When information about research misconduct proceedings is shared with individuals outside the Research Integrity Office, the RIO will use the following mechanisms to ensure all parties to research misconduct proceedings are aware of their confidentiality obligations:
| Party | Notification Mechanism |
| Research Integrity Standing Committee (RISC) Members | Notification and attestation via RISC Member Evaluation forms
Notification via case-specific committee charge document |
| Investigation Committee Members | Notification and attestation via case-specific COI disclosure and confidentiality attestation
Notification via case-specific committee charge document |
| Interviewees | Notification via email |
| Internal (to IU) Consultants | Notification and attestation via case-specific COI disclosure and confidentiality attestation |
| External (non-IU) Consultants | Signed confidentiality agreement or NDA |
| Institutional Officials | Notification via email |
Handling accidental disclosures or a breach in confidentiality is crucial to maintaining the integrity of the research misconduct proceedings. For example, such breaches may include the following:
| Unauthorized Disclosure | A member of the Inquiry Committee discusses details of the case with a colleague who is not involved in the investigation, leading to the spread of sensitive information. |
| Improper Storage of Documents | Investigation records are left unsecured in a shared office space, allowing unauthorized personnel to access confidential information. |
| Inadvertent Disclosure | An email containing confidential information about the case is accidentally sent to the wrong recipient, who is not authorized to view the information. |
| Public Statements | A university official makes a public statement about the case without proper authorization, revealing the identities of the complainant and respondent. |
| Social Media Posts | An individual involved in the investigation posts details about the case on social media, compromising the confidentiality of the proceedings. |
If a breach occurs, the following steps should be taken:
- Immediate containment: As soon as a breach is identified, the discloser must take immediate steps to contain the breach. This may involve recalling emails, securing physical documents, or restricting access to digital files.
- Notification: The discloser must immediately inform the Research Integrity Officer (RIO) about the accidental disclosure. Transparency is key to managing the situation effectively.
- Assessment: The RIO will conduct a thorough assessment to determine the extent of the breach and identify the information that was disclosed and evaluate the potential impact on the proceedings and the individuals involved.
- Mitigation: The RIO will implement measures to mitigate the impact of the disclosure. This could include reinforcing confidentiality obligations, providing additional training to staff, and enhancing security protocols.
- Communication: The RIO will inform appropriate parties of the breach, including the respondent, and the steps being taken to address it. The RIO will ensure that these communications are done sensitively and maintain as much confidentiality as possible.
- Documentation: The RIO will document the incident, including the nature of the disclosure, the steps taken to address it, and any measures implemented to prevent future occurrences. This documentation will be included in the case file.
- Review and improvement: The RIO will review the incident to identify any weaknesses in the current confidentiality protocols and will use this information to improve policies and procedures to prevent similar breaches in the future.
Example Scenario: An email containing sensitive information about a research misconduct proceeding is accidentally sent to an unauthorized recipient. The RIO is immediately notified, and the email is recalled. The RIO assesses the breach, informs appropriate parties, and documents the incident. Additional training on email security is provided to staff, and email protocols are reviewed and updated to prevent future occurrences.
The following institutional officials will be notified of inquiry and investigation initiation and results and findings and may share the information with additional individuals who need to know. When possible, institutional officials will consult with the RIO before sharing such information.
- DO
- Dean of Respondent’s school
- Division chief/Department head of the Respondent’s unit
- Respondent’s direct supervisor, especially for respondents who are post-doctoral fellows or staff
- If investigation is initiated: senior campus official such as Chancellor (IUI) or Provost (IUB)
- General Counsel
Complainants will be provided limited information after allegation assessment and at inquiry and investigation completion; however, the DO may require that more specific information, including inquiry/investigation reports, be provided.
