharing accounts must be reviewed and certified by the PI quarterly. The following certification statement appears on Expenditure Statements for every sponsored project and cost sharing account: The principal investigator confirms: to the best of my knowledge, salary and wages charged to this project are appropriate in relation to work performed on this project. All other costs charged to this project are, to the best of my knowledge, appropriate. Where required, corrections have been or will be made through the accounting system.

Project expenditures must be reviewed and certified every academic quarter, recorded by signature on the Quarterly Expenditure Statement. This certification is the responsibility of the project PI (or Co-PI). A PI may delegate the monthly review of expenditures for accuracy, but may not delegate certification of the appropriateness of the charges.

The PI’s certification assures that all expenses charged to the account are allowable, allocable to the project and reasonable. The certification of salary expenditures assures that salaries charged to the account are supported by a corresponding expenditure of effort during the time period being certified. The certification also assures that other expenditures are for items or services purchased and used during the project period as specified by the award. It is the PI’s responsibility to seek a no-cost extension of the award if that is necessary in order to complete the project.

To be considered timely, the expenditure statement must be reviewed and signed within two months of the end of the academic quarter being certified. A quarterly calendar detailing timeliness for both review of monthly expenditures and quarterly certifications of expenditures is available in the Related Items section of this policy.

Adequate explanation and documentation for all project charges must be maintained for four years after the sponsor closes out the award. Where documentation cannot be provided as to the allowability, allocability and reasonableness of any project expense, including but not limited to expenses incurred late in the project period, the sponsor may deny them. In this case, the PI, department or school will be expected to cover the expense from unrestricted sources.

Each school and independent laboratory must maintain a mechanism to retain reviewed and certified Quarterly Expenditure Statements. Difficulties regarding the timely certification of expenditures should be discussed with the appropriate Department Chair, School Dean, and/or Provost and Dean of Research.

Any departure from the policy or procedures for Quarterly PI Review and Certification must be approved in advance by the Office of Research.

13.5 Charging Salaries to Projects Salary being charged to sponsored projects must be supported by documentation of a corresponding appropriate level of effort. Labor Distribution schedules must be completed accurately and salary charges certified as described, above.

37

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

13.6 Charging Vacation to Projects Staff at Habib University, including Academic Staff-Research (non-faculty), accrue vacation as specified by University policy. Vacation charges to sponsored projects are appropriate only when such vacation is earned on the respective project. When staff members leave the University, they must be paid for accrued vacation. Such vacation shall not be charged to any project(s) on which it was not earned.

13.7 Charging Proposal Expenses to Ongoing Projects Proposal preparation costs may not be charged to sponsored projects unless the proposal is being prepared for submission to a current sponsor for non-competing extension or continuation of its ongoing project. In those circumstances, it is appropriate to charge those proposal development costs directly to current projects. Costs for development of proposals for submission to other sponsors, or for work that does not relate to ongoing projects, is not allocable to current projects and may not be charged to those projects.

13.8. Monitoring of Funds within Sponsor Funding Limitations PIs are responsible for the ongoing fiscal management of awarded projects, including regular monitoring against project period budgets. Habib University establishes the approved project budget as the financial expression of the project and sponsors may evaluate the project against the budget at any time. Although sponsors allow certain flexibilities with respect to re-budgeting, unobligated balances, and pre-award costs, Habib University and sponsors expect expenditures to be reasonably consistent with the approved project and budget. Sponsors may question or restrict expenditures that appear inconsistent with the project plan and budget. PIs are obligated to request prior approval when budget and program plan revisions indicate a significant change in scope.

Indicators of a change in scope can include, for example, significant expenditures beyond the amount authorized on the award, or requests for additional funding.

Overdrafts

It is Habib University’s expectation that projects will be managed within their established budgets.

If, as a result of unusual circumstances or unanticipated project expenses, an account is in overdraft upon expiration of the term of the sponsored project and if additional funds have not been received from the sponsor, the PI must identify an appropriate source of funds (e.g., gift, endowment, or operating budget) to cover the expense. The overdraft must be transferred in sufficient time to permit Habib University to comply with the financial reporting requirements of the original award (See Project Closeout, below).

Since charges to clear overdrafts reflect direct project costs, they must not be incorporated into cost pools which lead to indirect cost recovery. These costs represent project costs being borne by Habib University and therefore must be accounted for in the same manner as cost sharing.

The department must identify the source of funds to the Office of Research or designated School office which will create a cost sharing account. The department will then initiate the necessary 38

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

expense transfer, including documentation of the nature of the expenses, noting they were legitimate project expenses but the funding was inadequate and other reasons for the transfer. Such transfers must occur in sufficient time to permit Habib University to comply with the financial reporting requirements of Closeout, and the RPH: ‘Cost Transfer Policy for Sponsored Projects’.

The school is responsible for the timely clearance of any such unfunded expenditure from within its resources.

13.9 No-Cost Time Extensions If additional time is needed to complete a project and there is an unexpended balance in the award, PIs may request that the period of performance of an award be extended. In some cases, Habib University officials may be authorized to approve no-cost time extensions; in other cases, funding agency prior approval is required. Requests for extensions should be initiated by a PI and processed in accordance with the terms of the sponsored award; in most cases, the countersignature of an authorized institutional office is required. To ensure compliance with the reporting requirements of awards, PIs are urged to submit no-cost time extension requests as soon as the need becomes apparent. Requests for a no-cost extension should be submitted no later than the end date of the award (unless an earlier date is required by the funding agency.) Award closeouts cannot be delayed to accommodate pending requests submitted after the award end date.

If final technical reports are to be completed after the project end date and funds from the project are available to pay these expenses, a no-cost extension should be obtained from the sponsor to cover the expense of producing and distributing those reports. If funds are not available from the project, then the PI, department or school must identify unrestricted funds to pay final report costs.

13.10 Project Close-Out PIs are responsible for overseeing the proper closeout of sponsored projects, including the timely submission of all required reports (including final technical reports). While central offices may prepare and submit final administrative reports, including financial and property reports, they do so on the basis of documentation created in the department. PIs must assure that such documentation is adequate and readily available. In addition, PIs are responsible for ensuring that any necessary final financial adjustments and documentation (e.g., final invoices from vendors or sub-recipients) are received promptly after the end of the award.

If an approval to close an award has not already been provided by the PI, the Office of Research will prepare and submit financial reports based on the information reflected in the financial system as of two weeks prior to the due date for the final report. In addition, some financial reports may require the PI’s signature.

39

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

14 Special Requirements Related to Sponsor Notifications and Prior Approvals The PI must assure that ongoing fiscal management is accomplished in accordance with sponsor requirements, including necessary notifications to the sponsor about project status.

14.1 Principal Investigator Responsibilities The PI is responsible for necessary notifications to the sponsor about project status. In all cases, required notifications or requests for prior approval of contract or grant status, including those described in the sections below, should be made in writing to both the administrative and technical officials in the sponsoring agency. Such notifications must be coordinated through the Office of Research.   

The sponsor’s technical officer - the project or program director The sponsor’s grant or contract officer - the administrative officer in the Office of Research The institutional representative for Habib University - the Office of Research

A. Communication Related to Project and Funding Status

Separate regulatory requirements exist for notification to the sponsor in the case of Government contracts and in the case of Government grants. In all cases, such notifications must be made on a timely basis, in coordination with the Office of Research, in order to allow sufficient time to arrange for and process additional funds, or for the reduction in spending and effort in order to phase out the program in an orderly fashion if additional funds are not available. The PI’s Department Chair and School Dean should also be informed, in advance, of potential funding problems.

1. Financial Status of Government Contracts

In the case of Government cost-type contracts (as opposed to grants), PIs must assure compliance with the Limitation of Funds and/or Limitation of Cost clauses which include the requirements that the Contractor: 



notify the sponsoring agency in writing at any time that there is reason to believe the total cost to the Government for the performance of the project will be greater or substantially less than the estimated cost, and further, notify the sponsoring agency if, at any time, there is reason to believe that the costs which are expected to be incurred in the next succeeding 60 days, when added to all costs previously incurred, will exceed 75% of the specified estimated cost. Failure to provide such notice may preclude Habib University from receiving additional funding on that contract.

40

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 2. Project and Financial Status of Government Grants

There may be special administrative requirements for Government grants, and prior written approval by the sponsor may be necessary in the following circumstances:   

Change in the scope or the objective of the project or program (even if there is no associated budget revision).

Change in a key person specified in the application or award document (see discussion of changes in PI status below).

Need for additional Government funding transfer of funds allotted for training allowances (direct payment to trainees) to other categories of expense.

14.2 Accelerated/Slow Spending Prior approval must be requested of granting agencies when either a significantly accelerated rate of project expenditures, or expenditures that are significantly behind budget projections, indicates that the scope of the project has been changed.

In addition, the specific award notice or the agency’s policy manual or administrative guide may also establish requirements for communication with the sponsor during the course of the project.

A. Changes in PI Status

In addition, sponsors often have requirements regarding notification or prior approval of changes in availability of the PI: 1. A reduction in time devoted to the project of 25% or more from the proposed and awarded level.

2. An absence from the project for more than three months.

For any additional requirements, review the grant award and grant policy of the specific agency.

The PI, Department Chair, or department administrator should contact the Office of Research to coordinate securing required approvals in either of the circumstances above. If, in the original award, Habib University had committed to fund some of the PI’s effort as cost sharing and the PI reduces the overall committed level on the project, the Office of Research will also negotiate reductions in levels of the cost-shared component of effort, as appropriate.

In addition, when a PI’s faculty appointment will terminate prior to or during a project’s period of performance, the sponsor is so informed by the Office of Research.

15 Conflicts of Commitment and Interest This presents and discusses circumstances which can create real or perceived conflicts of commitment and conflicts of interest for faculty. It establishes requirements for annual disclosures 41

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

and certifications, and for those made at the time of a transaction such as a sponsored project or gift.

15.1 Introduction Habib University’s policy and procedures regarding conflict of commitment (COC) and conflict of interest (COI) apply to all members of the Habib faculty, including faculty members serving as University officers. School deans are responsible for ensuring implementation of this policy. The Provost and Dean of Research are responsible for interpretation and overall coordination of the policy. Violation of any part of this policy may cause a faculty member to be subject to sanctions, including those described in the Habib University policy on Faculty Discipline. This policy will be modified as necessary to be in compliance with the requirements of external agencies.

