office of research and grants (org)

legal entity name: 世界杯2022预选赛录像回放

irs entity type: non-profit 501(c)(3)

organization type: private institution of higher education

incorporation: february 2, 1901, state of tennessee

director, office of research & grants: robyn saakian

chief financial officer: jeffrey baughn

chief academic officer: jennifer shewmaker

academic finance director: rebecca johns

research integrity officer: tbd

unique entity identifier (uei): lueng479wqw1

commercial and gov’t entity code: cage code - 0mz75

employer identification number: 62-0485733

dun & bradstreet number (d&b): 075381186

fice institutional code: 003486

human subjects assurance (fwa): fwa00027444

integrated postsecondary ed id: 219976

standard industrial classification: 8211- college and universities

state representative district: district 56

state senate district: district 21

u.s. congressional district: tennessee 05 (tn-005)

misconduct in research filing date: march 2022

nicra cognizant federal agency: u.s. department of health and human services

nicra approved rates: 36.20% on-campus, 27.60% off-campus

nicra rate term: 06/01/2023 to 05/31/2027 (all programs) 

nsf awardee/performing code: 0034868000

org utilizes and recommends grant forward (lipscomb subscription-based) to find grants and research funding entities. notify us if you have difficulty accessing this resource or have questions about conducting a grant search.

the office of research and grants requires that all externally supported proposals (e.g., federal, state, corporate, or foundation funding source) be approved for submission through a process in which an institutional routing form is completed and signed. docusign® is how org streamlines the grant application approval workflow. the signature process is initiated by our office, and the routing form is distributed via email to appropriate signatories. 

please contact us at researchandgrants [at] lipscomb.edu ( )if you intend to apply for external funding in order to start the routing process at least two weeks before the application deadline. please see the routing form to be prepared ahead of time regarding the questions that the principal investigator/project director will need to complete via docusign®. the routing form below is used as an example. 

institutional routing forms are required to be filed:

• prior to submission for all externally supported proposals (e.g., federal, state, corporate, or foundation funding source)
• prior to award acceptance in cases where an award is received for which no proposal was developed and/or submitted
• for all research and programmatic grants, externally funded contracts, cooperative agreements, and subcontracts
• prior to submission when a letter of intent requires a signature from an authorized organizational representative (aor) or other authorized institutional representative

routing form information

when an award (general term for external funding) is received, it goes through a negotiation process through which the contract is reviewed and can be amended before signing. usually, negotiations are only required if there are issues of non-conformance.

once terms are reached, the award acceptance is signed by the sponsor of the award and a university official within the org. no faculty or staff member has the authorization to negotiate and sign. the document would be non-binding.

after the award is accepted, it is entered into our system to track and report expenses. the org then oversees these metrics, as well as the principal investigator/project director's management, upon which an award is contingent. 

policy statement

世界杯2022预选赛录像回放  (“lipscomb”) personnel must submit all documentation for externally funded research and sponsored programs for internal approval, which is only authorized for submission upon approval by the office of research and grants.

purpose

the purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for the preparation and approval of externally funded programs to be ultimately submitted by the office of research and grants (which provides an authorized signatory agent for proposals).

applicability

this policy is applicable to any lipscomb full-time, exempt employee participating in an externally funded research or sponsored program administered by the office of research and grants, unless an exception has been granted by the executive administration.

definitions

capitalized terms that are used but not otherwise defined in this policy have the following meanings:

• principal investigator (pi) and project director (pd). lipscomb considers a pi and pd to be the individual who bears the responsibility for the overall operation and performance of the award, including management, reporting, subrecipient monitoring, record retention, compliance, effort certification, and other activities supporting program delivery and management. the term pi may be commonly seen in research grants, whereby pd is commonly used for awards which are more programmatic in nature without a dedicated research component. the term principal investigator is intended to include, by reference throughout this policy, the role of co-principal investigator.

procedures

routing form. all proposals for external funding must be approved by the pi/pd’s supervisor(s) on the institution’s routing form prior to any review or subsequent approval by the office of research and grants. no proposal may be submitted without completing the routing form without pre-approval by the office of research and grants.

authorization to submit. proposals on behalf of lipscomb are only authorized to be submitted by the office of research and grants, unless otherwise delegated.

timeline for submission. pi/pds are encouraged to submit all proposal documents and the routing form in ample time to enable all approvers and the office of research and grants to review all documentation for compliance. as a general practice, pi/pds are encouraged to submit to the office of research and grants any and all materials two (2) weeks prior to the proposal due date.  

limited submissions. certain solicitations limit the number of proposals that lipscomb may submit. such proposals shall be coordinated through the office of research and grants, whose determination shall be final.

forms

• proposal routing form (to be located electronically on the website of the office of research and grants).

contact

for additional information or questions regarding this policy, contact the office of research and grants, which can be reached at 615.966.5907.

effective date

this policy was approved by the office of the provost on november 3, 2022. this policy should be reviewed, and any appropriate changes made and duly approved, on an annual basis to ensure compliance with applicable law.

download pdf

policy statement

世界杯2022预选赛录像回放 (“lipscomb”) provides a consistent process to establish who is eligible to participate in externally funded research and sponsored programs in the role of the principal investigator or project director (pi/pd).

purpose

the purpose of this policy is to set forth the eligibility requirements of a pi/pd on an extramurally funded research and sponsored program at lipscomb.

applicability

this policy applies to all externally funded research and sponsored program.

definitions

capitalized terms that are used but not otherwise defined in this policy have the following meanings:

• principal investigator (pi) and project director (pd): lipscomb considers a pi and pd to be the individual who bears the responsibility for the overall operation and performance of the award, including management, reporting, subrecipient monitoring, record retention, compliance, effort certification, and other activities supporting program delivery and management. the term pi may be commonly seen in research grants, whereby pd is commonly used for awards which are more programmatic in nature without a dedicated research component. the term principal investigator is intended to include, by reference throughout this policy, the role of co-principal investigator.

policy

eligibility to serve as pi/pd
only eligible lipscomb faculty, staff, and appointees (when appropriate) may serve as a pi/pd on extramurally funded research and sponsored program. eligibility includes full-time faculty, staff, and administrative members. part time/adjunct faculty, part-time staff, visiting faculty, other part-time personnel, and affiliates (including but not limited to emeritus faculty), may only serve upon prior written approval of the chief research officer.

students, fellows, and trainees:
postdoctoral fellows and trainees (postdoctoral fellows and graduate students) may be eligible to be principal investigators on fellowship and training programs when such a designation is required by the funding agency and a pi-eligible faculty or staff personnel is identified as their sponsor/mentor. undergraduate students are not eligible to serve as a pi, but may serve as co-pi under the condition that the pi is duly eligible to serve in that capacity.

awards to the institution:
all extramurally funded research and sponsored programs administered on behalf of lipscomb shall be assigned a pi/pd.

contact

for additional information or questions regarding this policy, contact the office of research and grants, which can be reached at 615.966.5907.

effective date

this policy was approved by the office of the provost on november 3, 2022. this policy should be reviewed, and any appropriate changes made and duly approved, on an annual basis to ensure compliance with applicable law.

download pdf

policy statement

this policy provides a consistent and compliant process for the approval of participation of any person or entity in externally funded research and sponsored programs of 世界杯2022预选赛录像回放 (“lipscomb”).

purpose

the purpose of this policy is to outline the procedure for ensuring that all participants, entities, and subawards are eligible for participation in externally funded research and sponsored programs. the procedures set forth in this policy help ensure that externally funded research and sponsored programs adhere to and comply with the highest standards, are in continual compliance with federal rules and regulations, and are conducted consistently across all contracts and awards held or submitted by lipscomb.

applicability

this policy is applicable to any lipscomb employee or student participating in an externally funded research or sponsored program, including, without limitation, participation in any grant, contract, subaward, or other externally funded contractual obligation.

definitions

capitalized terms that are used but not otherwise defined in this policy have the following meanings:

• cfr means the code of federal regulations.
• federal agency or agency, as defined in 5 u.s.c. § 551(1), generally means each authority of the government of the united states, whether or not it is within or subject to review by another agency.
• fr means the federal register.

authority

this policy is aligned with applicable federal rules and regulations, including, without limitation, the following:

