University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Procedures for Adjudicating Complaints of Misconduct in Research and Scholarly Activities

View as PDF

Unit Responsible: Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research and Innovation (OVCRI)

Effective Date:  January 1, 2026

Contact: ResearchIntegrity@illinois.edu

1. INTRODUCTION

All University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (“University”) Institutional Members are expected to conduct Research and Scholarly Activities to the highest level of integrity. The University of Illinois System Policy on Integrity in Research and Scholarly Activities (or the “Policy”)[1] defines Research Integrity and Research Misconduct.[2]

2. SCOPE AND COVERAGE

The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Procedures for Adjudicating Complaints of Misconduct in Research and Scholarly Activities (the “Procedures” described within this document) apply to all Institutional Members, as defined by the Policy. Any individual whose primary affiliation is outside the University who is serving as a Principal Investigator (PI) of sponsored Research and Scholarly Activities at the University[3] is required to comply with the Policy and these Procedures. Codes of student conduct and other System and University policies should be consulted as appropriate.[4]

Complaints implicating policies overseen by other administrative units (including Complaints involving interpersonal misconduct) may be referred to the appropriate policy administrator at any point in the Proceeding.[5] The Research Integrity Officer (RIO) or Vice Chancellor for Research and Innovation (VCRI) may consult with University Counsel on the appropriate referral of such Complaints received or discovered.

3. PURPOSE AND GENERAL PROVISIONS

This document outlines the Procedures as required by the Policy.[6] As stated in the Policy, the Responsible Official for approving these Procedures is the VCRI.[7]

3.1 Policy Definitions

All definitions, provisions, and other policy elements outlined in the Policy are incorporated into these Procedures. Capitalized terms throughout these Procedures are defined in the Policy and shall have the same meanings, unless otherwise defined herein. Footnotes refer to relevant sections of the Policy, Procedures, and other source documents.

3.2 Confidentiality of Proceedings

Proceedings, including the identities of Complainants,[8] witnesses, and Respondents, are confidential to the extent reasonably possible.[9] Participants are responsible for protecting the confidentiality of all information and materials (collectively “Information”) related to Proceedings, limiting any disclosures to only those necessary to complete Proceedings. Documents related to the Proceedings will be stored using University‐maintained information technology services and secured against unauthorized access. Any breaches of these confidentiality obligations, whether intentional or unintentional, should be immediately reported to the RIO. The obligation of confidentiality continues until the University has made a final determination, including consideration of a Respondent’s appeal.  

3.3 Exceptions, including Timelines

At any phase of the Proceeding, the RIO may request exceptions to the Policy[10] or these Procedures in writing to the VCRI. Requests to extend a timeline shall set forth the length of the extension requested and provide specific updates and the reason for the request.[11] The RIO shall give Notice[12] to the Respondent of exceptions to the Policy or these Procedures.

3.4 Proceedings Involving Institutions Outside the University

The Chancellor may authorize the coordination of misconduct Proceedings involving institutions outside of the University. If there are multiple institutions, one institution should be designated as the lead institution if a joint research misconduct proceeding is conducted. The lead institution should obtain the Research Records and other Information pertinent to the proceeding and sequestered from other relevant institutions.

By mutual agreement, the joint Research Misconduct proceeding may include committee members from the institutions involved. The determination of whether an Inquiry and/or Investigation is warranted, whether Research Misconduct occurred, and the recommended actions to be taken may be made by the institutions jointly, or the determination may be tasked to the lead institution pursuant to the lead institution’s policy and procedures. The recommendations (including any involving Sanctions and/or Corrective Actions) decided as an outcome of an Investigation lead jointly or by an outside institution should be then separately considered with the resulting determination and adjudication made by the Illinois Chancellor and the Deciding Official for the institution outside of the University.

3.5 Amendments to Procedures

The RIO is responsible for ensuring that these Procedures are consistent with the Policy and federal agency requirements. The RIO shall periodically review these Procedures in consultation with University Counsel, and the RIO may suggest amendments to them in writing to the VCRI. Upon approval of the VCRI, such amendments shall be incorporated into these Procedures. Amendments do not apply to Proceedings in progress, unless specifically approved by the VCRI.

4. ASSESSMENT

4.1 Intake

Complaints may be directed to the RIO, the relevant Unit Executive Officer (UEO), or the University Ethics and Compliance Office.[13] If the Complainant requests anonymity, the University will maintain the request within the limits set by applicable policy and law.[14] Complainants will be advised that their identity may be inferred during an Inquiry or Investigation or may be required to be disclosed to a federal oversight agency or under applicable laws. The University's ability to investigate and respond to anonymous Complaints may be limited, especially when the Complainant's identity is unknown to the RIO.