15.2 General Principles A. Conflict of Commitment

Habib faculty members owe their primary professional allegiance to the University and their primary commitment of time and intellectual energies should be to the education, research and scholarship programs of the institution. The specific responsibilities and professional activities that constitute an appropriate and primary commitment will differ across schools and departments, but they should be based on a general understanding between the faculty member and his or her department chair and school dean.

Even with such understandings in place, however, attempts of faculty to balance University responsibilities with external activities – such as consulting, public service or pro bono work – can result in conflicts regarding allocation of time and energies. Conflicts of commitment usually involve issues of time allocation. Whenever an individual’s outside professional activities as defined in Habib’s policy on Consulting exceed the permitted limits (normally thirteen days per quarter), or whenever a full-time faculty member’s primary professional loyalty is not to Habib University, a conflict of commitment exists. If a situation raises questions of a possible conflict of commitment, faculty should discuss the situation with their department chair or school dean, or the Dean of Research.

B. Conflict of Interest

Habib University is an institution of public trust; faculty must respect that status and conduct their affairs in ways that will not compromise the integrity of the University or that trust.

A conflict of interest occurs when there is a divergence between an individual’s private interests and his or her professional obligations to the University such that an independent observer might reasonably question whether the individual’s professional actions or decisions are determined by considerations of personal financial gain. A conflict of interest depends on the situation and not on the character or actions of the individual.

42

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

Conflicts of interest are common and practically unavoidable in a modern research university. At Habib University, conflicts of interest can arise out of the fact that a mission of the University is to promote the public good by fostering the transfer of knowledge gained through University research and scholarship to the private sector. Important means of accomplishing this mission include faculty consulting, outside speaking engagements, publications and the commercialization of technologies derived from faculty research. It is appropriate that faculty be rewarded for their participation in these activities through consulting fees, honoraria and sharing in royalties resulting from the commercialization of their work. It is wrong, however, for an individual’s actions or decisions made in the course of his or her University activities to be determined by considerations of personal financial gain; faculty should be sensitive even to the appearance of that possibility.

Such behavior calls into question the professional objectivity and ethics of the individual and it also reflects negatively on the University.

Faculty members should conduct their affairs so as to avoid or minimize conflicts of interest and must respond appropriately when conflicts of interest arise. To that end, the purposes of this policy are to educate faculty about situations that generate conflicts of interest, to provide means for faculty and the University to manage conflicts of interest, to promote the best interests of students and others whose work depends on faculty direction and to describe situations that are prohibited.

Every Habib faculty member has an obligation to become familiar with, and abide by, the provisions of this policy. Conflicts of interest must be disclosed to Habib University when personal financial relationships or activities with outside entities occur that would reasonably appear to be related to a faculty member’s Habib institutional responsibilities for research/scholarship, education/teaching, or administration. All such financial activities and relationships must be disclosed annually and at the time of a specific transaction.

Common sense must prevail in the interpretation of these policies. That is – no matter what the circumstances – If an independent observer might reasonably question whether the individual’s professional actions or decisions are determined by considerations of personal financial gain, the relationship should be disclosed to the public during presentations, in publications, teaching, or other public venues.

15.3 Key Provisions - Summary Below is a summary of the key provisions of this policy. Faculty should read the document in its entirety to fully understand the spirit of these provisions, the bona fide exceptions, and the requirements for compliance. (See another section for discussion and detail for each of the following provisions.)

1. Faculty must maintain a significant physical presence on campus (main or overseas partner institution) throughout each quarter they are on active duty.

2. Faculty must not allow other professional activities to detract from their primary allegiance to Habib University. For example, a faculty member on full-time active duty must not have significant outside managerial responsibilities or titles that suggest such responsibilities (e.g., chief operating officer), or act as a PI on sponsored projects that could be conducted at Habib University but instead are submitted and managed through another institution (excluding such agreements as Habib-managed sub-awards or collaborations).

43

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 3. Faculty must foster an atmosphere of academic freedom by promoting the open and timely exchange of results of scholarly activities and ensuring that their advising of students (defined for this policy to include postdoctoral scholars and other trainees) and their supervision of staff are independent of personal financial interests. Faculty should inform students and colleagues about outside obligations that might influence the free exchange of scholarly information between them and the faculty member.

4. Faculty may not use University resources or personnel, including facilities, staff, students or other trainees, equipment, or confidential information, except in a purely incidental way, as part of their outside consulting or business activities or for any other purposes that are unrelated to the education, research, scholarship and public service missions of the University.

5. Faculty must disclose on a timely basis the creation or discovery of all potentially patentable inventions created or discovered in the course of their University activities or with more than incidental use of University resources. If intellectual property rights are to be claimed, ownership of such inventions is assigned to the University regardless of the source of funding. The inventor will share in royalties earned. The inventor(s), acting collectively where there is more than one, are free to place their inventions in the public domain if they believe that would be in the best interest of technology transfer and if doing so is not in violation of the terms of any agreements that supported or are related to the work.

6. Faculty must disclose to the University whether they (or their spouse/domestic partner or dependent children) have a financial interest (defined below) in an outside entity that would reasonably appear to be related to their institutional responsibilities. Disclosures of such interests are also required when the faculty member is involved in a specific transaction, including:     

Gifts.

Sponsored projects.

Technology licensing arrangements.

Material transfer and collaboration agreements.

Certain procurements (e.g., sole source or from a privately-held company).

In such cases, review and approval by the school dean or the Office of Research will be required prior to entering into the proposed arrangement.

7. Financial interests that are disclosed and deemed to be related to one or more of the faculty member’s institutional responsibilities will be further reviewed to determine if the financial interest or relationship could have a direct and significant effect on the faculty member’s performance of his or her responsibilities. If such a situation exists, the conflict will need to be eliminated or managed according to a plan provided to the faculty member by the cognizant dean.

Other administrative actions, such as disclosure in publications and public talks, may be required when the financial interest is not considered likely to directly and significantly affect performance of institutional responsibilities.

8. On an annual basis all faculty members must certify to their school deans their compliance with Habib’s policies related to conflict of commitment and conflict of interest. They must also disclose information not previously reported about their existing or new financial relationships (or those of their spouse/domestic partner or dependent children) with outside organizations, which would reasonably appear to be related to their institutional responsibilities, as soon as such situations become known to the faculty member.

9. School deans shall establish procedures to ensure timely review of their faculty’s disclosures of potential or apparent conflicts of interest, both annually and at the time of a specific transaction, 44

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 and to ensure (in consultation with the Dean of Research) the elimination or appropriate management of such conflicts. School deans will file their own annual disclosures and certifications of compliance with the Dean of Research.

10. The Dean of Research shall:    

Approve each school dean’s plans for implementing this policy.

Interpret policy provisions in consultation with school deans.

Respond to faculty wishing to appeal a school dean’s decisions.

Report to the Office of Research annually on the status of this policy and its implementation

11. Should a faculty member wish to appeal a decision made by the Dean of Research, he or she may present the appeal to the Provost, who will consider the case in consultation with the President.

15.4 Discussion and Detail A. Presence on Campus

Appointment as a faculty member of Habib University confers the privilege and obligation to pursue teaching, research and scholarship (whichever are appropriate to the position held). In addition, academic faculty members are expected to participate in University governance, in the formulation of academic policy and in the determination of the intellectual directions and academic priorities of the University. Fulfillment of these obligations requires a primary commitment of expertise, time, and energy.

A full-time appointment conveys an obligation for a faculty member to have a significant physical presence on campus (main or overseas partner), to be accessible to students and staff and to be available to interact with Habib University colleagues throughout every semester during which he or she is on active duty, unless the department chair and/or school dean has granted specific prior approval for extended or frequent absences from campus. Because requirements for field research and other reasons for absence from campus differ across the University, schools and departments should define for their faculties what qualifies as inappropriate, extended, or frequent absences.

B. Limitations on Outside Professional Activities

Habib University encourages faculty to become involved in the transfer of knowledge from the University to the public and into the commercial marketplace. It is an appropriate role for the University to facilitate the transfer of the knowledge gained through academic research to applications that can benefit the general population. Moreover, experience gained by faculty in the course of outside professional activities can enhance their teaching and research or scholarship within the University. But the process of information and technology transfer can create the potential for conflicts of commitment and/or interest, particularly when there is opportunity for personal financial gain on the part of the faculty. The intent of this provision of the policy is to minimize these conflicts and provide means of managing them when they arise.

An implicit assumption underlying the University’s policy RPH: ‘Consulting and Other Outside Professional Activities’ is that such outside professional activities are a privilege and not a right 45

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

and must not detract from a faculty member’s full-time obligation to his or her University duties.

When any outside activity detracts from the conduct of University duties, a conflict of commitment will result. Even activities such as pro bono work, government service in the public interest, and any outside employment unrelated to the faculty member’s University responsibilities (therefore not included as ‘consulting’ in the policy on outside professional activities), should be managed so they do not take precedence over a faculty member's primary commitment to the University.

See below in Related Items: Faculty Handbook, for limitations on faculty appointments at other academic institutions.

Outside professional activities can also generate conflicts of commitment regardless of the time involved. Habib faculty members on active duty normally are prohibited from serving as principal investigators on sponsored projects submitted and managed through other institutions. This stipulation is not intended to limit faculty from participating in multi-site training or research programs for which Habib University receives a sub-award or has a collaborative or other agreement, nor is it intended to apply to circumstances in which the faculty member’s research requires access to specialized facilities not available at Habib University.

Because full-time faculty are expected to devote their primary energies and professional interests to their University obligations, they may not accept significant managerial responsibilities or titles that suggest or connote managerial or supervisory responsibilities (e.g., CEO, Director, Scientific Officer, or Vice President) as part of their outside consulting activities. Normally it will be necessary for faculty to take a full leave of absence from their University responsibilities in order to take on a significant management role in an outside entity; doing so while on sabbatical is not permitted. Service on boards of directors or advisory boards is allowed.

Faculty members must establish clear boundaries that separate their University and outside obligations, so as to avoid questions about their appropriate use of resources and attributions of products of their work. The Habib name and logo may not be used in consulting activities. Outside activities may not include either: 



A promise or assignment to a third party of intellectual property conceived, or first reduced to practice, in whole or in part, in the course of University responsibilities, or with more than incidental use of University resources, to the third party; or The extension of Habib University research into the consulting activity, such that a third party receives early or exclusive access to Habib University research results.

If a faculty member is listed as an author on any publication resulting from performance of consulting services, a disclosure should be included clearly stating that the contribution to the publication was as a paid consultant and was not part of his/her Habib University duties or responsibilities. The same disclosure should be given in speaking activities related to consulting services see RPH: ‘Consulting and Other Outside Professional Activities’.