• (a) executive order 12549, which establishes federal regulations “… in order to curb fraud, waste, and abuse in federal programs, increase agency accountability, and ensure consistency among agency regulations concerning debarment and suspension of participants in federal programs.”
• (b) executive order 12689, which indicates that “[n]o agency shall allow a party to participate in any procurement or nonprocurement activity if any agency has debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded (to the extent specified in the exclusion agreement) that party from participation in a procurement or nonprocurement activity.”
• (c) 2 cfr § 200.214, which states that “[n]on-federal entities and contractors are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing executive orders 12549 and 12689 … . [these regulations] restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in federal assistance programs or activities.”
• (d) section (h) of 2 cfr appendix ii to part 200, which states that “[a] contract award (see 2 cfr 180.220) must not be made to parties listed on the governmentwide exclusions in the system for award management (sam), in accordance with the omb guidelines at 2 cfr 180 that implement executive orders 12549 (3 cfr part 1986 comp., p. 189) and 12689 (3 cfr part 1989 comp., p. 235), ‘debarment and suspension.’ sam exclusions contains the names of parties debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded by agencies, as well as parties declared ineligible under statutory or regulatory authority other than executive order 12549.”

procedures

debarment and suspension search

any externally funded contract award, including any subaward received from a partnering entity, issued to lipscomb may not include or involve any person or entity engaged in the management or operation of the research or sponsored program who is federally debarred or suspended from such participation. to ensure compliance with applicable federal rules and regulations, lipscomb will conduct a search of all such persons and entities prior to the acceptance of any such award using the publicly accessible system for award management (sam) website, located at www.sam.gov.

to ensure that a consistent process is established to govern the flow of all contract mechanisms, lipscomb’s office of research and grants may also conduct debarment and suspension searches of any person or entity participating in activities funded by non-federal grants.

confidentiality

lipscomb’s office of research and grants shall maintain the confidentiality of any results produced from a debarment and suspension search conducted through www.sam.gov. notwithstanding the foregoing, the office of research and grants may notify any entity of any federal debarment or suspensions identified in the public record and, at its discretion, may decline the related award or substitute the participation of other persons or entities that are not debarred or suspended from participating in such research or sponsored program.

ineligibility received during participation

any person or entity administering or participating in a contract award issued to lipscomb that receives notification from a federal agency that such person or entity is considered ineligible (through debarment or suspension) while participating in such a contract award shall immediately notify lipscomb’s office of research and grants regarding their eligibility status. such notifications shall be in writing and contain appropriate documentation from the federal agency of such status.

contact

for additional information or questions regarding this policy, contact the office of research and grants by researchandgrants [at] lipscomb.edu (email) or by phone at 615.966.5907.

effective date

this policy was approved by the office of the provost on november 3, 2022.

download pdf

policy statement

世界杯2022预选赛录像回放 (“lipscomb”) monitors and documents the time and effort of faculty, staff, students, and other personnel expended on externally funded research and sponsored programs in compliance with 2 cfr § 200.430 and other regulations. time and effort shall be documented and reported consistently in all externally funded research and sponsored programs managed through the office of research and grants.

purpose

the purpose of this policy is to promote consistency in reporting time and effort devoted to externally funded research and sponsored programs. this policy ensures that lipscomb:

• documents allowable salaries and benefits;
• maximizes indirect cost recovery;
• is positioned to meet committed matching requirements;
• remains federally compliant and auditable;
• upholds its reputation for being a responsible steward of funding; and
• maintains documentation sufficient to serve as a subcontractor on federal flow-through awards issued to lipscomb by partnering institutions.

applicability

this policy is applicable to any lipscomb employee or student participating in an externally funded research or sponsored program managed through the office of research and grants.

definitions

capitalized terms that are used but not otherwise defined in this policy have the following meanings:

budget, as defined in 2 cfr §200.1, means the financial plan for the federal award that the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity approves during the federal award process or in subsequent amendments to the federal award. it may include the federal and non-federal share or only the federal share, as determined by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity.

cfr means the code of federal regulations.

federal agency or agency, as defined in 5 u.s.c. § 551(1), generally means each authority of the government of the united states, whether or not it is within or subject to review by another agency.

federal award, as defined in 2 cfr §200.1, has the following meaning, depending on the context:

• (i) the federal financial assistance that lipscomb receives directly from a federal awarding agency or indirectly from a pass-through entity, as described in 2 cfr §200.101; or (ii) the cost-reimbursement contract under the federal acquisition regulations that a non-federal entity receives directly from a federal
• the instrument setting forth the terms and conditions. the instrument is the grant agreement, cooperative agreement, other agreement for assistance covered in paragraph (2) of the definition of federal financial assistance in 2 cfr §200.1, or the cost-reimbursement contract awarded under the federal acquisition regulations (48 cfr §52.204-17). federal award does not include other contracts that a federal agency uses to buy goods or services from a contractor or a contract to operate federal government owned, contractor operated facilities. see also the definitions of federal financial assistance, grant agreement, and cooperative agreement in 2 cfr §200.1.

federal awarding agency, as defined in 2 cfr §200.1, means the federal agency that provides a federal award directly to a non-federal entity.

principal investigator, or pi, and project director, or pd, mean the individuals who bear the responsibility for the overall operation and performance of the externally funded research or sponsored program, including management, reporting, subrecipient monitoring, record retention, compliance, effort certification, and other activities supporting program delivery and management. pi is commonly used in research grants, whereas pd is commonly used for awards that are more programmatic in nature without a dedicated research component. as used in this policy, principal investigator includes the role of co-principal investigator.

u.s.c. means the united states code.

procedures

authorizing individuals: the pi or pd shall serve as the individual authorized to certify the time and effort of all individuals working on any externally funded research or sponsored program, including themselves, regardless of whether such individuals receive compensation for such time and effort. in all cases, the pi or pd certifying time and effort reporting must have first-hand knowledge of the participation of all individuals for whom the pi or pd is certifying. all completed time and effort reporting forms must be forwarded to the director of the office of research and grants to ensure compliance with federal and other requirements.

frequency: all lipscomb time and effort reporting is completed on an after-the-fact basis, including the completion or compilation of any and all appropriate supporting documentation for all externally funded research or sponsored programs at least on a quarterly basis (as aligned with applicable funding requirements).

delegation approval: the pi or pd may temporarily delegate, with approval of the office of research and grants through consultation of the applicable department, the authority to certify the time and effort of all individuals working on an externally funded research or sponsored program to another individual who has sufficient knowledge of the project activities and a reliable means of verifying work performed. delegation of such certification may be approved on a case-by-case basis, such as extended absence of the pi or pd because of lengthy travel, sabbatical, or other circumstances where the pi or pd has limited access to verify accuracy, or severe illness. the duration of the delegated authority shall be determined and approved by the office of research and grants to ensure compliance with 2 cfr § 200.308, which requires prior approval from a federal awarding agency for a budget or program revision in the event that the pi or pd should, for any
reason, become disengaged from the project for more than three (3) months or a 25 percent reduction in time devoted to the project.

archival: the pi or pd shall forward all verified and certified time and effort reporting forms to the office of research and grants, who shall in turn ensure that documentation is retained appropriately and provided to authorized individuals and auditors.

conflict: this policy is subject to applicable law. in the event of a conflict between the provisions of this policy and applicable law, including, without limitation, 2 cfr §200, the provisions of applicable law shall control.

form(s)

time and effort reporting form

this document is aligned with 2 cfr 200.430(i) and is to be completed on an after-the-fact basis for all funding sources and for all externally funded projects administered by the office of research and grants (org). this form must be submitted to org at least on a quarterly basis, or as otherwise directed by org and signed by the individual or delegate with first-hand knowledge of the performance and distribution of effort presented. please complete the below fields and researchandgrants [at] lipscomb.edu (email) this form, with appropriate supporting documentation. charges for salaries and wages (including those authorized for cost sharing) must reasonably reflect all activities for which the employee is compensated by 世界杯2022预选赛录像回放 , not exceeding 100% of compensated activities. in accordance with flsa requirements (29 cfr part 516), charges for nonexempt employees must include the total number of hours worked daily.

download pdf

contact

for additional information or questions regarding this policy, contact the office of research and grants by researchandgrants [at] lipscomb.edu ( email ) or by phone at 615.966.5907.

effective date

this policy was approved by the office of the provost on november 3, 2022.

download pdf

policy statement

this policy outlines the conditions and limitations in which certain personnel of 世界杯2022预选赛录像回放 (“lipscomb”) may receive extra compensation as a result of participation in externally funded research or sponsored programs at lipscomb.

purpose

the purpose of this policy is to apply federal regulations governing the issuance of any extra compensation to lipscomb personnel in the performance of externally funded research and sponsored programs, recognizing that service above and beyond the normal scope of an employee’s assigned duties and job functions may be required.

applicability

this policy is applicable to any lipscomb employee participating in an externally funded research or sponsored program administered by the office of research and grants, unless an exception has been granted by the executive administration.