Upon receiving a Complaint, the RIO or the Respondent’s UEO will each notify the other promptly and decide whether the Complaint falls within the Time Limitation and scope of the Policy.[15] Complaints that fall outside the Time Limitation will not be reviewed further.[16] The RIO and the Respondent’s UEO may decline to assess Complaints clearly falling outside the scope of the Policy or the Assessment criteria stated in §4.3. In such instances the RIO may consult with University Counsel, and the RIO may inform the Respondent’s UEO and Dean of the nature of the Complaints and that an Assessment was not conducted. The Complainant (if known) should be informed of the decision not to assess the Complaints, which may be appealed in writing as outlined in §4.3.

The RIO and the Respondent’s UEO may determine that the Complaint falls outside the definition of Research Misconduct but is nevertheless a Detrimental Research Practice[17] or otherwise inconsistent with Research Integrity as described in the Policy.[18] The RIO and Respondent’s UEO may recommend that the Complaint (or relevant portions thereof) be referred to the appropriate unit or policy administrator for further action as appropriate.

Complainants should act in Good Faith in reporting Complaints to the University.[19] Intentionally submitting a false report may be the basis for disciplinary action or other personnel action in accordance with University rules and policies. If at any stage in the Proceedings, the Inquiry Team or the Investigation Panel determines that the original Complaints or the testimony of any person are intentionally false or misleading, the RIO shall communicate this to the VCRI. The VCRI may, upon consulting with University Counsel, inform the Provost or Chancellor, who may refer the matter to the appropriate unit or policy administrator for further action.

Due to the nature of certain Complaints, the RIO may recommend that the Complainant report their Complaints directly to the Title VI Office, Title IX Office, Office for Access and Equity (OAE), Office for Student Conflict Resolution (OSCR), or Human Resources. As a University Employee, the RIO is a Responsible Employee and has an obligation to report incidents of sexual misconduct.[20] If the Complaints implicate additional policies, the VCRI may direct the RIO to temporarily pause a Proceeding to allow other policy administrators to address the Complaints; however, referrals will not terminate a Research Misconduct Proceeding.

The RIO may, in consultation with University Counsel, request in writing that the appropriate administrative officials authorize the relevant administrative units to coordinate activities on a defined basis in addressing the Complaints. Such coordinated activities may include, but are not limited to, reviewing the Complaints, sharing sequestered information and Evidence, and conducting interviews. Each unit may prepare an independent report as appropriate.

4.2 Assessment of Allegations

For Complaints that fall within the scope of the Policy, the RIO and the Respondent’s UEO (or their delegate) will work together to conduct an Assessment. Specifically, the RIO and the Respondent’s UEO (or their delegate) shall assess each Allegation to determine whether the Allegation falls within the definition of Research Misconduct in the Policy[21] and is sufficiently credible and specific to enable potential Evidence of Research Misconduct to be identified.

The RIO may inform the Respondent of the Assessment, and if appropriate, request information related to the Allegations. In conducting the Assessment as outlined above, the UEO and RIO need not interview the Complainant, Respondent, or other witnesses, or gather data beyond any that may have been submitted with the Allegation. The Assessment period should be long enough for sufficient information to be brought forth to determine whether to move to an Inquiry and ideally concluded within 15 calendar days of receipt of the Complaint. The RIO and Respondent’s UEO (or their delegate) shall prepare a written statement of their Assessment findings and recommendations as to whether to pursue further misconduct Proceedings and/or other actions to the attention of the involved Dean or Deans, or the equivalent Executive Officer (hereinafter “Dean”) for each Respondent.

4.3 Assessment Determination

Within 15 calendar days after the Dean’s receipt of the Assessment recommendation, the Dean shall determine whether an Inquiry or Interim Actions are warranted. If the Dean determines to proceed to an Inquiry, the RIO should make a Good Faith effort to give Notice to the Respondent as described in §5.1 below. If the Dean determines that no action is to be taken, the RIO should inform the Respondent and may consult with University Counsel as to notification of Respondents who are not current Institutional Members.