C. Free and Open Exchange of Research Results

The integrity of the University as a community of scholars requires the free and open exchange of ideas and the results of scholarly activities. Faculty are obligated to maintain an atmosphere free 46

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

from unwarranted external influences. Students and collaborators must be able to pursue topics of interest, have access to available information and facilities and be able to communicate the results of their work to other scholars and the public. Therefore, faculty must ensure that: 

 

The results of research or scholarship undertaken at Habib are disseminated on an open and timely basis to the broader scholarly community and public in keeping with Habib’s RPH: ‘Openness in Research policy’.

The academic activities of students and postdoctoral scholars are free from the personal commercial interests of the faculty member.

The work of students, staff, postdoctoral scholars and collaborators is not exploited in the course of a faculty member’s outside obligations. To this end, a faculty member should be open with his or her students, staff and colleagues about the faculty member’s involvement with and obligations to outside third parties who could benefit from their work or ideas. Similarly, students, associates and staff should have access to information about the sources of funds that support their research.

This policy requires that consulting, technology licensing or other agreements with third parties, including nondisclosure or confidentiality agreements, must not delay or prohibit publications resulting from Habib University research and scholarship. In addition, faculty should, and in some circumstances will be required to, disclose their financial relationships in publications and public discussions of research or scholarship supported by or in a field relevant to the interests of the company/organization.

D. Appropriate Use of University Resources, Including Facilities, Personnel, Equipment, and Information

Faculty may not use University resources or personnel, including facilities, staff, students or other trainees, equipment, or confidential information, except in a purely incidental way, as part of their outside consulting or business activities or for any other non-University purposes. Inappropriate use of University resources includes the following: 

 



Assigning tasks to the faculty member’s students, staff, or postdoctoral scholars for purposes of potential or real financial gain of the faculty member rather than the advancement of the scholarly field or the students’ educational needs.

Involvement of the faculty member's students or staff in his or her outside consulting or business activities without prior review and approval by the school dean and the Dean of Research.

Granting external entities access to Habib resources, personnel or services for purposes outside the University’s missions, or offering inappropriate favors to outside entities in an attempt to unduly influence them in their dealings with the University or for personal financial gain.

Using confidential information acquired through conduct of University business or research activities for personal gain, or granting unauthorized access of others to such information.

Confidential information includes, but is not limited to, medical, personnel, or security records of individuals; proprietary knowledge about corporate anticipated material requirements or price actions; and proprietary knowledge of possible new sites for government operations or information about forthcoming programs or selection of contractors or subcontractors in advance of official announcements.

47

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 

Providing preferential access to research results, materials or products generated from University teaching or research and scholarly activities to an outside entity for personal financial gain. (This would not preclude appropriate licensing arrangements for inventions, or consulting on the basis of sponsored project results where there is significant additional work or expertise involved.)

E. Disclosure and Ownership of Intellectual Property

All potentially patentable inventions, including patentable software, created or discovered by faculty in the course of their University activities, or with more than incidental use of University resources, must be disclosed to the University on a timely basis. If intellectual property rights are to be claimed, ownership of these inventions is assigned to the University regardless of the source of funding. The inventor(s), acting collectively where there is more than one, are free to place their inventions in the public domain if they believe that would be in the best interest of technology transfer and if doing so is not in violation of the terms of any agreements that supported or are related to the work.

Institutional management of the commercialization of technologies developed using University resources guarantees that contractual obligations to sponsors are fulfilled. Habib management of technology also reduces the potential for individual conflicts of interest, since the institutional managers of the assets do not have personal financial interests in the outcomes of licensing processes nor do they participate in making academic or future research decisions.

In this context, ‘invention’ includes tangible research property. The term does not, however, include books, scholarly articles, musical and artistic works and other forms of educational media, title to which remains with the creator. In accord with academic tradition, except to the extent required by the terms of funding agreements, Habib does not claim ownership to pedagogical, scholarly, or artistic works, regardless of their form of expression. Such works may represent the personal or scholarly beliefs of the author. The protection of academic freedom of the faculty requires that the University not attempt, nor have the right, to control the content or distribution of such works. An additional consideration is that the University does not wish to accept liability for a faculty member’s works that are individual forms of expression.

Ownership of computer software requires special consideration. Some forms of software are patentable, and thus are governed by Habib RPH policy on patentable inventions. Other forms of software are more like books in that they are digital expressions of scholarly, artistic, or educational works, in which case title rests with the creator. Rights to software that is not patentable rest with the individual faculty creator except in the following circumstances: the work is supported by a direct allocation of funds through the University for the pursuit of a specific project, is commissioned by the University, or is otherwise subject to contractual obligations. In addition, Habib University resources are to be used solely for University purposes and not for personal gain or personal commercial advantage, nor for any other non-University purposes.

Therefore, if the creator of a copyrightable work makes significant use of the services of University non-faculty employees or University resources to create the work, he or she shall disclose the work to the Office of Research and assign title to the University. Ordinary use of desktop computers, University libraries and limited secretarial or administrative resources is not considered to be significant.

48

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

Title to software created jointly with students or other faculty shall be jointly owned by the creators. Title to software created jointly by faculty and University staff members will be jointly owned between the faculty creator and the University. Faculty must be aware, however, that the creation, upgrade, or maintenance of commercializable software, when done as part of a faculty member’s University activities, can lead to the same types of conflicts of commitment and interest as patentable inventions. It is the responsibility of the faculty member to avoid such conflicts. One way of doing so is to voluntarily assign copyright and licensing authority to the University.

This policy is not intended to slow or restrict the transfer of technology, so if the University does not proceed in a timely manner (e.g., sixty days) to initiate patenting of a technology and/or licensing it, the ownership may be reassigned to the creator at his or her request if permitted by contractual obligations. In those cases where the sponsor requires the University to take title, the University may recommend to the sponsor that ownership be assigned to the inventor. When the University is successful in the licensing of a technology created by a faculty member, he or she will share in the royalties earned under the terms of the applicable University policy. Further development of the intellectual property is the responsibility of the licensee and must be pursued without use of University resources.

F. Faculty Disclosure of Financial Interests in Outside Entities Related to Their Institutional Responsibilities

A faculty member must disclose personal financial interests (or those of his or her spouse/domestic partner or dependent children) to the University when the interest reasonably appears to be related to his or her institutional responsibilities.

Disclosure must be made when the faculty member (or his or her spouse/domestic partner or dependent children) has: 



One or more financial interests, including payment for services, income such as consulting fees, paid honoraria, equity, stock/stock options or other ownership interest, royalties from intellectual property not owned by Habib; or salary for spouse/domestic partner and The financial interest reasonably appears to be related to one or more of the faculty member's Habib institutional responsibilities, including research/scholarship, teaching/education, administration or clinical care.

This information will be reviewed to determine whether a ‘significant financial interest’ (SFI) exists. Criteria to be used to help define SFI include:  



Any current or pending ownership interests (including shares, partnership stake, or derivative interests such as stock options) in a privately-held entity (e.g., in a ‘start-up’ company).

Any current or pending ownership interests of $5,000 or more (including shares, partnership stake, or derivative interests such as stock options) in a publicly-traded entity (except when the ownership interest is managed by a third party such as a mutual fund).

Any income amounting to $5,000 or more per year per company/organization, including, for example, payment for services, consulting fees, honoraria, licensing or royalty income; or any

49

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 financial interests in a single company/organization ( listed above) that amount to $5,000 or more in aggregate.

The faculty member’s financial interest in the company/organization will be considered as reasonably appearing to be related to his or her research or other University responsibilities in circumstances such as when the company/organization:     

        

Sponsors research at Habib University in which the faculty member is directly involved.

Has interests that could reasonably be considered to have a potential influence on the design, conduct or reporting of the faculty member’s research/scholarship.

Has company interests such that the faculty member’s research/scholarship could reasonably be considered to have a possible effect on the company/organization's interests.

Sponsors or makes a product that is under study in any research in which the faculty member is directly or indirectly involved.

Makes gifts to Habib University of funds or property (including equipment loans), which will be under the control of, or will directly support the teaching or research activities of the faculty member.

Licenses Habib University intellectual property in which the faculty member has a financial interest.

Has an Agreement to provide materials used in the faculty member’s research or for materials to be provided by the faculty member.

Is the sole-source provider of materials or services or of procurements from a privately-held entity.

Provides financial support for the faculty member’s trainees (including graduate students and postdoctoral fellows).

Has products (excluding textbooks) or devices that are used in the faculty member’s teaching.

Produces or markets online learning services or materials in which the faculty member has an interest.

Supports the faculty member’s participation as a lecturer/speaker in continuing education activities or on-line education programs.

Has financial interests that would reasonably appear to be related to the faculty member’s administrative duties.

Has financial interests that would reasonably appear to be related to the faculty member’s clinical care responsibilities.

When a ‘significant financial interest’ (SFI) related to the faculty member’s institutional responsibilities is identified, the circumstances will be evaluated further, as described below. In addition, faculty are strongly encouraged to disclose to the public any financial interests related to their institutional responsibilities whether or not these interests meet the SFI criteria in order to maximize transparency. Faculty receiving awards must also disclose sponsored travel. See below in related items: Requirements Regarding Financial Disclosure and Agency Notifications.

Faculty must complete training about COI according to University requirements.

50

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 G. Review of Disclosures of Faculty Financial Interests in Outside Entities Related to Their Institutional Responsibilities

When a faculty member makes a disclosure, the school dean, the cognizant dean for COI or the Office of Research shall review the circumstances to determine whether it represents a significant financial interest (SFI) and reasonably appears to be related to one or more of the faculty member’s institutional responsibilities. The circumstances will then be assessed to determine whether the SFI could have a direct and significant effect on the faculty member’s performance of these duties. If so, the SFI will be deemed a ‘financial conflict of interest (FCOI)’ and management options will be provided to the faculty member depending upon whether the conflict involves research/scholarship, teaching/education, administration or clinical care duties. See RPH: ‘Requirements Regarding Financial Disclosures and Agency Notifications’.

The faculty member may decide to discontinue the relationship or divest the financial interest that creates the conflict, or decide not to participate in the specific institutional activity that generates the conflict. In some circumstances, the conflict may be managed by requiring one or more of the following:     

Public disclosure of the significant financial interest; Training about conflicts of interest and commitment for involved students and personnel; Independent monitoring and oversight of the activity; Modification of the Habib University activity to remove the conflicted faculty member from participation in all or some portion of the activity; Other mitigating strategies.