definitions

capitalized terms that are used but not otherwise defined in this policy have the following meanings:

cfr means the code of federal regulations.

extra compensation means any compensation or extra service payment issued by lipscomb that is in addition to the recipient’s ibs for services performed outside of the recipient’s principal
appointment (including services for research or programmatic projects). extra compensation shall not include compensation or reimbursement received for jury duty or court attendance pursuant to a subpoena, nor is it inclusive of any compensation received for any non-lipscomb affiliated arrangement. compensation included within an individual’s ibs may include, without limitation, appointments to roles such as director or department chair, if such a role is defined within an appointment letter or employment contract.

institutional base salary or ibs, as defined in 2 cfr § 200.430(h)(2), means the annual compensation paid by lipscomb for an individual’s appointment, whether that individual’s time is spent on research, instruction, administration, or other activities. ibs excludes any income that an individual earns outside of duties performed for lipscomb.

principal investigator, or pi, and project director, or pd, mean the individuals who bear the responsibility for the overall operation and performance of the externally funded research or sponsored program, including management, reporting, subrecipient monitoring, record retention, compliance, effort certification, and other activities supporting program delivery and management. pi is commonly used in research grants, whereas pd is commonly used for awards that are more programmatic in nature without a dedicated research component. as used in this policy, principal investigator includes the role of co-principal investigator.

procedures

method of compensation 

the preferred method of compensating any lipscomb personnel who provide services for an externally funded research or sponsored program is through release time or course buy-out. if release time is not available or not favorable for a particular award, and personnel are eligible to receive extra compensation as set forth in this policy and applicable federal regulations (including, but not limited to, 2 cfr §200.430(h)), extra compensation may generally be approved under the following conditions:

• extra compensation is clearly indicated in the awarded budget, or lipscomb has received prior written approval by the awarding agency; and
• extra compensation is approved by the employee’s supervisor and the office of research and grants.

extra compensation

to ensure consistency across all awards, the office of research and grants shall apply the appropriate federal regulations, including, but not limited to, 2 cfr §200.430(h), with respect to the issuance of extra compensation to eligible exempt faculty and staff.

exempt faculty and staff may not earn or receive any extra compensation exceeding 25% of their ibs as remuneration for effort expended in connection with an externally funded research or
sponsored program, unless an exception has been approved by the provost of lipscomb, in consultation with the office of research and grants.

non-exempt employees may generally not receive extra compensation. written requests for extra compensation for lipscomb non-exempt employees must be approved in advance by the office of research and grants, the office of human resources, the employee’s supervisor, and the funding agency or organization. any approved extra compensation for non-exempt employees must comply with the applicable requirements of the fair labor standards act.

conflict

this policy is subject to applicable law. in the event of a conflict between the provisions of this policy and applicable law, including, without limitation, 2 cfr § 200.430, the provisions of applicable law shall control.

forms

• proposal routing form (available at the office of research and grants)

contact

for additional information or questions regarding this policy, contact the office of research and grants by researchandgrants [at] lipscomb.edu (email) or by phone at 615.966.5907.

effective date

this policy was approved by the office of the provost on november 3, 2022. this policy should be reviewed, and any appropriate changes made and duly approved, on an annual basis to ensure compliance with applicable law.

download pdf

policy statement

this policy outlines the conditions and limitations for cost sharing in externally funded research or sponsored programs at 世界杯2022预选赛录像回放 (“lipscomb”).

purpose

the purpose of this policy is to establish consistent guidelines for cost sharing in externally funded research or sponsored programs of lipscomb.

applicability

this policy is applicable to any lipscomb employee or student participating in any externally funded research or sponsored program of lipscomb.

definitions

capitalized terms that are used but not otherwise defined in this policy have the following meanings:

cfr means the code of federal regulations.

cost sharing or matching, as defined in 2 cfr § 200.1, means the portion of project costs not paid by federal funds or contributions (unless otherwise authorized by federal statute).

project cost, as defined in 2 cfr § 200.1, means total allowable costs incurred under a federal award and all required cost sharing and voluntary committed cost sharing, including third-party contributions.

unrecovered indirect costs, as defined in 2 cfr § 200.306(c), means the difference between the amount charged to the federal award and the amount which could have been charged to the federal award under the non-federal entity’s approved negotiated indirect cost rate.

u.s.c. means the united states code.

voluntary committed cost sharing, as defined in 2 cfr § 200.1, means cost sharing specifically pledged on a voluntary basis in the proposal’s budget on the part of the non-federal entity and that becomes a binding requirement of federal award.

procedures

voluntary cost sharing: lipscomb does not encourage voluntary cost sharing or matching contributions committed toward any externally funded research or sponsored program on behalf of lipscomb, regardless of whether the cost is committed by lipscomb or a third party. voluntary commitments made toward such a program may have the effect of:

• reducing lipscomb’s capacity to provide such commitments at a later time or when required by another federally funded program;
• negatively impacting lipscomb’s indirect cost rate calculation;
• requiring additional human capital to maintain financial data to support audits;
• requiring fair market value valuations, institutional base salary calculations, and other rates, as required; and/or
• being non-compliant with the regulations of the funding entity, especially for those organizations that generally prohibit cost sharing or matching.

mandatory (or statutory) cost sharing: mandatory cost sharing or matching are those commitments that are required by the funding agency as a condition of receiving an award, and are generally subject to audit. such commitments are documented by the office of research and grants to support future audits, and such commitments must be approved in advance in writing (through the applicable routing form) by the applicable department chair and academic dean.

recovered indirect costs: indirect costs may not be voluntarily committed as a cost sharing or matching without prior approval from the office of research and grants. indirect cost calculations are based on a percentage of actual expenditures, which involves both variability and risk in commitment level. in addition, indirect costs are applied by lipscomb to support the research enterprise and may not be committed on behalf of lipscomb by a principal investigator or project director for a specific cause or purpose.

unrecovered indirect costs: unrecovered indirect costs may only be committed at the discretion of the office of research and grants, as prior approval of the funding agency is required in accordance with 2 cfr § 200.306(c)). should a funding agency (federal, state or private) approve the utilization of unrecovered indirect costs toward a statutory matching requirement, the office of research and grants will retain a written copy of the funding agency’s approval for any future audit.

conflict: this policy is subject to applicable law. in the event of a conflict between the provisions of this policy and applicable law, including, without limitation, 2 cfr § 200, the provisions of applicable law shall control.

forms

• routing form (available at the office of research and grants)

contact

for additional information or questions regarding this policy, contact the office of research and grants by researchandgrants [at] lipscomb.edu ( email) or by phone at 615.966.5907.

effective date

this policy was approved by the office of the provost on november 3, 2022.

download pdf

policy statement

this policy establishes the methodology for applying indirect costs with respect to externally funded research or sponsored programs at 世界杯2022预选赛录像回放 (“lipscomb”).

purpose

the purpose of this policy is to:

• establish guidelines and procedures governing the inclusion of indirect costs, using lipscomb’s negotiated indirect cost rate agreement (as allowable), within proposals and contracts related to externally funded research or sponsored programs; and
• establish lipscomb’s incentive policy for the distribution of recovered indirect costs.

applicability

this policy is applicable to any lipscomb full-time employee participating in an externally funded research or sponsored program administered by the office of research and grants.

definitions

capitalized terms that are used but not otherwise defined in this policy have the following meanings:

budget, as defined in 2 cfr §200.1, means the financial plan for the federal award that the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity approves during the federal award process or in subsequent amendments to the federal award. it may include the federal and non-federal share or only the federal share, as determined by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity.

cfr means the code of federal regulations.

cognizant agency for indirect costs, as defined in 2 cfr § 200.1, means the federal agency responsible for reviewing, negotiating, and approving cost allocation plans or indirect cost proposals on behalf of all federal agencies. the cognizant agency for indirect costs is not necessarily the same as the cognizant agency for audit, as defined in 2 cfr § 200.1. for assignments of cognizant agencies for institutions of higher education, see section c.11 of appendix iii to 2 cfr part 200.

cost sharing or matching, as defined in 2 cfr § 200.1, means the portion of project costs not paid by federal funds or contributions (unless otherwise authorized by federal statute).

federal agency or agency, as defined in 5 u.s.c. § 551(1), generally means each authority of the government of the united states, whether or not it is within or subject to review by another agency.