The Complainant and all persons who have been informed of the Allegation shall be given Notice of the determination of the Assessment.[22] The Complainant or others informed of the Allegation may appeal the decision not to pursue an Inquiry to the RIO in writing within 15 calendar days of being informed of the decision. Individuals appealing the decision should outline how the Allegation meets the criteria described in §4.2 above and may submit additional information for consideration. The RIO shall forward the Assessment and additional information provided in the appeal to the VCRI. The VCRI shall consider the appeal and determine whether an Inquiry or other Interim Actions are warranted, ideally within 15 calendar days. The RIO shall inform the Complainant and the Respondent of the appeal status. The VCRI’s decision on any Assessment appeal is final.

If the Dean (or VCRI on appeal) determines that an Inquiry is warranted, the Dean shall appoint an Inquiry Team.

4.4 Allegations Involving Multiple Units

When an Allegation involves more than one unit (for example, if the Respondent holds more than one affiliation) or if there are multiple Respondents, the Deans from all relevant units shall jointly determine whether an Inquiry is warranted. When multiple Deans are involved and a consensus cannot be reached, the RIO shall forward the Assessment and any related recommendations to the Provost. The Provost shall make a determination regarding the Assessment per §4.3 above.

4.5 Allegations Involving OVCRI Units

Allegations involving a Respondent whose primary appointment is within a unit in the OVCRI shall be assessed by the RIO and the Respondent’s UEO, with the VCRI serving in the role of Dean. The Dean of the Graduate College shall serve as the Responsible Official and assume the VCRI’s role as described in these Procedures. If the RIO, Respondent’s UEO, or VCRI has a Conflict of Interest, the Dean of the Graduate College shall appoint a replacement.[23]

4.6 Allegations Involving Multiple Institutions

A Research Misconduct Proceeding involving multiple institutions must be conducted consistent with §3.4 above.

5. INQUIRY

5.1 Notice to Respondent

As part of the Notice of Allegations, the RIO shall inform the Respondent of the duty to cooperate in providing Information relevant to the Proceeding. Respondents retain their Right of Consultation and are encouraged to maintain professionalism.[24] The Notice to the Respondent must also inform the Respondent of the following rights in the Inquiry:

1. To challenge any member of the Inquiry Team for failure to meet the criteria stated in §5.3, pursuant to §5.4 below
2. To consult with uninvolved individuals;[25]
3. To submit a written response to the Allegations to the Inquiry Team;
4. To receive a copy of the Inquiry Report;
5. To submit a written response to the Inquiry Report that will accompany the Inquiry Report when forwarded to the VCRI; and,
6. To be notified of the outcome of the Inquiry.

The Notice to the Respondent must also outline the Respondent’s responsibilities during the Inquiry:

1. To produce Research Records and other Evidence on request, the refusal to do so being Evidence of Research Misconduct under the Policy;[26]
2. To maintain confidentiality;[27]
3. To cooperate with the conduct of the Proceedings;[28] and,
4. To not Retaliate against any Complainant, witness, or Inquiry Team member.[29]

5.2 Inquiry Team

The Dean, in consultation with the RIO and UEO, shall appoint an Inquiry Team consisting of two persons:

1. A tenured faculty member from the unit in which the Respondent holds a primary appointment; and
2. A tenured faculty member from outside the unit in which the Respondent holds a primary appointment.

If the Respondent was a graduate student at the time of the alleged misconduct, the Dean of the Graduate College will appoint a graduate student to the Inquiry Team as a third member. The Dean, at their discretion, may appoint one additional individual to the Inquiry Team.

The Dean may appoint substitute Inquiry Team members at any point of the Inquiry prior to the delivery of the Inquiry Report to the VCRI. The RIO shall request, in writing, that the VCRI approve any exceptions to the designated composition of the Inquiry Team.[30]

5.3 Qualifications of Inquiry Team Members

Inquiry Team members shall have appropriate qualifications to evaluate the Allegations and related matters at issue. Members should have no potential or actual unresolved personal, professional, or financial Conflicts of Interest with a Complainant, Respondent, or witness.[31]

5.4 Challenge to an Inquiry Team Member

The Respondent will be notified of the Inquiry Team members, their affiliations, and any substitutions in the Notice of Allegations or in a subsequent Notice. The Respondent may challenge membership of any proposed or substitute member of the Inquiry Team on the sole ground that the person does not meet the criteria set forth in §5.3. An objection to an Inquiry Team member must be made in writing to the RIO within 10 calendar days after the Respondent has been notified of the Inquiry Team appointments. The challenge should address the qualifications outlined in §5.3 and state the rationale for any objection. The Dean shall have the discretion to approve or deny challenges and the Dean’s decision is final.