When the significant financial interest is related to research involving human subjects and is greater than $10,000, the situation will be considered a financial conflict of interest (FCOI). In such cases, the investigator must provide compelling reasons, detailing his or her unique contribution to the study, in order to justify continued involvement. Without compelling reasons to maintain direct involvement or a plan that isolates the investigator from direct interaction with the human subjects or research data, the investigator will be required to reduce his or her financial interest below $10,000 or the work may not be done at Habib University or by the investigator at another location.

When conflicts of interest are related to gifts, faculty must follow University procedures to document the terms of all such gifts so that the exact nature of the exchange is spelled out. Gifts should not create a venue for privileged access to research results or an opportunity for promoting a company's product or products, or provide the company with preferential treatment. See RPH: ‘Establishment of Industrial Affiliates’ and ‘Related Membership-Supported Programs’, in regard to Industrial Affiliate programs.

Conflicts of interest involving technology transfer, material transfer or collaborative agreements require review and approval by the Dean of Research.

51

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 H. Certification of Compliance with the Conflict of Commitment and Conflict of Interest Policy

On an annual basis and at any time when a situation that requires disclosure occurs, all faculty members must certify to their school deans their compliance with Habib’s policies related to conflict of commitment and conflict of interest. These reports are considered confidential and will be reviewed only by the school dean, or designated individuals such as an associate dean, the department chair, senior administrative staff, the Dean of Research and University officials.

Individual schools of the University may request additional information as needed to evaluate conflicts of interest in their fields and disciplines.

In addition, faculty members must disclose to their school situations that may raise questions of conflict of commitment or interest, as soon as such situations become known to the faculty member and as required at the time of a particular transaction, such as submission of grants or human subjects research protocols, receipt of gifts, technology licensing and materials transfer agreements.

I. Responsibilities of the School Deans

Each school dean is responsible for the timely collection and review of annual certifications related to conflicts of commitment and conflicts of interest, as well as of new disclosures that occur during the year, and (in consultation with the Dean of Research) for the management of conflicts of interest that arise. The review process in each school may be assigned to a faculty senior member.

The school dean or the Dean of Research may convene a committee to advise him or her in the evaluation and options for management of conflicts of interest. The committee may include other members of the faculty and/or individuals not otherwise affiliated with Habib who have no vested interests in the outcome of the proposed arrangements. Individual schools may have more, but not less, restrictive internal policies than those set forth by the University. School deans will file their own annual disclosures and certifications of compliance with the Dean of Research.

J. Responsibilities of the Dean of Research

The Dean of Research is the University officer responsible for interpreting and overseeing implementation of and compliance with this policy. He or she is responsible for reviewing and approving each school’s mechanisms for implementing this policy, for consulting with school deans to determine appropriate strategies for managing conflict situations and for reporting annually to the Academic Planning Committee on the effectiveness of the policy throughout the University. In addition, the Dean of Research shall adjudicate situations in which faculty wish to appeal a decision of a school dean on research related matters. The Dean of Research shall work with school deans to ensure that this policy is implemented with consistency across the University.

K. Appeals of Decisions Made by the Dean of Research

Should a faculty member wish to appeal a decision made by the Dean of Research, he or she may present the appeal to the Provost, who will consider the case in consultation with the President.

52

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

15.5 Attachment A: Habib University Requirements for Faculty Consulting Activities and Agreements Habib University Requirements for Faculty Consulting Activities and Agreements.

The terms of consulting and non-disclosure agreements between faculty and external organizations must be consistent with all of the following requirements: 1. Habib University is not a party to consulting or non-disclosure agreements between faculty and external organizations, shall have no obligations or potential liability under the agreements and its rights may not be impaired in any way by the agreement. The university does not provide indemnity insurance for these activities.

1. Consultant’s Obligations to Habib University  Consulting is permitted provided the faculty member’s full-time obligation to the University is met.  Habib faculty members owe their primary professional allegiance to Habib University and their primary commitment of time and intellectual energies should be to the education, research, and scholarship programs of the institution. Outside professional activities must not detract from a faculty member’s full-time obligation to these duties.

1. Limitations on time spent as a consultant and type of responsibilities  The maximum number of consulting days permissible for faculty on a full-time appointment is 13 days per semester.  A faculty member on full-time active duty or sabbatical leave must not have outside managerial responsibilities and may not have titles that imply management responsibilities, e.g. Chief Scientific Officer, Chief Technical Officer, Director of Research, regardless of actual consulting duties.

1. Restrictions concerning students and research staff  The academic activities of students and postdoctoral scholars must be free from the personal commercial and consulting interests of the faculty member.  The work of students, staff, postdoctoral scholars and collaborators must not be exploited in the course of a faculty member’s outside obligations.  Faculty may not hire or directly supervise a Habib student in employment activities outside the University while serving as the student’s advisor or as a participant on the student’s dissertation committee without written approval.

1. Restrictions on use of University resources  Habib facilities, personnel and equipment may not be used except in a purely incidental way, as part of outside consulting activities.  Preferential access to research results, materials or products generated from University teaching or research activities may not be provided to an outside entity for personal financial gain.

53

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 

Confidential information acquired through conduct of University business or research activities may not be used for personal gain, or to grant unauthorized access to others; confidential information includes any information that comes into your possession as a result of your employment by Habib University that is not broadly available to the general public.

1. Ownership of intellectual property  Habib owns the title to all potentially patentable inventions conceived, or first reduced to practice, in whole or in part, by faculty in the course of University responsibilities, or with more than incidental use of University resources and must be assigned to the University. Faculty members do not have the authority to assign or otherwise transfer rights in any of the University’s inventions.  Any publication, invention, discovery, improvement, or other intellectual property that results solely and directly from Consultant’s services either alone or with employees of or other consultants or advisors to the external organization are not subject to Habib University disclosure and ownership policies.

1. Use of the Habib name  The Habib name and logo may not be used in any consulting activities.  The office address of the consultant may be used for convenient communication.

1. Authorship, speaking and marketing activities  If a faculty member is listed as an author on any publication resulting from performance of consulting services, a disclosure should be included stating that “Dr./Professor [NAME]’s contribution to this publication was as a paid consultant and was not part of his/her Habib University duties or responsibilities”.  The same disclosure should be given in speaking activities related to consulting services.  Habib faculty are prohibited from publishing articles under his/her own name that are written in whole or material part by company employees (so---called “Ghost Written”).  Habib faculty are not permitted to participate in dedicated marketing and training programs designed solely or predominantly for sales or marketing purposes. All faculty are strongly discouraged from performing any sales, marketing, or promotional services for the company requesting consulting services. This includes promotional marketing activities to academic colleagues, the media, the public or as an exhibitor.

15.6 Attachment B: Faculty Investment in Habib Student Companies Faculty Investment in Habib Student Companies

Are faculty permitted to invest in start-up companies of current Habib University students?

All faculty should consider carefully whether investing in any current student or postdoctoral fellow’s company is in the best educational interest of the student or fellow, whether or not the 54

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

faculty member has any involvement with the student’s academic program. However, a higher standard applies when a faculty member has direct involvement in a student or postdoctoral fellow’s academic program, including as the academic advisor, an honors/PhD thesis advisor, or a classroom teacher in the student’s major. In these circumstances, a faculty member who wishes to invest in a current student or postdoctoral fellow’s start-up company must receive approvals from the Dean of the student or postdoctoral fellow’s school, the Dean of the faculty member’s school and the Provost and Dean of Research. The strong presumption is that such involvement would constitute a significant conflict of interest that could not be mitigated or managed and that it would therefore not be permitted. Academic staff, other teaching staff and those who directly interact with students and postdoctoral fellows in the role of instructor or advisor should also follow these procedures.

What would be the nature of the conflict of interest in this situation?

University policy is that “a conflict of interest occurs when there is a divergence between an individual’s private interests and his or her professional obligations to the University such that an independent observer might reasonably question whether the individual’s professional actions or decisions are determined by considerations of personal financial gain.” More specifically regarding conflicts of interest in teaching and educational activities, University policy is that: “education and guidance given to students by faculty, including the nature and direction of research or other studies, should be governed by what is in the academic interest of the student.”

A faculty member investing in a current student or postdoctoral fellow’s company inherently creates a situation in which an independent observer might reasonably question whether the individual’s professional actions or decisions in relation to that student or fellow are determined by considerations of personal financial gain. Examples of actions that could be based – or perceived to be based – on considerations other than the academic interest of the student or fellow include:  

 

Advising a student to leave school to devote full time to his/her company rather than staying in school to complete his/her degree.

Permitting a student to spend an inordinate amount of time on company activities, rather than focusing on his/her academic program as expected by Habib policy (RPH ‘Relationships Between Students (Including Postdoctoral Scholars) and Outside Entities’).

Directing a student or fellow’s research toward a topic that might increase the potential success of the company.

Generally treating a student or fellow that has a company in which the faculty member has invested more favorably than other students or fellows.

Even if the faculty member is not involved in the student or fellow’s program, he/ she could still put pressure (or be perceived to put pressure) on the student or fellow to alter his or her academic program in favor of increasing the chances of success of the start-up. This is because of the inherently unequal power relationship between faculty and student, which exists even if the faculty member is not in a position to evaluate the student or influence the student’s academic program. Similar circumstances may arise for academic staff, other teaching staff or those who have instruction or advising roles for the student.

55

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

I understand how a faculty member who supervises or directly teaches a student is in a significant conflict of interest situation, but why should a faculty member who has nothing to do with the student’s academic program be advised to give careful consideration before investing in his/her company?

As noted above, the inherently unequal power relationship between faculty and student at a university exists even if the faculty member is not in a position to evaluate the student or influence the student’s academic program. A faculty member’s influence and authority are grounded in the role of educator per se and extend far beyond the classroom or laboratory. For example, a student may perceive, rightly or wrongly, that a prominent faculty member has influence over decisions regarding students’ academic progress, access to lab space or funding for research. The role of educator must always take precedence for faculty members or others who are directly involved in instruction or advising of the student.

16 Requirements Regarding Financial Disclosures and Funding Agency Notifications This section establishes guidelines for implementation of agency requirements related to financial disclosures by faculty members and other key personnel involved with submitting proposals and notifications to agencies in the event a financial conflict of interest (FCOI) is identified.