federal award, as defined in 2 cfr §200.1, has the following meaning, depending on the context:
            (1)(i) the federal financial assistance that lipscomb receives directly from a federal awarding agency or indirectly from a pass-through entity, as described in 2 cfr §200.101; or (ii) the cost-reimbursement contract under the federal acquisition regulations that a non-federal entity receives directly from a federal awarding agency or indirectly from a pass-through entity, as described in 2 cfr §200.101.
            (2) the instrument setting forth the terms and conditions. the instrument is the grant agreement, cooperative agreement, other agreement for assistance covered in paragraph (2) of the definition of federal financial assistance in 2 cfr §200.1, or the cost-reimbursement contract awarded under the federal acquisition regulations (48 cfr §52.204-17). federal award does not include other contracts that a federal agency uses to buy goods or services from a contractor or a contract to operate federal government owned, contractor operated facilities. see also the definitions of federal financial assistance, grant agreement, and cooperative agreement in 2 cfr §200.1.

federal awarding agency, as defined in 2 cfr §200.1, means the federal agency that provides a federal award directly to a non-federal entity.

indirect costs, as defined in 2 cfr § 200.1, means those costs incurred for a common or joint purpose benefitting more than one cost objective, and not readily assignable to the cost objectives specifically benefited, without effort disproportionate to the results achieved. to facilitate equitable distribution of indirect expenses to the cost objectives served, it may be necessary to establish a number of pools of indirect (facilities & administrative) costs. indirect (facilities & administrative) cost pools must be distributed to benefitted cost objectives on bases that will produce an equitable result in consideration of relative benefits derived. indirect costs are further identified in 2 cfr § 200.414.

principal investigator means the individual who bears the responsibility for the overall operation and performance of the externally funded research or sponsored program, including management, reporting, subrecipient monitoring, record retention, compliance, effort certification, and other activities supporting program delivery and management. as used in this policy, principal investigator includes the role of co-principal investigator.

project cost, as defined in 2 cfr § 200.1, means total allowable costs incurred under a federal award and all required cost sharing and voluntary committed cost sharing, including third-party contributions.

unrecovered indirect cost, as defined in 2 cfr § 200.306(c), means the difference between the amount charged to the federal award and the amount which could have been charged to the federal award under the non-federal entity’s approved negotiated indirect cost rate.

voluntary committed cost sharing, as defined in 2 cfr § 200.1, means cost sharing specifically pledged on a voluntary basis in the proposal’s budget on the part of the non-federal entity and that becomes a binding requirement of federal award.

procedures

inclusion of indirect costs within grant and contract budgets: the indirect cost rate (as identified in lipscomb’s rate agreement from the u.s. department of health and human services, the cognizant agency for indirect costs) shall be consistently applied across all externally funded research and sponsored programs at lipscomb, unless such a rate is unallowable or must otherwise be reduced by the funding agency with a modification approved by the office of research and grants.

grants or contracts for any externally funded research or sponsored program at lipscomb may not be subject to more than one indirect cost rate. lipscomb has been assigned separate indirect cost rates for projects performed on- or off-campus. the off-campus rate shall be used only for those activities performed in facilities not owned by lipscomb and for which rent is directly allocated to the project(s). if more than 50% of the time and effort of all individuals working on any externally funded research or sponsored program is performed off-campus, the off-campus rate will apply to the entire project. working remotely from home shall not be considered off-campus activities. the final indirect cost rate applied by the office of research and grants shall constitute the rate used for both submission and award management of all externally funded research or sponsored programs.

indirect costs shall not be voluntarily applied as a cost sharing or matching unless required by the funding agency, is in the best interest of lipscomb, applies unrecoverable indirect costs prior to any other commitments (as allowable), and is pre-approved for use by the office of research and grants under the administration of the chief research officer.

incentive policy for the distribution of recovered indirect costs: indirect costs will be recovered according to the regulations set forth in 2 cfr part 200 or the written policies or procedures of the funding agency. the federal government does not provide directives to institutions of higher education regarding how recovered indirect costs must be disbursed, spent, or otherwise applied. therefore, after all other costs or expenses related to any externally funded research or sponsored program at lipscomb have been paid, lipscomb will distribute recovered indirect costs as follows, unless the office of research and grants directs otherwise:

• 75% to the office of research and grants, which may be used at the discretion of the office of research and grants to support salaries, ongoing research administration, incentives, or other costs as deemed appropriate. any such amount distributed to the office of research that exceeds the annual budget of the office of research and grants shall be used at the discretion of the provost;

• 12.5% to the principal investigator, which will be placed into a dedicated institutional account for use in future research and related activities. funds in these accounts may roll over from one fiscal year to the next and may accumulate. principal investigators may choose to use these funds for activities that may include, without limitation, traveling to a conference, hiring a graduate research assistant, and/or purchasing a subscription to an academic software solution or journal. in situations where any externally funded research or sponsored program was managed by one or more co-principal investigators, a distribution, agreed upon in writing by all such investigators in accordance with the level of contribution provided to the project, shall determine the allocation to each investigator. while utilizing these funds, principal investigators must comply with all applicable policies and procedures of lipscomb, including without limitation, the travel, entertainment, and expense reporting policy. if all principal investigators for an externally funded research or sponsored program cease to be employed by lipscomb for any reason, any funds remaining in the corresponding dedicated institutional account will be placed in a dedicated institutional account to support the appropriate academic college(s), as determined by the office of research and grants; and

• 12.5% to the academic college, which will be placed into a dedicated institutional account to be used at the discretion of the dean to support ongoing college, institute, department, or unit level research activities. funds in these accounts may roll from one fiscal year to the next and may accumulate. appropriate expenditures may include, without limitation, upgrading computer or research equipment, providing compensation to personnel to support proposal development, matching future grant proposals (when and if allowable by the funding agency), and/or supporting faculty or staff whose compensation is not currently funded by any externally funded research or sponsored program to engage in research activities or collaborative efforts that could create opportunities to obtain future funding.

this incentive program is limited to the distribution of applicable recovered indirect costs not previously approved as cost sharing or matching within awarded proposals or grants. unrecovered indirect costs shall not be included in any distribution pursuant to this incentive policy.

institutional responsibilities: post-award grant accounting personnel will be responsible for (i) approving the awarded budget (to ensure that charges were properly calculated with institutional rates), and (ii) preparing the distribution report at the end of each fiscal year (or other applicable period, as may be required), after affected indirect costs have been recovered (generally up to 45 days). the report shall be provided to the office of research and grants and the provost for pre-approval of disbursement. the office of research and grants shall approve the disbursements, which shall be administered by the post-award grant accounting personnel.

conflict:this policy is subject to applicable law. in the event of a conflict between the provisions of this policy and applicable law, including, without limitation, 2 cfr § 200, the provisions of applicable law shall control.

related documents/policies

• travel, entertainment, and expense reporting policy, available on mylipscomb

contact

for additional information or questions regarding this policy, contact the office of research and grants byresearchandgrants [at] lipscomb.edu ( email) or by phone at 615-966-5907.

effective date

this policy was approved by the office of the provost on april 5, 2023.

download pdf

policy statement

世界杯2022预选赛录像回放 (“lipscomb”) requires that all faculty, students, postdoctoral fellows, and investigators participating in any externally funded research or sponsored program successfully complete responsible conduct of research (“rcr”) training if the federal awarding agency makes rcr training a term or condition of the award. in addition, lipscomb’s office of research and grants (“org”) or lipscomb’s institutional review board (“irb”) may direct any other individuals participating in any externally funded research or sponsor program to complete rcr training. lipscomb encourages and welcomes all members of the lipscomb research community to participate in rcr training.

purpose

the purpose of this policy is to promote research ethics and integrity at lipscomb through rcr training.

applicability

this policy is applicable to any lipscomb employee or student participating in an externally funded research or sponsored program administered by the office of research and grants.

definitions

capitalized terms that are used but not otherwise defined in this policy have the following meanings:

• cfr means the code of federal regulations.
• collaborative institutional training initiative (citi or citi program) is the virtual training provider currently utilized by lipscomb to provide training in research, research conduct, and compliance.
• federal agency or agency, as defined in 5 u.s.c. §551(1) and further clarified in 5 u.s.c. §552(f), generally means each authority of the government of the united states, whether or not it is within or subject to review by another agency.
• federal award, as defined in 2 cfr §200.1, has the following meaning, depending on the context:
  • (1)(i) the federal financial assistance that lipscomb receives directly from a federal awarding agency or indirectly from a pass-through entity, as described in 2 cfr §200.101; or (ii) the cost-reimbursement contract under the federal acquisition regulations that a non-federal entity receives directly from a federal awarding agency or indirectly from a pass-through entity, as described in 2 cfr §200.101.
  • (2) the instrument setting forth the terms and conditions. the instrument is the grant agreement, cooperative agreement, other agreement for assistance covered in paragraph (2) of the definition of federal financial assistance in 2 cfr §200.1, or the cost-reimbursement contract awarded under the federal acquisition regulations (48 cfr §52.204-17). federal award does not include other contracts that a federal agency uses to buy goods or services from a contractor or a contract to operate federal government owned, contractor operated facilities. see also the definitions of federal financial assistance, grant agreement, and cooperative agreement
    in 2 cfr §200.1.
• federal awarding agency, as defined in 2 cfr §200.1, means the federal agency that provides a federal award directly to a non-federal entity.
• institutional rcr coordinator means the individual appointed by lipscomb to provide or coordinate compliant rcr and ethics training opportunities that support the research enterprise.
• principal investigator, or pi, and project director, or pd, mean the individuals who bear the responsibility for the overall operation and performance of the externally funded research or sponsored program, including management, reporting, subrecipient monitoring, record retention, compliance, effort certification, and other activities supporting program delivery and management. pi is commonly used in research grants, whereas pd is commonly used for awards that are more programmatic in nature without a dedicated research component. as used in this policy, principal investigator includes the role of co-principal investigator. as used in this policy, principal investigator includes the role of co-principal investigator.
• responsible conduct of research (“rcr”), as used by the national institutes of health (“nih”), promotes the aims of scientific inquiry, fosters a research environment that enables scientists to work together toward common goals, and promotes public confidence in scientific knowledge and progress for the public good.

procedures

lipscomb requires that all faculty, students, postdoctoral fellows, and investigators participating in any externally funded research or sponsored program successfully complete rcr training if the federal awarding agency makes rcr training a term or condition of the award. in addition, the org or irb may direct any other individuals participating in any externally funded research or sponsor program to complete rcr training. lipscomb encourages and welcomes all members of the lipscomb research community to participate in rcr training.

compliance
federal awarding agencies have statutory requirements as to which individuals participating in externally funded research or sponsored programs need to complete rcr training. lipscomb’s compliance with this training requirement is tracked by the org and irb. federal awarding agencies requiring completion of virtual or face-to-face rcr training include, but are not limited to, the nih, the national science foundation (“nsf”), and the u.s. department of agriculture’s national institute of food and agriculture (“nifa”). compliance is also required for direct federal flow-through awards as well as subawards received by partnering institutions and organizations.

non-compliance
non-compliance with rcr training requirements may result in any of a number of consequences, including, but not limited to, disallowance of salary and any associated expenses charged to the externally funded research or sponsored project, removal of the pi from the project, the appointment of a replacement pi, removal from research support roles for a sponsored project, loss of eligibility to apply for future grants, termination of assistantships, or referral for academic disciplinary action.

virtual training
lipscomb provides training courses through the citi program available at www.citiprogram.org. on the citi program website, click on “my courses” and “log in” if you already have an account, or “register” an account in the system if you do not have an account. select “世界杯2022预选赛录像回放 ” as the organization affiliation. enroll in the course entitled “responsible conduct of research (rcr).”

in-person or face-to-face training
lipscomb also provides a minimum of eight hours of in-person rcr training, which is required by the nih for selected awards. the in-person rcr training must be completed within the first year of the appointment to the project or before the applicable person graduates or otherwise leaves lipscomb, even if that imposes a shorter deadline. upon completion of rcr training requirements, a certificate of completion will be issued by org to document that the requirements of the externally funded research or sponsored program have been met. it is the responsibility of the individual receiving the certification to provide appropriate copies to the irb and/or the pi.

responsibilities
lipscomb’s institutional rcr coordinator, who serves in the org, shall:

• develop, deliver, and/or coordinate org-led, face-to-face, online/virtual, and hybrid trainings for the campus community in compliance with the applicable requirements of a federal awarding agency (e.g., nih, nsf, or nifa);
• take attendance and issue certificates of participation or certificates of completion to attendees;
• retain appropriate documentation for all rcr training sessions in accordance with 2 cfr § 200.334, which may include slideshows, attendance, surveys, guest speakers, handouts, presentation dates/times/durations, and other relevant information; and
• provide appropriate documentation to applicable federal awarding agencies upon request, reporting, and/or audit purposes.

the org shall:

• ensure that pis of awards requiring rcr as a term or condition of the award are informed of the requirement and can communicate that requirement to appropriate senior personnel, faculty, staff, students, and others;
• ensure that an annual rcr training calendar of in-person events is available to the campus community on lipscomb’s website;
• complete federal or sponsoring agency certifications, approved by the authorized organizational representative, attesting that lipscomb has or will provide an appropriate rcr training plan at the time of funding and will communicate all such requirements to the institutional rcr coordinator to ensure continuity of programming (if such an attestation is required at the time of submission or award acceptance);
• provide rcr training plans to the federal awarding agency (and auditors) upon request; and
• retain all certificates for at least three years after completion, in compliance with 2 cfr § 200.334.

conflict
this policy is subject to applicable law. in the event of any conflict between the provisions of this policy and applicable law, including, without limitation, section 7009 of the america competes act, the provisions of applicable law shall control.

contact

for additional information or questions regarding this policy, contact the office of research and grants, which can be reached at 615-966-5907.

effective date

this policy was approved by the office of the provost on may 12, 2023.

download pdf

policy statement

世界杯2022预选赛录像回放 (“lipscomb”) requires that all faculty, staff, and students engaged in research involving human subjects successfully complete training appropriate to the type of research and activities being conducted.

purpose

the purpose of this policy is to ensure that all researchers, whether or not such research is externally funded, have obtained appropriate regulatory and ethical training prior to the conduct of research or the performance of any research activities involving human subjects.

applicability

this policy applies to any lipscomb employee or student engaged in human subjects research, whether or not the research or activities are performed on- or off-campus (including virtually).

definitions

capitalized terms that are used but not otherwise defined in this policy have the following meanings:

• cfr means the code of federal regulations.
• collaborative institutional training initiative (citi or citi program) is the virtual training provider currently utilized by lipscomb to provide training in research, research conduct, and compliance.
• human subject, as defined in 45 cfr § 46.102(e)(1), means a living individual about whom an investigator (whether professional or student) conducting research: (i) obtains information or biospecimens through intervention or interaction with the individual, and uses, studies, or analyzes the information or biospecimens; or (ii) obtains, uses, studies, analyzes, or generates identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens.
• irb means the lipscomb institutional review board, which is the committee that performs ethical review of proposed research involving human subjects.
• human subjects research involves a wide variety of research procedures, including, but not limited to, the collection of human subject data through survey mechanisms; direct or indirect observations; interventions; standardized tests from the fields of education, psychology or human performance; investigational drugs or devices; randomized clinical trials; research utilizing medical records; and/or research using existing pathological specimens, discarded tissue, or secretions.
• research, as defined in 45 cfr § 46.102(l), means a systematic investigation, including research development, testing, and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge. activities that meet this definition constitute research for purposes of this policy, whether or not they are conducted or supported under a program that is considered research for other purposes. for example, some demonstration and service programs may include research activities. for purposes of this policy, the following activities are deemed not to be research:
  1. (1) scholarly and journalistic activities (e.g., oral history, journalism, biography, literary criticism, legal research, and historical scholarship), including the collection and use of information, that focus directly on the specific individuals about whom the information is collected.
  2. (2) public health surveillance activities, including the collection and testing of information or biospecimens, conducted, supported, requested, ordered, required, or authorized by a public health authority. such activities are limited to those necessary to allow a public health authority to identify, monitor, assess, or investigate potential public health signals, onsets of disease outbreaks, or conditions of public health importance (including trends, signals, risk factors, patterns in diseases, or increases in injuries from using consumer products). such activities include those associated with providing timely situational awareness and priority setting during the course of an event or crisis that threatens public health (including natural or man-made disasters).
  3. (3) collection and analysis of information, biospecimens, or records by or for a criminal justice agency for activities authorized by law or court order solely for criminal justice or criminal investigative purposes.
  4. (4) authorized operational activities (as determined by each agency) in support of iintelligence, homeland security, defense, or other national security missions.

procedures

human subjects research training
human subjects research training courses are available at www.citiprogram.org. on the citi program website, click on “my courses” and “log in” if you already have an account, or “register” an account in the system if you do not have an account. select “世界杯2022预选赛录像回放 ” as the organization affiliation.

lipscomb provides the campus community with three citi training courses in human subjects research. researchers (and faculty advisors, as appropriate) must earn a citi certificate of completion in one course that is most closely aligned to the type of research being conducted. the three available human subjects research courses are as follows:

option 1: social-behavioral-education (“sbe”) human subjects research
researchers shall take this course if the proposed research focuses only on social, behavioral, or educational subjects and does not involve research of physical health, mental health, biomedical topics, blood draws, investigational drugs or devices; randomized clinical trials; research on medical records; or research using existing pathological specimens, discarded tissue, or secretions.