5.5 Charge to the Inquiry Team

The RIO, after consultation with the Dean and UEO, shall prepare a charge in writing for the Inquiry Team that:

1. sets forth the time for completion of the Inquiry as 60 calendar days from the date of Notice to the Respondent; [32]
2. states the need to maintain confidentiality and the prohibition of Ex Parte communications under the Policy;[33]
3. informs the Inquiry Team that it must conduct the Inquiry as prescribed in the Policy and these Procedures;
4. identifies the Respondent(s) and their position;
5. describes the Allegations and any related issues identified during the Assessment;
6. states that the purpose of the Inquiry is to conduct an initial review of the Evidence, which may include the testimony of the Respondent, Complainant, and witnesses, and to determine whether an Investigation is warranted;
7. states that an Investigation is warranted if the Inquiry Team determines there is a reasonable basis for concluding that the Allegations:  
   1. fall within the definition of Research Misconduct in the Policy;[34] and,
   2. may have substance, based on the Inquiry Team’s review; and,
8. informs the Inquiry Team members that they are responsible for preparing, or directing the preparation of, a written report of the Inquiry that meets the requirements of the Policy and these Procedures.

5.6 First Meeting of the Inquiry Team

The RIO shall convene the first meeting of the Inquiry Team, review the charge to the Inquiry Team and the Allegations, note the Respondent’s responses (if any), and describe the procedures for conducting an Inquiry. Attendance at Inquiry Team meetings is expected. Meetings may be conducted by any practical means, including in-person, via tele/video conference, or with Inquiry Team members attending via a combination thereof. The RIO shall be present or available throughout the Inquiry to advise the Inquiry Team as needed.[35] The Inquiry Team shall conduct only those activities required pursuant to its charge, also considering any admission by the Respondent.[36]

5.7 Inquiry Process

The Inquiry Team may, at its discretion: interview the Respondent, the Complainant (if known), and witnesses; examine relevant Information; consult experts in the field; and take such other steps as are in their judgment appropriate to the Inquiry. Interviews, if conducted as part of the Inquiry, may be conducted by any practical means, including in-person, teleconference, videoconference, or via written questionnaire.[37]

5.8 Additional Evidence of Research Misconduct

The Inquiry Team shall evaluate the Evidence, including any testimony obtained, during the Inquiry. If additional Evidence of Research Misconduct is found during the Inquiry that meets the criteria outlined in §4.2, the RIO shall assist the Inquiry Team in assessing the Evidence as a basis for additional Allegations. The Dean shall be informed of any such Evidence and shall determine whether the new Allegations should be included as Allegations to be considered within the charge to the Inquiry Team. The Respondent shall be given Notice of the new Allegations and the opportunity to respond to them in writing within 10 calendar days.

5.9 Additional Respondents Identified During Inquiry

If additional Respondents are identified as part of the Inquiry, the RIO shall inform the VCRI who may initiate a separate Proceeding or direct the Inquiry Team to prepare separate Inquiry Reports specific to each Respondent. The RIO shall promptly give Notice to new Respondents, and they should be given the opportunity to respond to the Allegations in writing within 10 calendar days.[38] As needed, the VCRI shall grant an extension to the timeline of the Inquiry to allow any additional Respondents to submit written responses.

5.10 Inquiry Report

After consultation with the RIO, the Inquiry Team shall prepare, or direct the preparation of, a written Inquiry Report that shall include the following information:

1. Name and position of the Respondent;
2. Names, titles, and affiliations of the Inquiry Team members;
3. Description of the Allegations of Research Misconduct;
4. List of the sponsors of the Research and Scholarly Activities in question, including, for example, grant numbers, grant applications, and contracts;
5. List of related publications and those acknowledging sponsor support;
6. Description of the Inquiry process, including the analyses conducted;
7. Timeline and procedural history, including any extensions granted to the Inquiry Report timeline, if any, with the cause of the extension;[39]
8. List of the Research Records reviewed and inventory of any sequestered Research Records;
9. List of interviews conducted, if any;
10. Attachment or appendix containing interview transcripts, reviewed notes, or recordings, if any;
11. Preliminary findings of fact and a clear, detailed description of the Evidence upon which those findings are based;[40]
12. Recommendation of whether an Investigation is warranted and basis for that recommendation;
13. Recommendations with respect to the scope of the Investigation or Respondent(s) to be investigated; and,
14. Any institutional actions implemented to date, and recommendations for any other actions to be taken under other System and University policies.[41]

The RIO shall assist the Inquiry Team to ensure that the Inquiry Report conforms to the requirements of the Policy and these Procedures. The Inquiry Team shall send the Inquiry Report to the VCRI with a copy to the RIO. The RIO shall provide a copy of the Inquiry Report to the Dean, the Respondent, and other appropriate parties; the Complainant is not generally entitled to receive a copy of the Inquiry Report.