16.1 Introduction Habib’s Faculty Policy on Conflict of Commitment and Interest establishes requirements for faculty disclosures (on both an annual and an ad hoc basic) of financial interests and professional relationships related to research projects and for annual certifications of policy compliance. In addition, Habib’s policy requires that faculty members seeking funding from an external sponsor comply with the disclosure requirements of that sponsor.

In addition to requirements for an institutional policy on conflict of interest, several agencies have their own requirements for disclosures related to their sponsored research projects. This policy provides guidance related to the requirements of those agencies.

16.2 Investigator Disclosures Habib University requires that, for each proposal submitted to an agency, the Principal Investigator (PI) and any other person, regardless of title or position, who is responsible for the design, conduct, or reporting of research (Investigators) certify that he or she has appropriately disclosed any Significant Financial Interests (SFI) related to his or her institutional responsibilities to Habib.

These SFI disclosures must be updated at least annually and within thirty days of entering into a new relationship with a company/organization or discovering or acquiring (e.g., through purchase, marriage, or inheritance) a new SFI. Before an award can be accepted, Habib must determine:

56

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 1. If the SFI is related to the Investigator’s research responsibilities and to the specific research award in question.

2. If the SFI creates an FCOI. 3. If an FCOI is determined to exist, then a Management Plan detailing how the conflict will be managed, reduced, or eliminated must be developed and implemented.

At Habib University, each School will handle this responsibility for its own Investigators, relying on the annual and transactional/ad hoc disclosures submitted by faculty as required by Habib’s Faculty Policy on Conflict of Commitment and Interest in RPH. Habib University requires that Investigators disclose to a designated representative of the institution all SFIs that would reasonably appear to be related to the Investigator’s institutional responsibilities which include: research and other scholarly activities; teaching or educational activities; and administrative activities.

SFI means a financial interest consisting of one or more of the following interests of the Investigator (and those of the Investigator’s spouse/domestic partner or dependent children) that reasonably appear to be related to the Investigator's institutional responsibilities: 





With regard to any publicly traded entity, a significant financial interest exists if the value of any remuneration received from the entity in the twelve months preceding the disclosure and the value of any equity interest in the entity as of the date of disclosure, when aggregated, exceeds $5,000 With regard to any non-publicly traded entity, a significant financial interest exists if the value of any remuneration received from the entity in the twelve months preceding the disclosure, when aggregated, exceeds $5,000, or when the Investigator (or the Investigator’s spouse or dependent children) holds any equity interest Intellectual property rights and interests (e.g., patents, copyrights), upon receipt of income related to such rights and interests that is not paid through Habib University

An FCOI means an SFI that could directly and significantly affect the design, conduct, or reporting of funded research.

A. Habib University Implementation, Requirements

PIs must certify that all requirements related to the submission of a funded research proposal have been met. One requirement is for Habib to ensure that if there are personal financial interests related to the funded research, these relationships are examined and dealt with according to institutional and funding agency policies on conflict of interest. A personal financial interest with an entity would be reasonably considered related to an investigator’s research study in circumstances such as the following:   

Entity sponsors research at Habib in which the investigator is directly involved.

Entity has financial interests that could reasonably be considered to have a potential influence on the design, conduct or reporting of investigator’s research/scholarship.

Entity has a reasonable possibility of being financially affected by investigator’s research/scholarship.

57

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0     

Entity makes gifts to Habib that benefit investigator’s research/scholarship (including equipment gifts or loans).

Entity makes a product that is under study in research in which investigator is involved.

Entity licenses Habib intellectual property in which investigator has a financial interest.

Entity has a Materials Transfer Agreement to provide materials used in investigator’s research or for materials provided by investigator to the company/organization.

Entity sponsors or makes a product that is under study in which investigator is directly or indirectly involved.

B. Agency Notifications

Upon receipt of an award and prior to the expenditure of any funds, as well as within 60 days for any interest that the Institution identifies as conflicting subsequent to the Institution’s initial report under the award, Habib is obligated to notify the sponsoring institute or agency of any FCOI associated with that award. In addition Habib will provide annual updates on any previouslyidentified FCOI for the duration of the research project or until the FCOI ceases to exist. The annual FCOI report will address the status of the financial conflict of interest and changes to the management plan and is done at the same time as the Investigator’s submission of the annual progress report, multi-year progress report, or extension.

If an FCOI is identified at the time a proposal is submitted and that proposal is subsequently awarded, or if an FCOI is identified subsequent to the award of the project, Habib must prepare a notification. That notification is to consist of the following: 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

Grant number.

PD/PI or contact PD/PI. Name of Investigator with the FCOI. Name of the entity with which the Investigator has an FCOI. Nature of FCOI (e.g., equity, consulting fees, travel reimbursement, honoraria).

Value of the financial interest (in pre-specified dollar ranges) or a statement that a value cannot be readily determined.

A description how the financial interest relates to the funded research and the basis for the Institution’s determination that the financial interest conflicts with such research.

Key elements of the Institution’s management plan including: role and principal duties of the conflicted Investigator in the research project.

Conditions of the management plan.

How the management plan is designed to safeguard objectivity in the research project Confirmation of the Investigator’s agreement to the management plan.

How the management plan will be monitored to ensure Investigator compliance. Habib will monitor Investigator compliance until the completion of the PHS-funded research project.

Other information as needed.

In the event that Habib identifies a significant financial interest that was not disclosed in a timely fashion by the Investigator or previously reviewed by Habib during an on-going funded research project, Habib will, within 60 days, determine whether it is related to funded research and, if so, whether a financial conflict of interest exists. If an FCOI exists, Habib will implement a management plan.

58

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

In addition, whenever a financial conflict of interest is not identified or managed in a timely manner, Habib will, within 120 days of its determination of non-compliance, complete a retrospective review of the Investigator’s activities and the funded research project. The purpose of the review is to determine whether any research conducted during the period of non-compliance was biased in its design, conduct or reporting.

The documentation of the retrospective review will include these elements:       

Project number.

Project title.

PD/PI or contact PD/PI if a multiple PD/PI model is used.

Name of the Investigator with the FCOI. Name of the entity with which the Investigator has a financial conflict of interest.

Reason(s) for the retrospective review and methodology used for the review.

Findings and conclusions of the review.

Based on the retrospective review, if appropriate, Habib will update the previously submitted FCOI report, specifying the actions that will be taken to manage the FCOI If bias is found, Habib will notify the funding agency promptly and submit a mitigation report to them. The mitigation report will include the key elements documented in the retrospective review, the impact of the bias on the research project and Habib’s plan of action or actions to eliminate or mitigate the effect of the bias.

Habib will maintain records relating to all Investigator disclosures of financial interests and Habib’s review of and actions taken related to such disclosures for at least three years from the date of the final expenditures report is submitted to the funding agency, or, where applicable, from other dates specified in funding agency’s regulations.

C. Other Requirements 1. Public Accessibility

Prior to the expenditure of funds, Habib will make certain that information concerning FCOIs held by senior/key personnel is publicly accessible via a Web site or by a written response to any requester within five business days of a request or as required by law. This information will include: the Investigator’s name; the Investigator’s title and role with respect to the research project; the name of the entity in which the significant financial interest is held; the nature of the significant financial interest; and the approximate dollar value of the significant financial interest (in pre-specified dollar ranges), or a statement that a value cannot be readily determined. This information will remain publicly accessible for at least three years from the date that it was most recently updated.

2. Investigator Training

In addition, education is required immediately when: 59

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0   

Financial conflict of interest policies are revised in a manner that changes researcher requirements.

A researcher is new to the organization.

A researcher is non-compliant with financial conflict of interest policies and procedures.

3. Sub-awards

If an institution carries out funded research through sub-awardees, contractors, or collaborators, the institution must take reasonable steps to ensure that the collaborating entity has its own policies in place that meet the requirements of the funding agency’s policy or that investigators working for such entities follow the policies of the primary institution.

4. Travel

Investigators who are planning to participate in funded research must disclose their reimbursed or sponsored travel related to their institutional responsibilities over the previous twelve-month period to their Institution no later than the time of application for the funded research. They must also submit an updated disclosure of reimbursed or sponsored travel within 30 days of each occurrence.

16.3 Investigator Disclosures Most funding agencies will require Habib to maintain an appropriate written and enforced policy on conflict of interest and that all conflicts of interest for each award be managed, reduced or eliminated prior to the expenditure of the award funds. If an institution carries out agency-funded research through sub-awardees, contractors, or collaborators, the institution must take reasonable steps to ensure that the collaborating entity has its own policies in place that meet the requirements of this policy or that investigators working for such entities follow the policies of the primary institution.

As provided by Habib’s Faculty Policy on Conflict of Commitment and Interest in RPH, most funding agencies require that each investigator disclose to a responsible representative of the institution all significant financial interests of the investigator (including those of the investigator’s spouse and dependent children) that would reasonably appear to be affected by the research or educational activities funded or proposed for funding by the funding agency or in entities whose financial interests would reasonably appear to be affected by such activities.

The term “investigator” means the principal investigator, co-principal investigators/co-project directors, and any other person at the institution who is responsible for the design, conduct, or reporting of research or educational activities funded or proposed for funding by funding agency.

As specified by most funding agencies, the term “significant financial interest” (SFI) means anything of monetary value, including, but not limited to, salary or other payments for services (e.g., consulting fees or honoraria); equity interest (e.g., stocks, stock options, or other ownership interests); and intellectual property rights (e.g., patents, copyrights, and royalties from such rights).

60

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

The term does not include:    



Salary, royalties, or other remuneration from the applicant institution.

Income from seminars, lectures, or teaching engagements sponsored by public or non-profit entities.

Income from service on advisory committees or review panels for public or nonprofit entities.

An equity interest that, when aggregated for the investigator and the investigator’s spouse and dependent children, meets both of the following tests: does not exceed $5,000 in value as determined through reference to public prices or other reasonable measures of fair market value, and does not represent more than a 5% ownership interest in any single entity.

Salary, royalties or other payments that, when aggregated for the investigator and the investigator’s spouse and dependent children, are not expected to exceed $5,000 during the twelve month period.

Most funding agencies require Habib to ensure that investigators have provided all required financial disclosures at the time the proposal is submitted to them. Habib must also ensure that those financial disclosures are updated during the period of the award, either on an annual basis, or as new reportable significant financial interests are obtained.

Habib designates individuals to review financial disclosures, determine whether a conflict of interest exists, and determine what conditions or restrictions, if any, should be imposed by the institution to manage, reduce or eliminate such conflict of interest. A conflict of interest exists when the reviewer(s) reasonably determines that a significant financial interest could directly and significantly affect the design, conduct, or reporting of research or educational activities.