option 2: health sciences, biomedical, or pharmaceutical human subjects research
researchers shall take this course if the research involves physical health, mental health, biomedical topics, blood draws, investigational drugs or devices; randomized clinical trials; research on medical records; or research using existing pathological specimens, discarded tissue, or secretions.

option 3: interdisciplinary-sbe and health sciences+
researchers shall take this course if the research focuses upon a combination of social, behavioral, or education subjects and involves physical health, mental health, biomedical topics, blood draws, investigational drugs or devices; randomized clinical trials; research on medical records; or research using existing pathological specimens, discarded tissue, or secretions. the interdisciplinary-sbe and health sciences+ course should be taken if there is doubt regarding the applicability of the other courses.

required and supplemental modules
each training course contains both required and supplemental training modules. all required modules must be successfully completed. furthermore, researchers must take any and all supplemental modules directly related to the research or activity(ies) being performed. failing to take appropriate supplemental modules may cause significant delays to the irb review process. supplemental modules may include, but are not limited to:

• prisoners (id: 8 or id: 506)
• children (id: 9 or id: 507)
• pregnant women, fetuses, and neonates (id: 10)
• international research (id: 14081 or id: 509 or id: 971)
• public elementary and secondary schools (id: 805)
• internet research (id: 510)
• non-english speakers (id: 17260)
• gender and sexuality diversity (id: 16556)
• undocumented status (id: 16656)
• critically ill (id: 16592)
• decisionally impaired (id: 16610)
• older adults (id: 16502)
• socially or economically disadvantaged (id: 16539)
• physical disabilities and impairments (id: 16657)
• students in research (id: 1321)
• workers and employees (id: 483)
• public health (id: 17637, 17638, 17639, 17640)

in addition, a citi certificate of completion may be required for one or more of the following courses, as specified for the applicable type of research:

supplemental course:
information privacy and security
this course is required if a research study includes data from medical records or other health-related information.z

supplemental course:
good clinical practice social/behavioral research best practices for clinical research
this course is required for any individual engaged in research regulated by the u.s. food and drug administration. this type of research typically involves drug, device, or biologic agents or products. this course is recommended for any beginning researcher learning the steps involved in high-quality research and participant safety, and may also be included in research methodology courses.z

supplemental course:
responsible conduct of research (“rcr”)
completion of this course does not meet requirements for human subjects research; however, completion of a human subjects research course and rcr may be required in certain externally funded research and sponsored programs. the office of research and grants will notify all researchers if this course is required as a condition of any award.z

supplemental course and in-person training:
rcr plus eight hours of face-to-face training
virtual and face-to-face training is required for certain categories of research funded by the national institutes of health, and potentially other funding agencies. the office of research and grants will notify all researchers if this course is required as a condition of any award.

conflict
this policy is subject to applicable law. in the event of a conflict between the provisions of this policy and applicable law, including, without limitation, 45 cfr § 46, the provisions of applicable law shall control.

contact

for additional information or questions regarding this policy, contact the office of research and grants, which can be reached at 615-966-5907.

effective date

this policy was approved by the office of the provost on may 12, 2023.

download pdf

policy statement

this policy codifies the responsibilities of 世界杯2022预选赛录像回放 (“lipscomb”) under the phs policies  on research misconduct, set forth in 42 cfr part 93. this policy applies to allegations of research  misconduct involving:  

• an institutional member; and  
• (a) phs support for biomedical or behavioral research, research training or activities related to that research or research training, such as the operation of tissue and data banks and the dissemination of research information, (b) applications or proposals for phs support for biomedical or behavioral research, research training or activities related to that research or  research training, or (c) plagiarism of research records produced in the course of phs supported research, research training or activities related to that research or research training. this includes any research proposed, performed, reviewed, or reported, or any  research record generated from that research, regardless of whether an application or  proposal for phs funds resulted in a grant, contract, cooperative agreement, or other form of  phs support. (see 42 § cfr 03.102.) 

this policy does not apply to authorship or collaboration disputes and applies only to allegations of  research misconduct that occurred within six years of the date lipscomb or hhs received any  allegation of research misconduct, subject to the exceptions set forth in 42 cfr § 93.105(b). 

purpose

the purpose of this policy is to:  

• establish the responsibilities and administrative actions of lipscomb in reporting and  responding to research misconduct, including allegations and research misconduct proceedings, pursuant to the requirements of 42 cfr part 93; 
• establish consistent procedures for reporting any and all occurrences of research  misconduct to hhs, phs, and the office of research integrity; 
• define research misconduct at lipscomb; and 
• protect the health and safety of the public and promote the integrity of research and the research process (including phs research). 

applicability

this policy requires all institutional members to report observed, suspected, or apparent research  misconduct to lipscomb’s research integrity officer, whose contact information shall be made available to the public and lipscomb community on the website of lipscomb’s office of research and grants.  

definitions

capitalized terms that are used but not otherwise defined in this policy have the following meanings:

allegation, as defined in 42 cfr § 93.201, means a disclosure of possible research misconduct through any means of communication. the disclosure may be by written or oral statement or other communication to a lipscomb or hhs official.  

cfr means the code of federal regulations. 

complainant, as defined in 42 cfr § 93.203, means a person who in good faith makes an allegation of research misconduct. 

deciding official, as defined in 42 cfr § 93.221, means the lipscomb official who makes final determinations on allegations of research misconduct and any institutional administrative actions.  the deciding official will not be the same individual as the research integrity officer and should have no direct prior involvement in lipscomb’s inquiry, investigation, or assessment of allegations. a  deciding official’s appointment of an individual to assess allegations of research misconduct, or to serve on an inquiry or investigation committee, is not considered to be direct prior involvement.  

evidence, as defined in 42 cfr § 93.208, means any document, tangible item, or testimony offered or obtained during a research misconduct proceeding that tends to prove or disprove the existence of an alleged fact. 

good faith, as defined in 42 cfr 93.210, means, as applied to a complainant or witness, having a belief in the truth of one’s allegation or testimony that a reasonable person in the complainant’s or witness’s position could have based on the information known to the complainant or witness at the time. an allegation or cooperation with a research misconduct proceeding is not in good faith if made with knowing or reckless disregard for information that would negate the allegation or testimony. good faith as applied to a committee member means cooperating with the research  misconduct proceeding by carrying out the duties assigned impartially for the purpose of helping lipscomb meet its responsibilities under this policy and applicable law. a committee member does not act in good faith if his or her acts or omissions on the committee are dishonest or influenced by personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest with those involved in the research  misconduct proceeding. 

hhs, as defined in 42 cfr § 50.603, means the united states department of health and human  services, and any components of such department to which the authority involved may be delegated. 

inquiry, as defined in 42 cfr § 93.212, means preliminary information-gathering and preliminary fact-finding that meets the criteria and follows the procedures of 42 cfr §§ 93.907-.309. 

institutional member, as identified in 42 cfr § 93.214, means a person who is employed by, is an agent of, or is affiliated by contract or agreement with lipscomb. institutional members may include,  but are not limited to, officials, tenured and untenured faculty, teaching and support staff,  researchers, research coordinators, clinical technicians, postdoctoral and other fellows, students,  volunteers, agents, and contractors, subcontractors, and subawardees, and their employees. 

investigation, as defined in 42 cfr § 93.215, means the formal development of a factual record and the examination of that record leading to a decision not to make a finding of research misconduct or to a recommendation for a finding of research misconduct which may include a recommendation for  other appropriate actions, including administrative actions.

office of research integrity, as defined in 42 cfr § 93.217, means the office to which the hhs  secretary has delegated responsibility for addressing research integrity and misconduct issues related to phs-supported activities. 

preponderance of the evidence, as defined in 42 cfr § 93.219, means proof by information that,  compared with that opposing it, leads to the conclusion that the fact at issue is more probably true than not. 

phs, as defined in 42 cfr § 50.603, means the public health service of the hhs and any components  of the phs to which the authority involved may be delegated, including the national institutes of  health. 

records of research misconduct proceedings, as defined in 42 cfr § 93.317, includes:

• the records that lipscomb secures for the proceeding pursuant to 42 cfr §§ 93.305,  93.307(b) and 93.310(d), except to the extent lipscomb subsequently determines and  documents that those records are not relevant to the proceeding or that the records duplicate  other records that are being retained;  
• the documentation of the determination of irrelevant or duplicate records;
• the inquiry report and final documents (not drafts) produced in the course of preparing that  report, including the documentation of any decision not to investigate as required by 42 cfr  § 93.309(d); and 
• the investigation report and all records (other than drafts of the report) in support of that report, including the recordings or transcriptions of each interview conducted pursuant to  42 cfr § 93.310(g). 