Upon completion of their roles, Inquiry Team members and witnesses will return to the RIO all copies of information or will otherwise dispose of and surrender access to the information in accordance with instructions of the RIO. These individuals shall not publicize, discuss, or disclose any information related to Proceedings except as necessary pursuant to these Procedures or as otherwise required by law.[42]

5.11 Comments by Respondent

The Respondent, including any additionally identified Respondents from the Inquiry, may submit written comments to the VCRI within 15 calendar days of receipt of the Inquiry Report.

5.12 Decision by VCRI

Within 10 calendar days after receiving both the Inquiry Report and any written comments of the Respondent, the VCRI shall determine whether to order an Investigation, close the Proceeding, and/or take other appropriate action under the Policy, these Procedures, or University or System statutes, policies, rules, or regulations. The RIO shall secure and maintain the Institutional Record of the Inquiry.[43]

If the VCRI determines an Investigation is not warranted and closes the Proceeding, the RIO shall give Notice to the Respondent, the Complainant (if known), the UEO, and all persons who have been interviewed or otherwise informed of the Allegation[44] The VCRI’s determination to close further Proceedings is final and not subject to appeal.

5.13 Notice of Investigation

If the VCRI orders an Investigation, the RIO shall give Notice within 30 calendar days (if known) and remind them of the obligation to cooperate with the Investigation and refrain from Retaliation.[45] The RIO shall further notify appropriate University administrators, including the Chancellor, the Provost, the Dean, and the Respondent’s UEO. As necessary or appropriate, the RIO shall notify the Respondent’s collaborators and external sponsors.[46] If requested, the RIO shall provide the research sponsor the written decision of the VCRI and a copy of the Inquiry Report and addenda. The RIO shall consult University Counsel regarding appropriate redactions of the Inquiry Report provided to external entities or individuals with respect to protected information.[47] 

6. INVESTIGATION

6.1 Notice to Respondent

The Notice of an Investigation to the Respondent shall include all Allegations to be investigated and a list of the Respondent’s rights in the Investigation:

1. To be notified of Allegations being investigated
2. To be notified of any new Allegations uncovered during the Investigation within a reasonable time after the determination to pursue those Allegations;
3. To challenge appointed Investigation Panel members for failure to meet the criteria in §6.3, pursuant to §6.4 below;
4. To consult with uninvolved individuals;[48]
5. To submit written statements to the Investigation Panel at any point during the Investigation;
6. To be interviewed and appear before the Investigation Panel to present information and respond to the Allegations, or to waive the opportunity for such an interview conducted by any practical means, including in-person or via videoconference;[49]
7. To correct transcripts of any interviews of the Respondent, if made;
8. To have recordings or transcripts of interviews, if made, included in the record of the Investigation;
9. To identify witnesses having relevant information to the Investigation, and for such individuals to be interviewed or that such individuals respond to a written questionnaire at the discretion of the Investigation Panel Chair;
10. To be accompanied by personal legal counsel or one advisor of choice in any interview, as set forth in Section VI.16. of the Policy;
11. To receive a copy of the draft Investigation Report and, concurrently, a copy of, or supervised access to, the Evidence on which the draft Investigation Report is based; and,
12. To submit comments to the draft Investigation Report within 30 calendar days of the date on which Respondent received the draft Investigation Report, with such comments to be included with the final version of the Investigation Report.

The Notice shall also include the Respondent’s responsibilities during the Investigation:

1. To maintain confidentiality; [50] 
2. To cooperate with the conduct of the Proceedings[51], including providing Research Records and other Evidence on request, the refusal to do so being Evidence of Research Misconduct under the Policy; [52] and,
3. To not retaliate against a Complainant, witness, or Investigation Panel member.[53]

6.2 Investigation Panel

The VCRI, in consultation with the RIO, shall appoint an Investigation Panel consisting of three persons as specified below within 30 calendar days after the Respondent has been notified of the Investigation:

1. A tenured University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign faculty member who is not from the unit in which the Respondent holds primary appointment and who shall chair the Investigation Panel;
2. A tenured University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign faculty member or individual from the unit in which the Respondent holds primary appointment; and,
3. A tenured faculty member from outside the University of Illinois.