Examples of conditions or restrictions that might be imposed to manage, reduce or eliminate conflicts of interest include, but are not limited to:      

Public disclosure of significant financial interests.

Monitoring of research by independent reviewers.

Modification of the research plan.

Disqualification from participation in the portion of the funded research that would be affected by significant financial interests.

Divestiture of significant financial interests Severance of relationships that create conflicts.

Habib must have adequate enforcement mechanisms, provide for sanctions where appropriate and must keep the funding agency appropriately informed if the institution finds that it is unable to satisfactorily manage a conflict of interest. Grantee notifications of conflict of interest that cannot be managed, reduced, or eliminated must be submitted electronically by the Dean of Office of Research.

Habib must maintain records of all financial disclosures and of all actions taken to resolve conflicts of interest for at least three years beyond the termination or completion of the grant to which they relate, or until the resolution of any funding agency action involving those records, whichever is longer.

61

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

16.4 Attachment A: Evaluation of Financial Interests Principal Investigators must document that all requirements related to the submission of a funded research proposal have been met. If the PI indicates the existence of a related financial interest, they must answer questions about those financial interests that may reasonably appear to be related to the research project, including: 1.

Name of company/organization (foundation, society, other).

2.

What is the nature of your activity/financial interest with the company/organization?

(Check all that apply)

__ Board of Directors membership. __ Advisory Board membership. __ Consultant (other than Advisory Board or Board of Directors membership). __ Licensing of your Habib or non-Habib intellectual property. __ Ownership of stock or stock options or other ownership interests.

(Excluding investments for which you do not directly control investment decisions, such as mutual funds). __ Payment for royalties for inventions (not paid through Habib). __ Payment for lectures. __ Payment for preparation of papers or reports. __ Payment for product evaluation. __ Legal consultant or expert witness. __ Executive or other employee position with company/organization. __ This is a financial interest/activity of my spouse/domestic partner or dependent child.

3.

What is the total amount of your financial interest (or that of your spouse/domestic partner or dependent children) in this company/organization?

__ $1 - 4,999 __ $5K - $9,999 __ $10K - 19,999 __ $20K - 49,999 __ $50K - 99,999 __ $100K - 199,999 __ Greater than $200,000 4.

If this entity is a company, is it

62

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

__ Publicly traded or __ Privately held or Start Up

17 Consulting and Other Outside Professional Activities by Members of the Academic Faculty.

This section establishes limits on the amount of time that may be spent on outside consulting activities by Habib faculty, and describes procedures for implementing this policy. Habib University has a requirement for faculty to provide the summary of Habib University Requirements for Faculty Consulting Activities and Agreements whenever entering into a consulting or non-disclosure agreement. You can also find the document in the Related Items section below.

17.1 Principles and General Standards This policy is applicable to all members of the Habib faculty including faculty members serving as University officers.

The purpose of the policy on consulting and related activities is to state with both clarity and generality the limits on such activities and the reasons for those limits. Consulting and other outside professional activities can provide an important means of continuing education for the faculty and can provide them with a currency and experience in aspects of their professional fields outside the context of the University itself. These activities can also provide a mechanism for transfer of knowledge from the University to the public good. Though such attributes of consulting may make faculty better scholars and teachers, the employer-employee nature of the consulting process has in it the potential for diversion of faculty from their primary activities and responsibilities.

Therefore, the basic principle of this policy statement is that there needs to be a limitation upon the time that a Habib faculty member may spend in consulting. The limits set forth below are intended to strike a fair balance between consulting and regular faculty duties within the University and serve to safeguard the interests of both parties.

Though comprehensive, the policy cannot deal unambiguously with every instance of consulting or other outside professional activities. In cases of doubt, the primary guide should be the intention to promote the interests of the University as a place of education, learning and research. Whenever uncertainty exists, it is the faculty member’s obligation to obtain prior consent from the appropriate University officer.

17.2 Definition of ‘Consulting’ In general, consulting is defined as professional activity related to the person’s field or discipline, where a fee-for-service or equivalent relationship with a third party exists.

There are many types of consulting relationships and fee arrangements and the precise form entered into may vary. The principle is that, in consulting, a person agrees to use his or her professional capabilities to further the agenda of a third party, in return for an immediate or 63

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

prospective gain. Activities or titles that constitute or imply managerial or supervisory responsibility are not permitted under Faculty Conflict of Commitment and Interest policy, and are not allowable as consulting relations. Titles such as CEO, Director, Scientific Officer, or Vice President, etc., are designations generally assigned to people with line management responsibilities. Faculty must avoid titles that include terms such as executive, officer, director, manager, or chief as they imply or indicate management responsibilities and create real or perceived conflicts of commitment. Situations arise in which a Habib faculty member is chosen to serve on a Board of Directors of a company, or on a company’s advisory council or scientific advisory board. These appointments and titles are different from managerial roles and titles and are permitted as consulting relationships.

Several types of faculty activity, other than regular University duty, are not ‘consulting.’ These are: A. Publication

Scholarly communications in the form of books, movies, television productions, art works, etc., though frequently earning financial profit for a faculty member and for another party (e.g., publisher), are not viewed as consultation. To attempt to distinguish between types of books, to assess the roles of book publication in different disciplines, or to challenge the historical relation between authorship and manuscript ownership would be fraught with danger and confusion. These reservations apply equally to the other types of scholarly communication cited above. However, faculty may not publish articles or other forms of scholarly communication under their own names in the course of their outside professional activities that are written in whole or material part by employees of the outside entity (i.e., ‘ghost written’). If a faculty member is listed as an author on any publication resulting from performance of consulting services, a disclosure should be included stating that the work was done as a paid consultant and was not part of the individual’s Habib duties and responsibilities.

B. Professional Service (Other Outside Professional Activities)

Under this rubric falls service to national commissions, governmental agencies and boards, granting agency peer review panels, philanthropic organizations or charities, professional societies, visiting committees or advisory groups to other universities and analogous bodies. The fundamental distinction between these activities and consulting is that they are public or University service. Although an honorarium or equivalent sometimes is forthcoming, these professional service activities are not undertaken for personal financial gain. Therefore, such service does not fall within the consulting category as defined by Habib policy. In addition, even activities such as pro bono work, government service in the public interest, and any outside employment unrelated to the faculty member’s University responsibilities (therefore not included as ‘consulting’ in the policy on outside consulting), should be managed so they do not take precedence over a faculty member’s primary commitment to the University.

64

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 C. ‘Moonlighting’

Faculty members may pursue a variety of endeavors for financial profit that are not directly related to the person’s field or discipline. These efforts are part of the faculty member’s private life and do not come under University regulation or this consulting policy. To emphasize again, however, such endeavors may only be pursued after the full-time commitment to Habib has been fulfilled.

17.3 Number of Permissible Consulting Days Consulting is permitted provided the faculty member’s full-time obligation to the University is met. The maximum number of consulting days permissible for a member of the Academic Faculty on a full-time appointment is 13 days per academic semester. This limit is based on a judgment about incentives and is aimed at furthering Habib’s teaching and research objectives; it is not derived from accounting principles. University holidays are included in each semester from which the 13-day consultation limit is derived. A limited amount of ‘averaging’ of consulting time among full-time semesters is permissible if, on occasion, a faculty member plans to consult for more than 13 days in one semester but no more than 39 days for all semesters. Thirteen days of consulting per semester, or 52 days for three semesters of active duty, is intended to be a liberal allocation, yet one that is fair to the University. In addition to this general policy on consulting, University policies exist or may be instituted in individual schools or academic units.

17.4 Responsibilities of Faculty Members The responsibility for adhering to the limit on consulting days, and other aspects of Habib’s consulting policy, lies first with the individual faculty member. Faculty members should resolve any questions and/or ambiguities with their dean before the fact, so that the University community is not injured by their actions. The University has the right, and indeed the obligation, to protect itself from losses due to excess consulting and to seek reimbursement from the faculty member for salary and benefits covering time spent on consulting beyond the limits provided for by this policy, especially in cases where amounts are significant and the faculty member did not seek prior consultation or follow the advice given by his or her dean. Faculty members have an obligation to report fully the level (i.e., number of days) of their consulting activities when asked to do so by the University so that it may be determined whether the principles set forth herein are being adhered to.

Furthermore, faculty must disclose their financial interests in outside entities that are related to their institutional responsibilities for research/scholarship, teaching/education or administration as required by the Faculty Policy on Conflict of Commitment and Interest in RPH. NOTE: Faculty entering into a consulting or non-disclosure agreement with a commercial entity must provide to that entity a copy of the attached summary of Habib University Requirements for Faculty Consulting Activities and Agreements.

17.5 Guidelines for Policy Implementation

65

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0 A. General

The nature of the consulting work should in no way detract from the prestige of the University or the professional stature of the faculty member. Consulting obligations undertaken should conform to this objective.

B. Averaging

Full-time Academic Council members who expect to consult for more than 13 days in any one academic semester, but not more than 39 days in the academic year, should so inform their dean on a prospective basis. A reasonable amount of ‘averaging’’ over the semesters of the academic year (or the full year, if the person is at 100 percent time for all semesters) ordinarily is acceptable, although particular circumstances such as teaching loads or the terms of support under grants or contracts will need to be taken into account. Averaging of consulting time from semesters of less than full-time service to semesters of full-time service is not permitted.

C. Consulting During Periods of Part-Time University Employment

The 13-day limit should be pro-rated for those members of the Academic Faculty holding parttime appointments, using the following formula: [13 x F] + [(1-F) x 6 x 13], where F is the fraction of full-time duty, 13 represents the average number of weeks per semester, and 6 represents the maximum number of days per week which are likely to be devoted to professional activities during the period of off-duty time. Thus, a faculty member holding a 75% appointment is permitted up to 29 ¼ days of consulting per year.

D. Consulting During the Summer or During Periods of Leave without Salary

Faculty members on nine-month appointments with no salary supplement for the fourth quarter (usually, but not always, the summer quarter) are not subject to the 13-day limit during that quarter.

Nor does the limit apply to faculty members on leave without salary. The 13-day limit should be prorated on the basis of one day per calendar week of duty time for those on leave without salary for less than a quarter.

If the faculty member receives a 3/9 salary supplement for the summer quarter the regular 13-day consulting limit shall apply. If the appointment is for less than 3/9 time, one of two conditions applies: (a) the appointment specifies a particular calendar period as ‘on duty’, in which case the regular consulting policy applies during that period and there is no limit during the remaining time; or (b) the appointment is at part-time for all or part of the quarter, in which case the above paragraph applies.

