First, examine your institutions misconduct policy; it should specify if
there are different standards for federally funded research an other
research.  I would guess that your standards are the same, except that
there will reporting requirements for the federally supported that differ
from non-federal.  Those would be matters defined in the research
agreement; for federal, if my memory serves, it will be in agency-specific
regulations referred to in the award; as a practical matter, assume all
agencies expect the same reporting as PHS and NSF do.  If your standards
are not the same, you may want to re-examine your policy; misconduct is
misconduct, no matter who funds it.  Would you tell your four year old that
it is sometimes OK to steal candy from baby sister and sometimes not,
depending on who gave it to her?

If the project on which the misconduct occurred includes federally funded
activity as cost sharing, I would think it very likely that alleged the
misconduct may have extended to those activities; if not, how could the
activities have been close enough that the federally funded one can serve
as cost share?  In short, from the information you have given, there is an
APPEARANCE of possible misconduct, and appearances are as serious as actual
misconduct (also insert conflict of interest, or other unacceptable
behavior in this sentence!) -- maybe even more serious, because if not
examined because they are mere appearances, the suspicion is not resolved
into guilt or innocence!

Based on this, I'd advise my VP to make a report to the federal
sponsor.  It might be very carefully worded, and if there is some good
reason to consider that the misconduct did not extend to the federally
supported activities, I'd suggest making that clear and stating that the
report at this point is being made to ensure that the institution is not
making the error of omission.

Don't forget the importance of protecting any whistle blower!  And of
maintaining maximum confidentiality until an investigation is concluded.

Chuck

At 10:55 AM 9/5/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Dear colleagues:
>
>I would like to obtain your thoughts on the following scenario.
>
>An investigator has been accused of scientific misconduct. A committee
>organized by your institution found there was cause for additional
>investigation.
>
>The investigator's research was funded by a non-federal agency.  The
>non-federal agency does not have a policy on scientific misconduct.
>
>As part of the award budget for the research funded by the non-federal
>agency, there is a cost sharing component to be funded by a federal agency.
>
>Would you recommend following the federal agency's guidelines for scientific
>misconduct cases or would you recommend following only the institution's
>policy?
>
>Any light you can shed on this question would be illuminating.  Thanks!
>
>Rochelle R. Athey
>Associate Director
>Research Services & Sponsored Programs
>330-972-8311
>330-972-6281 fax
>
>
>======================================================================
>  Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including
>  subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available
>  via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists")
>======================================================================

Herbert B. Chermside, CRA
Director, Sponsored Programs Administration
Virginia Commonwealth University
PO BOX 980568
Richmond, VA  23298-0568
Express Delivery Only:
 Sanger Hall, Rm. 1-073
 11th & Marshall Streets
 Richmond, VA  23219
Voice:  804-828-6772
Fax     804-828-2521
OFFICE e-mail   xxxxxx@VCU.EDU
Personal e-mail xxxxxx@vcu.edu
http://views.vcu.edu/ospa/

======================================================================
 Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including
 subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available
 via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists")
======================================================================