Removal of Principal Investigators. Funded activities with contracted obligations under the direction of a principal investigator or project director are normally appropriately viewed as work products of those who have secured funding in these roles. These activities will include, but not be limited to, research grants, training grants, education grants, conference grants, and unrestricted donations or grants for unspecified research or consultation in designated areas. From time to time, issues arise concerning the discharge of contracted obligations that can have serious consequences for the University, its officials, faculty, and students who are involved. There may be occasions such as issues concerning misconduct, incapacitation, or resignation, which could appropriately result in removing a principal investigator or project director from a position of primary responsibility in fulfilling funded obligations, or not allowing a successor grant application to be made. The intention of this policy is to specify the procedures for dealing with such circumstances in a way that preserves the rights and responsibilities of all concerned parties (including funding sources). No principal investigator or project director will be involuntarily removed from grantee status or disallowed opportunity to renew grantee status except in conformance with the procedures below. For the purposes of this policy, the line of administration will be considered to go from the faculty member to the Head, Chair, or Director of his or her department or program, then to the Xxxx of the appropriate college, and then to the Vice Chancellor for Research or similar position. Hereafter, “grantee” will refer to any principal investigator, any pair (or larger group) of principal investigators, or any project director or pair (or larger group) of project directors.
Appears in 7 contracts
Removal of Principal Investigators. Funded activities with contracted obligations under the direction of a principal investigator or project director are normally appropriately viewed as work products of those who have secured funding in these roles. These activities will include, but not be limited to, research grants, training grants, education grants, conference grants, and unrestricted donations or grants for unspecified research or consultation in designated areas. From time to time, issues arise concerning the discharge of contracted obligations that can have serious consequences for the University, its officials, faculty, and students who are involved. There may be occasions such as issues concerning misconduct, incapacitation, or resignation, which could appropriately result in removing a principal investigator or project director from a position of primary responsibility in fulfilling funded obligations, or not allowing a successor grant application to be made. The intention of this policy is to specify the procedures for dealing with such circumstances in a way that preserves the rights and responsibilities of all concerned parties (including funding sources). No principal investigator or project director will be involuntarily removed from grantee status or disallowed opportunity to renew grantee status except in conformance with the procedures below. For the purposes of this policy, the line of administration will be considered to go from the faculty member to the Headhead, Chairchair, or Director director of his or her department or program, then to the Xxxx xxxx of the appropriate college, and then to the Vice Chancellor for Research or similar position. Hereafter, “grantee” will refer to any principal investigator, any pair (or larger group) of principal investigators, or any project director or pair (or larger group) of project directors. Procedures: In the event that anyone has concerns about the conduct of a grantee in the performance of a grantee’s funded obligations, those concerns shall be directed in writing to the head, chair, or director of the grantee’s department or program, who will then initiate an informal meeting with the grantee to discuss the situation. At this point in the process, the head, chair, or director will discuss the situation without identifying the person or agency that has brought forward the concerns. This initial step should be regarded as a primarily informal attempt at a quick resolution of issues. If the situation cannot be resolved informally to the satisfaction of both parties (the head, chair, or director and the grantee), the head, chair, or director will inform the grantee in writing of the concerns that were previously discussed informally, as well as detailing the origins of the concerns, and may suggest formal steps to be taken to deal with the concerns that would be satisfactory. At this point, the Vice Chancellor for Research or similar position may seek input from the sponsor. The grantee shall make any response in writing within two weeks after receiving written notice of the concerns. If the outstanding issues are not resolved by this exchange to the satisfaction of both parties, and cannot be resolved within two additional weeks by a further exchange of letters, then either party can request that the file of letters be forwarded to the xxxx. The xxxx will initiate an informal meeting with the grantee and the head, chair, or director in an effort to negotiate a settlement. If the xxxx cannot negotiate a mutually agreeable settlement within one month of receiving the case, the file will go forward with a narrative letter reporting the efforts attempted and their failure, along with any comments, to the Vice Chancellor for Research or similar position. When the file reaches the Vice Chancellor for Research, a final attempt at a mutually agreeable informal settlement may be made by the Vice Chancellor for Research. If this fails, or if the Vice Chancellor does not believe that an informal settlement is possible, he or she shall, within one month of receiving the case and with the concurrence of the Research Council at the Amherst campus (and through an analogous procedure at the Boston campus to be determined by the Union and the Administration), appoint a hearing panel of five tenured faculty members not from the same school who have been extramural grantees of some kind during the past seven years to settle the disagreement. The Vice Chancellor will appoint the chair of the hearing panel. The hearing panel will meet within one month of their appointments. After hearing from all parties in an appropriate hearing procedure, to be concluded within one month of the initial meeting and to be determined by agreement between the hearing panel and the Vice Chancellor for Research after consultation with all parties, the hearing panel will issue its written recommendation, based on a majority decision, to the Vice Chancellor for Research and all parties within one month after the hearing ends. The recommendation, with explanation of reasons, will be either that no change in the management of the funded activity be made, or that the Vice Chancellor work with the funding agency and any campus agencies involved to negotiate a change in funding responsibilities. The decision of the Vice Chancellor for Research will be made within two weeks of receipt of the hearing panel’s recommendation and will be binding on all parties, as will the results of any negotiations concluded by the Vice Chancellor for Research after a recommendation for change. Timelines: Every effort should be made to observe the timelines above, which may nonetheless be extended by mutual agreement.
Appears in 2 contracts
Samples: Agreement, fsu.umb.edu
Removal of Principal Investigators. Funded activities with contracted obligations under the direction of a principal investigator or project director are normally appropriately viewed as work products of those who have secured funding in these roles. These activities will include, but not be limited to, research grants, training grants, education grants, conference grants, and unrestricted donations or grants for unspecified research or consultation in designated areas. From time to time, issues arise concerning the discharge of contracted obligations that can have serious consequences for the University, its officials, faculty, and students who are involved. There may be occasions such as issues concerning misconduct, incapacitation, or resignation, which could appropriately result in removing a principal investigator or project director from a position of primary responsibility in fulfilling funded obligations, or not allowing a successor grant application to be made. The intention of this policy is to specify the procedures for dealing with such circumstances in a way that preserves the rights and responsibilities of all concerned parties (including funding sources). No principal investigator or project director will be involuntarily removed from grantee status or disallowed opportunity to renew grantee status except in conformance with the procedures below. For the purposes of this policy, the line of administration will be considered to go from the faculty member to the Head, Chair, or Director of his or her their department or program, then to the Xxxx of the appropriate college, and then to the Vice Chancellor for Research or similar position. Hereafter, “grantee” will refer to any principal investigator, any pair (or larger group) of principal investigators, or any project director or pair (or larger group) of project directors.
Appears in 2 contracts