If it is not feasible to include a member of the Respondent’s unit or a member from outside the University, the VCRI shall have the discretion to appoint other appropriate University faculty members.

If the Respondent was a student at the time of the alleged misconduct, the Dean of the Graduate College will appoint a graduate student to the Investigation Panel as a fourth member. If the Respondent’s primary appointment is within an OVCRI Unit, the Dean of the Graduate College shall appoint all Investigation Panel members.[54] No member of the Inquiry Team may serve on the Investigation Panel.

The VCRI and Graduate College Dean may appoint substitute Investigation Panel members at any point of the Investigation prior to the delivery of the Investigation Report to the VCRI. The RIO shall request, in writing, that the Chancellor approve exceptions to the designated composition of the Investigation Panel.

6.3 Qualifications of Panel

Investigation Panel members shall have appropriate qualifications to evaluate the Allegations and related matters at issue. Members should have no potential or actual unresolved personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest with a Complainant, Respondent, or witness.[55]

6.4 Challenge to Panel

The RIO will notify the Respondent of the Investigation Panel members, their affiliations, and any substitutions in the Notice of the Investigation or in a subsequent Notice. The Respondent may challenge membership of any proposed or substitute member of the Investigation Panel on the sole ground that the person does not meet the qualifications set forth in §6.3. An objection to an Investigation Panel member must be made in writing to the RIO within 10 calendar days after the Respondent has been notified of the Investigation Panel appointments. The challenge should address the qualifications outlined in §6.3 and state the rationale for any objection. The VCRI shall have the discretion to approve or deny such challenges, and the VCRI’s decision is final.

6.5 Subject Matter of the Investigation

The VCRI, in consultation with the RIO, shall set the scope of the Investigation based upon the Allegation, the Inquiry Report, and Respondent’s comments. If, during the Investigation, new information or Allegations come to light affecting the scope of the Investigation, the RIO shall inform the VCRI, who shall determine whether the Investigation Panel should continue with its original charge or amend the scope of the Investigation.[56] The Respondent, the UEO, and the Dean shall be informed of any new Allegations and whether the scope of the Investigation changes substantially.

6.6 Charge to the Investigation Panel

The VCRI shall provide the Investigation Panel with a written charge that:

1. Defines the subject matter of the Investigation;
2. Sets forth the time for completion of the Investigation Report draft outlined in §6.9 below as 120 calendar days from the first meeting of the Investigation Panel;
3. States the need to maintain confidentiality and the prohibition of Ex Parte communications under the Policy;[57]
4. Informs the Investigation Panel that it must conduct the Investigation as prescribed in the Policy and these Procedures;
5. Identifies the Respondent(s) and their position(s);
6. Describes the Allegations and related issues identified during the Inquiry;
7. Informs the Investigation Panel of the Respondent’s rights as outlined in §6.1;
8. Informs the Investigation Panel that it must evaluate the Evidence and testimony gathered during the Inquiry and Investigation to determine:
   1. Whether sufficient credible Evidence of Research Misconduct exists related to the Allegations;
   2. Whether Research Misconduct occurred based on the standards set forth in the Policy;[58] and,
   3. If found to have occurred, the type and extent of Research Misconduct and who was responsible for the Research Misconduct
9. Informs the Investigation Panel that it must prepare or direct the preparation of a written Investigation Report to the VCRI that meets the requirements of the Policy and these Procedures, as described in §6.9 below.

6.7 First Meeting of the Investigation Panel

The RIO shall convene the first meeting of the Investigation Panel to review the charge, the Inquiry Report, and the Procedures, including the necessity for confidentiality and for developing a specific Investigation plan. The Investigation Panel shall be provided with a copy of the Policy and these Procedures. Attendance at Investigation Panel meetings is expected. Meetings may be conducted by any practical means, including in-person, via tele/video conference, or with Investigation Panel members attending via a combination thereof. The RIO shall be present or available throughout the Investigation to advise the Investigation Panel as needed.[59]

6.8 Additional Respondents Identified During Investigation

If additional Respondents are identified as part of the Investigation, the RIO shall inform the VCRI who may initiate a separate Proceeding or direct the Investigation Panel to prepare separate reports specific to each Respondent. The RIO shall promptly notify new Respondents, and they should be given the opportunity to respond to the Allegations in writing within 10 calendar days.[60] As needed, the VCRI shall grant an extension to the timeline of the Investigation to allow additional Respondents to submit written responses.