research, as defined in 42 cfr § 93.222, means a systematic experiment, study, evaluation,  demonstration or survey designed to develop or contribute to general knowledge (basic research) or  specific knowledge (applied research) relating broadly to public health by establishing, discovering,  developing, elucidating or confirming information about, or the underlying mechanism relating to,  biological causes, functions or effects, diseases, treatments, or related matters to be studied. 

research integrity officer means the lipscomb official appointed by the associate provost for  research and graduate studies/chief research officer who is primarily responsible for:  

• assessing allegations of research misconduct to determine if they fall within the definition of  research misconduct, are covered by this policy and/or 42 cfr part 93, and warrant an  inquiry on the basis that the allegation is sufficiently credible and specific so that potential  evidence of research misconduct may be identified;  
• overseeing inquiries and investigations; and  
• the other responsibilities described in this policy. 

the same individual cannot serve as the deciding official and the research integrity officer. 

research misconduct, as defined in 42 cfr § 93.103, means fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results. for purposes of this  definition: 

• fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting them;
• falsification is 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; and
• plagiarism is the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.  

research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion. 
research misconduct proceeding, as defined in 42 cfr § 93.223, means any actions related to alleged  research misconduct taken under this policy and/or 42 cfr part 93, including but not limited to,  allegation assessments, inquiries, investigations, office of research integrity oversight reviews, and hearings.  

respondent, as defined in 42 cfr § 93.225, means the person against whom an allegation of research  misconduct is directed or who is the subject of a research misconduct proceeding. 

retaliation, as defined in 42 cfr § 93.226, means an adverse action taken against a complainant,  witness, or committee member by lipscomb or an institutional member in response to:

• a good faith allegation of research misconduct; or  
• good faith cooperation with a research misconduct proceeding. u.s.c. means the united states code. 

procedures

general policies and principles 
responsibility to report research misconduct. all institutional members will report observed,  suspected, or apparent research misconduct to the research integrity officer or to the associate  provost of research and graduate studies/chief research officer, who will then refer the matter to the research integrity officer. if an individual is unsure whether a suspected incident falls within the definition of research misconduct, he or she may meet with or contact either individual, whose contact information is available on the website of lipscomb’s office of research and grants, to discuss the suspected research misconductinformally, which may include discussing it anonymously and/or hypothetically. if the circumstances described by the individual do not meet the definition of research misconduct, the research integrity officer will refer the individual or allegation to other offices or officials with responsibility for resolving the problem, if applicable. at any time, an institutional member may have confidential discussions and consultations about concerns of possible misconduct with the research integrity officer or the associate provost of research and  graduate studies/chief research officer and will be counseled about appropriate procedures for reporting allegations.  

cooperation with research misconduct proceedings. institutional members will cooperate with the  research integrity officer and other lipscomb officials in the review of allegations and the conduct of inquiries and investigations. institutional members, including respondents, have an obligation to provide evidence relevant to research misconduct allegations to the research integrity officer or other lipscomb officials. 

confidentiality. the research integrity officer shall, as required by 42 cfr § 93.108:

• limit disclosure of the identity of respondents and complainants to those who need to know  in order to carry out a thorough, competent, objective and fair research misconduct  proceeding, and as allowed by law; provided, however, that lipscomb must disclose the  identity of respondents and complainants to the office of research integrity pursuant to an office of research integrity review of research misconduct proceedings pursuant to 42 cfr  § 93.403; and  
• except as otherwise prescribed by law, limit the disclosure of any records or evidence from which research subjects and reporting witnesses might be identified to those who need to know in order to carry out a research misconduct proceeding.  

protecting complainants, witnesses, and committee members. institutional members may not retaliate in any way against complainants, witnesses, or committee members. institutional members should immediately report any alleged or apparent retaliation against complainants, witnesses or committee members to the research integrity officer, who shall review the matter and, as necessary,  make all reasonable and practical efforts to counter any potential or actual retaliation and protect and restore the position and reputation of the person against whom the retaliation is directed.  

protecting the respondent. as requested and as appropriate, the research integrity officer and other lipscomb officials shall make all reasonable and practical efforts to protect or restore the reputation of persons alleged to have engaged in research misconduct, but against whom no finding of research  misconduct is made. (see 42 cfr § 93.304(k).) 

during the research misconduct proceeding, the research integrity officer is responsible for ensuring that respondents receive all the notices and opportunities provided for in 42 cfr part 93  and this policy. respondents may consult with legal counsel or a non-lawyer personal adviser (who is not a principal or witness in the case) to seek advice, but such counsel and advisers may not be present at or accompany respondents to interviews or meetings. 

interim administrative actions and notifying the office of research integrity of special circumstances. throughout the research misconduct proceeding, the research integrity officer will review the situation to determine if there is any threat of harm to public health, federal funds and equipment, or the integrity of the phs-supported research process. in the event of such a threat, the research  integrity officer will, in consultation with other lipscomb officials and the office of research  integrity, take appropriate interim action to protect against any such threat.4 (see 42 cfr §  93.304(h).) interim action might include additional monitoring of the research process and the handling of federal funds and equipment, reassignment of personnel or of the responsibility for the handling of federal funds and equipment, additional review of research data and results, or delaying publication. the research integrity officer shall, at any time during a research misconduct  proceeding, notify the office of research integrity immediately if he or she has reason to believe that  any of the following conditions exist:  

• 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 a 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;  
• the research misconduct proceeding may be made public prematurely and hhs action may be necessary to safeguard evidence and protect the rights of those involved; or
• the research community or public should be informed. (see 42 cfr § 93.318.)

conducting the assessment and inquiry 
assessment of allegations. upon receiving an allegation of research misconduct, the research  integrity officer will promptly assess the allegation to determine if it is sufficiently credible and specific so that potential evidence of research misconduct may be identified, if it is within the jurisdictional criteria of 42 cfr § 93.102(b), and whether the allegation falls within the definition of research misconduct in this policy. (see 42 cfr § 93.307(a).) an inquiry must be conducted if these criteria are met.  

the assessment period should be brief, preferably concluded within a week (subject to extenuating circumstances). in conducting the assessment, the research integrity officer need not interview the complainant, respondent, or other witnesses, or gather data beyond any that may have been submitted with the allegation, except as necessary to determine whether the allegation is sufficiently credible and specific so that potential evidence of research misconduct may be identified. the  research integrity officer shall, on or before the date on which the respondent is notified of the  allegation, obtain custody of, inventory, and sequester all research records and evidence needed to  conduct the research misconduct proceeding, as set forth in the subsection below entitled “notice to  respondent; sequestration of research records.” 

initiation and purpose of the inquiry. if the research integrity officer determines that the criteria for an inquiry are met, he or she will promptly initiate the inquiry process. the purpose of the inquiry is to conduct an initial review of the available evidence to determine whether to conduct an investigation. an inquiry does not require a full review of all the evidence related to the allegation. (see 42 cfr § 93.307(c).) 

notice to respondent; sequestration of research records. at the time of or before beginning an inquiry,  the research integrity officer must make a good faith effort to notify the respondent in writing, if the respondent is known. if the inquiry subsequently identifies additional respondents, they must be notified in writing. on or before the date on which the respondent is notified, or the inquiry begins, whichever is earlier, the research integrity officer must take all reasonable and practical steps to obtain custody of all the research records and evidence needed to conduct the research misconduct proceeding, inventory the records and evidence and sequester them in a secure manner, except that where the research records or evidence encompass scientific instruments shared by a number of users, custody may be limited to copies of the data or evidence on such instruments, so long as those copies are substantially equivalent to the evidentiary value of the instruments. (see 42  cfr §§ 93.305, 93.307(b).) the research integrity officer may consult with the office of research  integrity for advice and assistance in this regard. 

appointment of the inquiry committee. the research integrity officer, in consultation with the chief  research officer and other appropriate lipscomb officials, will appoint an inquiry committee and committee chair as soon after the initiation of the inquiry as is practical. the inquiry committee must consist of individuals who do not have unresolved personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest with those involved with the inquiry and should include individuals with the appropriate scientific expertise to evaluate the evidence and issues related to the allegation, interview the principals and key witnesses, and conduct the inquiry. (see 42 cfr § 93.304(b).) the research integrity officer will notify the respondent of the identity of the appointed inquiry committee members and committee chair and provide the respondent with ten (10) calendar days to provide a written objection to any member of the inquiry committee based upon a personal, professional, or financial conflict of interest. in the event of any proper objection by the respondent, the research  integrity officer (in consultation with the chief research officer) will make the final determination as to whether any conflict of interest exists. if the research integrity officer determines that any member of the inquiry committee has a conflict of interest, the research integrity officer will remove such individual from the inquiry committee and, in consultation with the chief research officer and other appropriate lipscomb officials, appoint a new member. the research integrity officer will notify the respondent of the identity of such appointed new member of the inquiry committee and provide the respondent with an additional ten (10) calendar days to provide a written objection to any member of the inquiry committee. 