E. Consulting While on Sabbatical Leave

The purpose of sabbatical leave is to permit faculty members to take time off from normal University duties to advance their scholarly interests so that they may return to their posts with renewed vigor, perspective, and insight. A faculty member on sabbatical leave receiving full-time University salary may consult up to the regular 13-day limit per semester during the period of 66

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

sabbatical. A person on sabbatical receiving less than full-time University salary may supplement income up to the full-time equivalent salary and in addition, may devote up to a maximum of 13 days per semester to consulting.

F. Hourly Consulting

Some consultation is carried out by the hour and not by the day. In such cases, a total of 130 consulting hours is permitted per full-time academic semester. Stipulation of this total, as opposed to an hour-to-day conversion formula, permits faculty members added flexibility in carrying out consulting and still protects the primary interests of the University. The figure 130 does not derive from accounting principles, but stems from subjective judgments about the length of average faculty work days, the work days of businesses employing consultants and the desire to accommodate legitimate needs of some University faculty. For those individuals who consult on both a daily basis and an hourly basis during one academic quarter, a formula of one consulting day equals 10 consulting hours should be used in calculating total consultation time.

G. Use of University Facilities or Services

The facilities and services of the University may not be used in connection with compensated outside work, except in a purely incidental way.

H. Conflict of Interest

Habib University adopts a policy on Conflict of Interest, which states: ‘An implicit assumption underlying the University’s [consulting policies] is that such outside professional activities are a privilege and not a right and must not detract from a faculty member’s full-time obligation to his or her University duties.’

Consulting agreements involving Habib faculty should specifically address this concern by acknowledging that: 1. The primary duty of the Consultant, who is a Habib faculty member, is to Habib University.

2. The Consultant is subject to Habib’s policy on outside consulting activities of its faculty.

3. The Consultant may have obligations to Habib by reason of agreements between Habib and external organizations for research or other activities performed in part by the Consultant in fulfilling his/her duties to the University.

In addition, faculty are required to disclose to the University whether they (or members of the immediate family) have consulting arrangements, significant financial interests, or employment in an outside entity before the University will approve the following proposed arrangements between such entities and Habib: a) gifts; b) sponsored projects; c) technology licensing arrangements; and d) procurements.

67

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

On an annual basis, and when situations arise that require disclosure as specified in the Faculty Policy on Conflict of Commitment and Interest, all faculty members must certify to their school deans their compliance with Habib’s policies related to conflict of commitment and interest.

17.6 Attachment A: Faculty Consulting Policies, including required Habib University Requirements for Faculty Consulting Activities and Agreements Habib University encourages research relationships with other entities as a way to foster the transfer of knowledge gained through University research and scholarship for societal benefit. We also recognize, however, that our concern to preserve openness in research may be at odds with the need of for-profit companies to keep research information and materials proprietary. With these differences in mind, this section describes Habib’s policies governing two types of agreements that faculty enter into without direct University oversight. These are personal consulting agreements and non-disclosure agreements (NDAs). As a Habib faculty member, it is your responsibility to know the principles and policies that must be followed when entering into such agreements.

If you enter into a consulting or non-disclosure agreement with a commercial entity, a copy of the attached summary of ‘Habib University Requirements for Faculty Consulting Activities and Agreements’ must be provided to the company.

Consulting: Any consulting agreements with outside entities should carefully delineate and separate your university responsibilities from consulting responsibilities. Specifically, these agreements must not involve or address Habib University, or its resources and people, including students, postdoctoral scholars and staff. You are responsible for making sure that your consulting activity and the terms of any written agreements are consistent with requirements of the faculty Conflict of Commitment and Interest policy and your university obligations related to inventions and other intellectual property. Habib University also prohibits consulting that is solely or primarily for commercial marketing purposes. To avoid confusion, correspondence and agreements related to consulting activities must not use Habib letterhead or appear to be Habib documents. Finally, facilities and services of the University may not be used in connection with your consulting, except in a purely incidental way.

Non-Disclosure Agreements: In their capacity as University employees, Habib faculty and staff may not engage in confidential work for an entity other than Habib University. Confidential work for another entity may only be pursued during time allowed for consulting.

Any confidential information received for research purposes at Habib must be incidental to University research activities and may not interfere with the participation of anyone at Habib in the intellectually significant portions of the research activity ‘Openness in Research’ Policy.

Within these important limits, if it becomes necessary for you to share confidential information with, or receive information from, another entity for your work at the University, you may personally sign a Confidentiality Disclosure Agreement (CDA) or Non-Disclosure Agreement 68

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

(NDA). The agreement must state clearly that you are signing in your individual capacity and covers only your own activities. If it is necessary for those you supervise to receive confidential information, they must separately sign a confidentiality agreement, but only if the confidential information to be received is incidental and with approval of your school dean.

Some CDAs or NDAs presented to faculty for signing may contain intellectual property provisions impacting Habib’s rights in patents, copyrights, or patentable technology or copyrightable works.

Faculty may not sign any agreement that could affect Habib’s or other Habib researchers’ rights in intellectual property or your Habib obligations related to intellectual property.

The CDA/NDA must not include Habib University as a party. Individual researchers, faculty members and other employees have no authority to sign CDAs or NDAs on behalf of the University, their school or department, or any other division or department of the University. Habib University generally does not sign CDA/NDAs on behalf of the University, because there is no institutional mechanism to ensure the confidentiality of information received.

Please contact your school dean’s office or the office of the Dean of Research to discuss any questions that you may have concerning consulting agreements; they will advise you about CDA/NDAs related to your Habib work.

18 Conflict of Commitment and Interest for Academic Staff and Other Teaching Staff 18.1 Introduction The general concepts of conflict of commitment and interest, as set forth in the Faculty Policy on Conflict of Commitment and Interest in the RPH are applicable with certain modifications to other teaching staff. Other Teaching Staff members are referred to the full text of the Faculty Policy on Conflict of Commitment and Interest in RPH for further discussion of the points presented here.

Note Other Teaching Staff (i.e. RAs, TAs, librarians etc.) generally do not have consulting privileges at Habib University.

18.2 Conflict of Commitment Other Teaching Staff, employed on a full-time basis at Habib, owe their primary professional allegiance to the University, and their primary commitment of time and intellectual energies should be to the programs on which they are working. Whenever an individual’s outside activities interfere with professional obligations to Habib, a conflict of commitment exists. In the case of Academic Staff and Other Teaching Staff working at Habib on a part-time basis, this general principle applies to the extent of the Habib appointment. Individuals on less than full-time appointments may engage in consulting relationships and other employment, to the degree that those activities do not interfere with their obligations to Habib.

The following points of policy relate to conflicts of commitment: 69

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

1. Outside consulting privileges are not normally available to full time Academic Staff and Other Teaching Staff. They may consult only with permission, as noted below. Under no circumstances may any Academic Staff or Other Teaching Staff member’s outside consulting work exceed the limits imposed by the faculty consulting policy, i.e., 13 days per calendar semester (that is, one day in seven) on a full-time equivalent basis. (See further discussion in Section below.) Academic Staff and Other Teaching Staff may not use University resources or personnel, including facilities, staff, students or other trainees, equipment, or confidential information, except in a purely incidental way, as part of any outside consulting or business activities or for any other purposes that are unrelated to the education, research, scholarship or public service missions of the University.

NOTE: Permission for full-time members of the Academic Staff (e.g. Librarians, postdoctoral staff) or Other Teaching Staff (TAs, RAs) to consult, including the reasons for such permission, must be in writing, normally on a prospective basis, by the appropriate (for members of the Academic Staff-Teaching or Other Teaching Staff), or by the principal investigator (for members of the Academic Staff-Research), or by the director of the appropriate library (for members of the Academic Staff-Libraries). If such permission is granted, the department/program chair or PI or library director is responsible for assuring that the consulting activities of the Academic Staff member individual do not adversely impact the achievement of program or project goals or subject the University to financial or reputation risk. He or she may require periodic written or oral reports from the Academic Staff or Other Teaching Staff member in order to discharge this responsibility.

The content of these reports, and the basis for the permission itself, are subject to review by the department chair, relevant dean, or Provost and Dean of Research. See further discussion below.

2. Academic Staff and Other Teaching Staff must maintain a significant presence on campus throughout each semester in which they are employed by Habib, consistent with the scope of their appointment.

3. Academic Staff and Other Teaching Staff must not allow other professional activities to detract from their primary allegiance to Habib. For example, individuals employed on a full-time basis must not have outside managerial responsibilities nor act as a principal investigator on sponsored projects that could be conducted at Habib University but instead are submitted and managed through another institution.

18.3 Conflict of Interest Habib University is an institution that relies on public trust; Academic Staff as well as faculty must respect that status and conduct their affairs in ways that will not compromise the integrity of the University or that trust.

A conflict of interest occurs when there is a divergence between an individual’s private interests and his or her professional obligations to the University such that an independent observer might reasonably question whether the individual’s professional actions or decisions are determined by considerations of personal financial gain. A conflict of interest depends on the situation, and not on the character or actions of the individual.

70

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

Academic Staff and Other Teaching Staff should conduct their affairs so as to avoid or minimize conflicts of interest and must respond appropriately when conflicts of interest arise. Conflicts of interest must be disclosed to Habib when personal financial relationships or activities with outside entities occur that would reasonably appear to be related to an Academic Staff member’s Habib institutional responsibilities for research/scholarship or education/teaching.

The following points of policy relate to conflicts of interest: 1. Academic Staff and Other Teaching Staff must foster the open and timely exchange of results of scholarly activities, informing faculty, students and colleagues about outside obligations and activities that might influence the free exchange of scholarly information.

2. Academic Staff and Other Teaching Staff must disclose on a timely basis the creation or discovery of all potentially patentable inventions created or discovered in the course of their University activities or with more than incidental use of University resources. If intellectual property rights are to be claimed, ownership of such inventions must be assigned to the University regardless of source of funding. The inventor will share in royalties earned.

3. Academic Staff and Other Teaching Staff must disclose on an annual and transactional/ad hoc basis to their supervisor, or to the principal investigator on their research, when they (or their spouse/domestic partner or dependent children) have a financial interest (defined below) in, an outside entity that would reasonably appear to be related to their institutional responsibilities. Disclosures of such interests are also required when the individual is engaged in a specific transaction, including:     

Gifts.

Sponsored projects.