6.9 Investigation Report Draft

The RIO shall assist the Investigation Panel in preparing a draft Investigation Report to ensure that the Investigation Report conforms to the requirements of the Policy, these Procedures, and federal regulations, if applicable. The Investigation Report shall include the following information:

1. Name and position(s) of the Respondent;
2. Names, titles, and affiliations of the Investigation Panel members and any experts consulted as part of the Investigation;
3. Description of the Allegations of Research Misconduct subject to the Investigation;
4. List of the sponsors of the Research and Scholarly Activities in question, including, for example, grant numbers, grant applications, and contracts (noting significant updates from the Inquiry Report);
5. List of current support for the Respondent or pending proposals by the Respondent for sponsored research and scholarly activities;
6. ]List of related publications and those acknowledging sponsor support (if updated from the Inquiry Report);
7. Description of the Investigation process, including any scientific or forensic analyses conducted. The description should include a reference to or attachment of the current Policy and Procedures under which the Investigation was conducted;
8. Extensions granted to the Investigation Report timeline, if any, and the cause of the extension;[61]
9. Description of the Research Records and Evidence reviewed and a description of any Evidence taken into custody but not reviewed;
10. List of sequestered materials and how sequestration was conducted;
11. List of individuals interviewed, including the Respondent;
12. Appendix containing interview transcripts, reviewed notes, or recordings, if any; and,
13. A finding with respect to each Allegation as to whether Research Misconduct did or did not occur that:
    1. Identifies the type of Research Misconduct;[62]
    2. Identifies whether the Research Misconduct was committed Intentionally, Knowingly, or Recklessly;[63]
    3. Summarizes the facts, Evidence, and analysis that support the finding, including consideration of the merits of any reasonable explanation by the Respondent;[64]
    4. Identifies the person(s) responsible for the Research Misconduct;
    5. Recommends Sanctions, if any, that should be imposed upon the Respondent;
    6. Recommends Corrective Actions, if any, that should be taken, including correction or retraction of publications and other disseminated results; and,
    7. Identifies whether there was a reasonable basis in fact for making the Allegation if no Research Misconduct is found related to the Allegation; and,
14. Identification of any other actions to be taken as recommended by the Investigation Panel. 

6.10 Comments by the Respondent

Consistent with the timeline set forth in §6.6.2, the RIO shall send the completed Investigation Report draft to the Respondent within 120 calendar days after the Investigation Panel’s first meeting.[65] The Respondent may submit written comments to the RIO within 30 calendar days of receipt of the Investigation Report draft. The RIO shall share the Respondent’s comments with the Investigation Panel.

6.11 Final Investigation Report

The Investigation Panel shall consider the Respondent’s comments, if any, and finalize the Investigation Report within 30 calendar days of receipt of Respondent’s comments. The Respondent’s comments shall be included as an attachment to the Investigation Report. The RIO shall send the final Investigation Report to the Respondent, the UEO, the Dean, the VCRI, and other appropriate parties.

Upon completion of their roles, Investigation Panel members and witnesses will return to the RIO all copies of Information or will otherwise dispose of and surrender access to the Information in accordance with instructions of the RIO. These individuals shall not publicize, discuss, or disclose any information related to Proceedings except as necessary pursuant to these Procedures or as otherwise required by law.[66]

7. ADJUDICATION

7.1 VCRI’s Recommendations to the Chancellor

The VCRI shall review the Investigation Report and the Respondent’s comments and formulate recommendations to the Chancellor regarding whether Research Misconduct occurred and any appropriate Sanctions and/or Corrective Actions. The VCRI may consult with the Investigation Panel, the UEO, the Dean, the Provost, the RIO, and others prior to determining any recommendations to the Chancellor. The VCRI shall send the Investigation Report, the Respondent’s comments, and the VCRI’s written recommendations to the Chancellor within 30 calendar days of the receipt of the Investigation Report. The VCRI may request an extension of the timeline from the Chancellor in writing, and the RIO should inform the Respondent of such extensions.

7.2 Chancellor’s Determination

The Chancellor, who may consult with the VCRI, Provost, UEOs, Deans, and others as appropriate, shall decide the final disposition of the case within 30 calendar days of receiving the VCRI’s recommendations.