More specific information about inquiry and/or investigation, including inquiry/investigation reports, may be provided to appropriate institutional officials, including division chiefs, department heads, or direct supervisors, at the DO’s request, especially to ensure appropriate institutional actions are completed and that appropriate departmental leadership understands the context of any results.
| Event | Respondent | Complaintant | DO | Dean | Division chief or department head | Senior campus official (e.g, Chancellor or Provost) | General Counsel |
| Allegation Assessment | | X | | | | | |
| Inquiry Initiation | X | | X | X | X | | X |
| Inquiry Outcome | X | X | X | X | X | | X |
| Investigation Initiation | X | | X | X | X | X | X |
| Investigation Outcome | X | X | X | X | X | X | X |
Information about inquiry and/or investigation results and findings, including inquiry/investigation reports, may be provided to additional external entities, especially to ensure appropriate institutional actions are completed, including:
- Journals, editors, and publishers
- Co-authors
- Professional organizations
- Collaborating institutions
- Funding agencies
When the disputed research is supported by or involves federal funds, information about research misconduct proceedings will be shared with relevant federal oversight agencies in accordance with federal, state, and location regulations as defined below. The RIO may make additional notifications as needed.
| Event | ORI (PHS funds) | NIH | NSF | VA | USDA | DOD |
| Allegation Assessment | | | | | | |
| Inquiry Initiation | | | | X | | |
| Inquiry Outcome | | | | | | |
| Investigation Initiation | X | X | X | X | X | X |
| Investigation Completion | X | X | X | X | X | X |
| Special Circumstances (see below) | X | X | X | | X | |
- When the disputed research is supported by PHS funds, the RIO will make the following notifications to the Office of Research Integrity (ORI), per 42 CFR 93:
- When the DO makes a decision that investigation is warranted, the RIO will provide ORI with a copy of the inquiry report within 30 days.
- At the completion of an investigation, after the DO has made a determination, the RIO will provide ORI with the institutional record.
- The RIO will notify ORI if the RIO plans to close a research misconduct proceeding on the basis that the respondent has admitted to research misconduct.
- If there is reason to believe any of the following special circumstances exist, the RIO will notify ORI:
- Health or safety of the public is at risk, including an immediate need to protect human or animal subjects
- HHS resources or interests are threatened
- Research activities should be suspended
- There is reasonable indication of possible violations of civil or criminal law
- Federal action is required to protect the interests of those involved in the research misconduct proceeding
- HHS may need to take steps to safeguard evidence and protect the rights of those involved
- When the disputed research is supported by NIH funds, the RIO will make the same notifications to the NIH Extramural Research Integrity Officer as are made to ORI.
- When the disputed research is supported by NSF funds, the RIO will make the following notifications to the Office of Inspector General, per 45 CFR 689:
- The RIO will notify the Office of Inspector General (OIG) immediately if an inquiry supports a formal investigation and keep OIG informed throughout the investigation.
- At the completion of an investigation, after the DO has made a determination, the RIO will provide ORI with the institutional record.
- If there is reason to believe any of the following special circumstances exist, the RIO will promptly notify OIG:
- Health or safety of the public is at risk, including an immediate need to protect human or animal subjects
- NSF’s resources, reputation, or other interests need protecting
- Research activities should be suspended
- There is reasonable indication of possible violations of civil or criminal law
- Federal action may be required to protect the of a subject of the investigation or of others potentially affected
- The scientific community or the public should be informed
- When the disputed research involves VA research, the RIO will contact the Research Integrity Office at the relevant VA location to ensure proceedings align with VHA Directive 1058.02. Notification will be made, at a minimum, at inquiry and investigation initiation and investigation completion.
- When the disputed research is supported by DOD funds:
- The RIO will notify the appropriate DOD agency when the DO makes a decision that investigation is warranted.
- At the completion of an investigation, after the DO has made a determination, the RIO will provide the institutional record to the appropriate DOD agency.
- When the disputed research is supported by USDA funds:
- The RIO will notify the OIG and the USDA RIO when the DO makes a decision that investigation is warranted.
- At the completion of an investigation, after the DO has made a determination, the RIO will provide the institutional record to the USDA Research Integrity Officer.
- If there is reason to believe any of the following special circumstances exist, the RIO will promptly notify the Agency Research Integrity Officer:
- Public health or safety is at risk
- The resources, reputation, or other interests of USDA are in need of protection
- Research activities should be suspended
- Federal action may be needed to protect the interest of a subject of the investigation or of others potentially affected
- A premature public disclosure of the inquiry into or investigation of the allegation may compromise the process
- The scientific community or the public should be informed
- There is reasonable indication of possible violations of civil or criminal law
When the disputed research is supported by funds other than federal funds, information about research misconduct proceedings will be shared with the sponsor or funding agency in accordance with any relevant contracts. The RIO may make additional notifications as needed or as directed by the DO.