Technology licensing arrangements.

Material transfer and collaboration agreements.

Certain procurements (e.g., sole source or from a privately-held company).

In such cases, review and approval by the school dean, the cognizant dean for COI or the designated COI program administrator will be required prior to entering into the proposed arrangement.

4. Financial interests or other outside activities that are disclosed and deemed to be related to one or more of the Academic Staff or Other Teaching Staff member’s institutional responsibilities will be further reviewed to determine if the financial interest or relationship could have a direct and significant effect on the performance of his or her responsibilities.

If such a situation exists, the conflict will need to be eliminated or managed according to a plan provided to the individual by the cognizant dean for COI. Other administrative actions, such as disclosure in publications and public talks, may be required when the financial interest is not considered likely to directly and significantly affect performance of institutional responsibilities.

5. Academic Staff and Other Teaching Staff who are approved for Principal Investigator status are required to file appropriate transactional/ad hoc COI disclosures as required as 71

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

well as an annual disclosure certifying compliance with the Faculty Conflict of Commitment and Interest Policy in RPH. If a situation raising questions of conflict of commitment or interest arises, Academic Staff and Other Teaching Staff must discuss the situation with their supervisor, principal investigator, or with the department chair or school dean or the person designated to assess conflicts of commitment and interest in their school or independent laboratory.

18.4 Further Discussion of Consulting by Academic Staff and Other Teaching Staff The decision to permit consulting by an Academic Staff or Other Teaching Staff member will depend on the circumstances of each situation, including the needs of the program or project, the individual’s role and the scope of his or her appointment. Such permission is subject to review as circumstances change. If permission is granted, time spent on consulting must be in addition to, rather than part of, the regular effort expected of the individual’s University work.

It is the responsibility of each Academic Staff and Other Teaching Staff member who wishes to engage in outside consulting to be aware of the University's limits on such activities. A full-time Academic Staff member’s consulting activities may never exceed 13 days per semester (that is, one day in seven). This maximum applies to all periods of University employment, including vacations, quarter breaks, or other paid time off from work. Department chairs or PIs may limit an Academic Staff member’s outside consulting activities to fewer than 13 days per quarter as necessary to meet University programmatic needs or project goals.

This policy is a University-wide policy. In addition, there may be further restrictions placed on Academic Staff and Other Teaching Staff consulting activities within individual schools or independent laboratories, centers and institutes. Academic Staff should request information about further policy limits from the school dean’s office or the Dean or Research.

When an Academic Staff or Other Teaching Staff member is involved in activities not directly associated with Habib (e.g., independent consulting, other business activities, publications, etc.), use of Habib's name and marks is limited to identification of the individual by his or her affiliation (e.g., Jane Smith, Senior Lecturer, Habib University) and must be consistent with the guidance provided in Administrative Guide Memo 15.5. The title may only be used only during the term of the appointment at the University and must always be used in its entirety; it cannot be abbreviated or altered.

In the event of conflict between the provisions of any consulting agreement and the terms and conditions of employment of an Academic Staff or Other Teaching Staff member by Habib, the latter shall prevail. The following sentence (or one similar) should be included in Academic Staff or Other Teaching Staff member’s outside consulting agreements: “The terms and conditions of employment and appointment by Habib University and the provisions of any agreement between Habib and external sponsors of projects on which the consultant works as part of his/her University duties, shall prevail in the event of any conflict with the provisions of this Agreement.”

72

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

19 University Investments in Start-Up Companies Involving Habib Faculty This section establishes guidelines under which Habib University may invest in start-up companies in which Habib faculty also have equity interests.

19.1 Background Each year Habib University may decide to invest a small portion of its investment capital in startup companies that are exploiting new technologies. Although many such companies do not succeed, those that do offer the potential for high returns to their investors.

19.2 Start-ups with Faculty Involvement On occasion Habib may be faced with an opportunity to invest in a start-up company in which one or more Habib faculty members also have equity interests. The University ordinarily will not invest in such companies if any of the involved faculty members also have line management responsibilities in them, given the potential for apparent or real conflicts of interest. See Faculty Policy on Conflict of Commitment and Interest in RPH for guidance regarding faculty management responsibilities in outside companies.)

However, Habib may invest in start-ups in which the extent of its faculty involvement is limited to equity holdings (or rights to equity) and/or advisory roles under the following conditions:   



Habib will not act as a lead investor or syndicating agent. All investments will be as a ‘passive investor.’

Habib will not acquire an equity holding greater than 10% of the ownership of the company.

No Habib officer is to be a member of the board, or be an officer of the company, or have a personal equity position in the company at the time of Habib’s investment in any of the equity rounds before the company goes public.

University investments in start-up companies in which Habib faculty have equity interests are subject to the case-by-case approval of the Provost, based upon recommendations by the Chief Executive Officer of the Habib Management Company. If the involved faculty member(s) subsequently creates University-owned data or inventions for which the startup company seeks a license for commercial use or development, the licensing request will be subject to the review and approval of the relevant department chair and school dean, in consultation with the Vice Provost and Dean of Research.

20 Equity Acquisition in Technology Licensing and Distance Learning Agreements This section establishes specific conditions under which Habib may acquire equity as part of an agreement.

73

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

20.1 Policy In the course of technology licensing and in developing, marketing, selling and licensing various types of distance learning, Habib University may have the opportunity to acquire equity. This policy enables Habib University to receive a benefit from equity. While potential conflict of interest issues are addressed through the Faculty Policy on Conflicts of Commitment and Interest, the policy on Conflict of Commitment and Interest for Academic Staff in RPH, the Staff Policy on Conflict of Commitment and Interest in the Administrative Guide Memo and through management of the University’s equity separate from an affected school or department. Equity includes shares of stock, and also other forms of equity (such as warrants, options, interest in limited partnerships or limited liability companies) that lend themselves to distribution in the manner contemplated.

20.2 Technology Licensing Agreements 1. The University may accept equity as one form of compensation for license rights, subject to a conflict of interest review if appropriate.

2. Of the total amount of equity which is to be issued for a particular license, fifteen percent (15%) of such equity (‘the Administrative Share’) will be issued to the University to cover its general administrative expenses.

3. The remaining equity to be issued for the license, after deducting the Administrative Share, will be considered as ‘Net Equity.’

4. One third (⅓) of the Net Equity will be issued to the Inventor(s) as the Inventor(s)’s Shares.

Following issuance of Net Equity, it shall be the sole responsibility of the Inventor(s) to manage the Inventor(s)’s Shares and to comply with any tax, legal or contractual obligations associated with the distribution, ownership, or disposition of the Inventor(s)’s Shares.

5. The remaining two thirds (⅔) of Net Equity will be issued to the University as the University Share. The Office of Research ‘Research and Fellowship Fund’, administered by the Provost and Dean of Research, will receive the University Share, less any unreimbursed direct expenses.

6. All equity received by the University will be managed by Habib University.

20.3 Distance Learning Agreements 1. The University may accept equity as one form of compensation for distance learning, subject to a conflict of interest review.

2. The Provost, or his designees, will determine the allocations of equity under this policy. In making this determination, factors to take into account include: 1) any royalties or other compensation received from the affected parties; 2) any seed funds or other support given by the school or department to the long distance venture; 3) the value of the university's name to the venture; 4) the value to the distance learning venture that was added by each of the parties; and 5) such other factors as are deemed relevant.

3. Of the total amount of equity which is to be issued for a particular venture, fifteen percent (15%) of such equity (‘the Administrative Share’) will be issued to the University for the benefit of the University. If the Office of Research and Continuing Education has

74

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

contributed significantly to the licensing of the work, the Dean of Research may allocate a portion of the 15% to the Office.

The remaining equity to be issued for the license, after deducting the Administrative Share, will be considered as ‘Net Equity.’

Up to one third (⅓) of the Net Equity may be issued to the Creator(s) as the Creator(s)’s Shares. Following issuance of Net Equity, it shall be the sole responsibility of the Creator(s) to manage the Creator(s)’s Shares and to comply with any tax, legal, or contractual obligations associated with the distribution, ownership, or disposition of the Creator(s)’ Shares.

The ‘Creator’ or ‘Creators’ are those individual(s) who created the intellectual content for the distance learning venture. If there is more than one Creator, they will generally share equally in the Creators’ Share. If there are no readily identifiable Creators because the distance learning venture is a group project, was largely created by University or Departmental resources or for any other reason, then the Creators’ Share will go to the University as set forth in paragraph 7. A committee appointed by the Provost [see 2 above] will make the determination of the apportionment of the ‘Creator’ share.

The remaining Net Equity will be issued to the University as the University Share. The Office of the Provost will determine how such proceeds are to be distributed. A department or school may petition the Office of the Provost to receive a portion of the equity for its particular teaching and education purposes.

All equity received by the University will be managed by Habib University.

Any disputes about any issues covered by this policy shall be submitted to the Provost who will attempt to informally resolve the dispute and, failing that, appoint a Panel to decide each dispute. Any objections to the decision of the Panel must be made in writing within 30 days of the decision of the Panel to the President and the President or his designee will make a final and binding determination of the dispute.

20.4 Equity It may be in the best interests of technology transfer and distance learning to include equity as partial consideration of a license agreement. Young, privately-held companies often do not have the requisite cash reserves to compete with an established company for rights to Habib property.

An offering of equity is a means of enabling small companies to license Habib technology or otherwise participate with Habib in distance learning ventures. However, the acceptance of equity presents two potential problems: risk and the generation of conflicts of interest.

Risk is an issue because, at the time equity is given, it generally has no value. Whether or not it will acquire value will depend on the overall success of the company, which is a function of many factors that may not relate to the technology being licensed or the educational content being distributed. Therefore, Habib University will always require some cash as part of the upfront license agreement.

Equity has considerable potential for creating conflicts of interest for inventors, creators and the University because equity holders are part owners of the company. As owners, they stand to gain considerably if the company does well, and therefore there may be incentives to take actions and

75

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

make decisions that favor the interests of the company over the academic missions of the University.

Habib’s Faculty Policy on Conflict of Commitment and Interest in RPH recognizes these potential conflicts and requires disclosure and intervention as necessary to manage them. However, since departments and schools are involved in key personnel and facilities decisions, conflict of interest can also be a concern at the organizational and institutional levels.

76

Research Policy Handbook Version 1.0

End Notes: Review: This document will be reviewed at least once a year by the Office of Research and Continuing Education at Habib University.

Acknowledgement: This document has been adapted from guidelines established by our partner institution Stanford University.

77