1. If the Chancellor determines that there has not been a finding of Research Misconduct pursuant to the Policy and these Procedures, the Proceeding will be considered closed. The Chancellor may prescribe appropriate Corrective Actions even without a finding of Research Misconduct.
2. If the Chancellor determines that Research Misconduct has occurred pursuant to the Policy and these Procedures, Sanctions may be imposed to the extent permitted by the University Statutes, General Rules, and other University rules, regulations, or policies.
3. The Chancellor has the sole discretion whether to impose Sanctions, regardless of a Respondent’s primary affiliation. The Chancellor is not obligated to follow the recommendations in the Investigation Report or the VCRI’s letter with regard to Sanctions.[67]
4. The Chancellor may also prescribe Corrective Actions and take any other action deemed appropriate in response to the Investigation Report. Such Corrective Actions, including the Respondent’s ability to serve as a University of Illinois Principal Investigator (PI),[68] may be taken regardless of a Respondent’s primary affiliation.
5. If the Respondent is subject to student discipline[69] and the Chancellor determines that formal Sanctions, as defined in the Student Disciplinary Procedures,[70] are recommended, the Chancellor will send a copy of the Investigation Report with a written recommendation to the Director of the Office of Student Conflict Resolution (OSCR). The OSCR will consider the Chancellor’s determination regarding any of the Investigation Panel’s findings of Research Misconduct as final. The OSCR will coordinate a hearing with members of the Senate Committee on Student Discipline, who will make a determination as to whether the Research Misconduct findings warrant student discipline Sanctions. The Director of OSCR will communicate the decision of the members of the Senate Committee on Student Discipline to the Respondent and the Chancellor in writing; this decision is final.

7.3 Notice of the Chancellor’s Determination

The Chancellor shall give Notice of the final determination, including any Sanctions and Corrective Actions, to the Respondent, the VCRI, the Provost, the RIO, and applicable third parties.[71] The Chancellor is the final adjudicator of all Allegations of Research Misconduct, subject only to an appeal by the Respondent to the University of Illinois President on procedural grounds within 15 calendar days of the Notice to the Respondent.[72] The RIO will give Notice of the Chancellor’s determination to the Complainant, Dean, UEO, and other appropriate parties after resolution of any submitted appeal.[73]

7.4 Notice to Sponsors of Research and Scholarly Activities

The RIO will ensure the University’s reporting requirements (and their associated deadlines) to sponsors and appropriate regulatory agencies are met by providing the following information, including but not limited to:

1. Investigation Report, including comments from the Respondent in response to the draft report.
2. Final determination by the Chancellor, including any findings of Research Misconduct.
3. Institution's actions, including any pending or completed administrative actions against the Respondent.

8. INSTITUTIONAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

After closure of a case and all ensuing related actions, the RIO shall prepare a file of the Institutional Record of Research Misconduct Proceedings as defined in the Policy.[74] The Institutional Record should include, at a minimum, the information and data files cited within final documents of the Proceedings. The RIO shall secure and retain the Institutional Record for seven years. Except as required by law or court order, the Institutional Record shall be made available only to external agencies as required. The Institutional Record may otherwise be made available by decision of the VCRI for good cause, such as under court order, or for use in a subsequent misconduct Proceeding involving the Respondent.

Upon expiration of the seven-year term, the RIO may inform and return all original materials to the persons who furnished them, if requested. After the required retention period, the RIO will destroy the Institutional Record per University Procedures.[75] If the RIO determines that there is a reason to extend the period of retention, the RIO shall consult with University Counsel. The RIO may inform the Respondent when the Institutional Record has been destroyed.

9. RELATED LAWS, REGULATIONS, STATUTES, AND POLICIES

1. University of Illinois, "Policy on Integrity in Research and Scholarly Activities," effective January 1, 2026, https://go.Illinois.edu/Research-Misconduct.
2. University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, "Student Code,"  https://studentcode.illinois.edu/.
3. University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, "Graduate College Handbook," https://grad.illinois.edu/handbooks-policies.
4. University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Campus Administrative Manual, https://cam.illinois.edu/.
5. University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Office of the Provost, “Policies,” https://provost.illinois.edu/policies/policies/.
6. University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Office of the Provost, “Provost's Communications,”  https://provost.illinois.edu/policies/provosts-communications/.
7. University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Office of the Senate, “Faculty Policy Guide,” https://senate.illinois.edu/facultypolicyguide.asp.

10. DOCUMENT HISTORY

Date                Description

07/31/2024     Published version of original document.

01/01/2026     Published revised interim version.