charge to the inquiry committee and first meeting. the research integrity officer will prepare a  charge for the inquiry committee that:  

• sets forth the time for completion of the inquiry;  
• describes the allegations and any related issues identified during the allegation assessment;
• states that the purpose of the inquiry is to conduct an initial review of the evidence, including  the testimony of the respondent, complainant and key witnesses, to determine whether an  investigation is warranted, not to determine whether research misconduct definitely  occurred or who was responsible;  
• states that an investigation is warranted if the committee determines: 
  • there is a reasonable basis for concluding that the allegation falls within the definition of  research misconduct and is within the jurisdictional criteria of 42 cfr § 93.102(b); and, 
  • the allegation may have substance, based on the committee’s review during the inquiry. 
• informs the inquiry committee that they are responsible for preparing or directing the preparation of a written report of the inquiry that meets the requirements of this policy and  42 cfr § 93.309(a).  

at the inquiry committee’s first meeting, the research integrity officer will review the charge with the committee, discuss the allegations, any related issues, and the appropriate procedures for conducting the inquiry, assist the committee with organizing plans for the inquiry, and answer any questions raised by the committee. the research integrity officer will be present or available throughout the inquiry to advise the committee as needed. 

inquiry process. the inquiry committee will normally interview the complainant, the respondent,  and key witnesses as well as examine relevant research records and materials. then the inquiry committee will evaluate the evidence, including the testimony obtained during the inquiry. after consultation with the research integrity officer, the committee members will decide whether an  investigation is warranted based on the criteria in this policy and 42 cfr § 93.307(d). the scope of the inquiry is not required to, and does not normally include, deciding whether research misconduct definitely occurred, determining definitely who committed the research misconduct, or conducting exhaustive interviews and analyses. however, if a legally sufficient admission of research  misconduct is made by the respondent, misconduct may be determined at the inquiry stage if all relevant issues are resolved. in that case, lipscomb shall promptly consult with the office of research  integrity to determine the next steps that should be taken.  

time for completion. the inquiry, including preparation of the final inquiry report and the decision of the deciding official on whether an investigation is warranted, must be completed within 60  calendar days of initiation of the inquiry, unless the research integrity officer determines that circumstances clearly warrant a longer period. if the research integrity officer approves an extension, the inquiry record must include documentation of the reasons for exceeding the 60-day period. (see 42 cfr § 93.307(g).) the research integrity officer will notify the respondent of any such extension.

the inquiry report 
elements of the inquiry report. a written inquiry report must be prepared by the inquiry committee  that includes the following information:  

• the name and position of the respondent;  
• a description of the allegations of research misconduct;  
• the phs support, including, for example, grant numbers, grant applications, contracts and publications listing phs support;  
• the basis for recommending or not recommending that the allegations warrant an  investigation;  
• any comments on the draft report by the respondent or complainant. (see 42 cfr §  93.309(a).) 

lipscomb’s general counsel should review the report for legal sufficiency. modifications should be made as appropriate in consultation with the research integrity officer and the inquiry committee.  
notification to the respondent and opportunity to comment. the research integrity officer shall notify the respondent whether the inquiry found an investigation to be warranted, include a copy of the draft inquiry report for the respondent’s comment within ten (10) calendar days, and include a copy of or refer to 42 cfr part 93 and this policy. (see 42 cfr § 93.308(a).) 

the research integrity officer may, in his or her discretion, notify the complainant whether the  inquiry found an investigation to be warranted and include a copy of the draft inquiry report for the complainant’s comment within ten (10) calendar days. in such circumstances, the research integrity officer may require that the complainant sign a confidentiality agreement.  

any comments that are submitted by the respondent or complainant will be attached to the final  inquiry report. based on the comments, the inquiry committee may revise the draft report as appropriate and prepare it in final form. the committee will deliver the final report to the research  integrity officer.  

determination of whether investigation is warranted and notification. the research integrity officer will transmit the final inquiry report and any comments to the deciding official, who will determine in writing whether an investigation is warranted. the inquiry is completed when the deciding official makes this determination. 

within 30 calendar days of the deciding official’s decision that an investigation is warranted, the  research integrity officer will provide the office of research integrity with the deciding official’s written decision and a copy of the inquiry report. the research integrity officer will also notify those  lipscomb officials who need to know of the deciding official’s decision. the research integrity  officer must provide the following information to the office of research integrity upon request:  

• the lipscomb policies and procedures under which the inquiry was conducted;
• the research records and evidence reviewed, transcripts or recordings of any interviews,  and copies of all relevant documents; and  
• the charges to be considered in the investigation. (see 42 cfr §§ 93.309(a) and (b).) 

documentation of decision not to investigate. if the deciding official decides that an investigation is not warranted, the research integrity officer shall maintain in a secure manner for seven (7) years after the termination of the inquiry sufficiently detailed documentation of the inquiry to permit a later assessment by the office of research integrity of the reasons why an investigation was not conducted. these documents must be provided to the office of research integrity or other authorized  hhs personnel upon request. (see 42 cfr § 93.309(c).) 

conducting the investigation 
initiation and purpose. an investigation must begin within 30 calendar days after the determination by the deciding official that an investigation is warranted. (see 42 cfr § 93.310(a).) the purpose of the investigation is to develop a factual record by exploring the allegations in detail and examining the evidence in depth, leading to recommended findings on whether research misconduct has been committed, by whom, and to what extent. the investigation will also determine whether there are additional instances of possible research misconduct that would justify broadening the scope beyond the initial allegations. broadening the scope of an investigation is particularly important where the alleged research misconduct involves clinical trials or potential harm to human subjects or the general public or if it affects research that forms the basis for public policy, clinical practice, or public health practice. pursuant to 42 cfr § 93.313, the findings of the investigation must be set forth in an investigation report. 

notifying the office of research integrity and respondent; sequestration of research records. the  research integrity officer must:  

• notify the director of the office of research integrity of the decision to begin the investigation on or before the date the investigation begins, and provide the office of research integrity a  copy of the inquiry report; and  
• notify the respondent in writing of the allegations to be investigated within a reasonable amount of time after determining that an investigation is warranted, but before the  investigation begins. the research integrity officer must also give the respondent written notice of any new allegations of research misconduct within a reasonable amount of time of deciding to pursue allegations not addressed during the inquiry or in the initial notice of the  investigation. (see 42 cfr §§ 93.310(b) and (c).)  

the research integrity officer will, prior to notifying the respondent of the allegations, take all reasonable and practical steps to obtain custody of and sequester in a secure manner all research records and evidence needed to conduct the research misconduct proceeding that were not previously sequestered during the inquiry. the need for additional sequestration of records for the  investigation may occur for any number of reasons, including, without limitation, lipscomb’s decision to investigate additional allegations not considered during the inquiry stage or the identification of records during the inquiry process that had not been previously secured. the procedures to be followed for sequestration during the investigation are the same procedures that apply during the inquiry. (see 42 cfr § 93.310(d).) 

appointment of the investigation committee. the research integrity officer, in consultation with the  chief research officer, will appoint an investigation committee and committee chair as soon as practical after the beginning of the investigation. the investigation committee must consist of individuals who do not have unresolved personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest with those involved with the investigation and should include individuals with the appropriate scientific expertise to evaluate the evidence and issues related to the allegation, interview the respondent and complainant and conduct the investigation. individuals who previously served on the inquiry committee may also be appointed to the investigation committee. when necessary to secure the requisite expertise or to avoid conflicts of interest, the research integrity officer may select committee members from outside lipscomb or utilize consultants to evaluate specific allegations. 

the research integrity officer will notify the respondent of the identity of the appointed investigation committee members and committee chair and provide the respondent with ten (10)  calendar days to provide a written objection to any member based upon a personal, professional, or financial conflict of interest. in the event of any proper objection by the respondent, the research  integrity officer (in consultation with the chief research officer) will make the final determination as to whether any conflict of interest exists. if the research integrity officer determines that any member of the investigation committee has a conflict of interest, the research integrity officer will remove such individual from the investigation committee and, in consultation with the chief  research officer, appoint a new member. the research integrity officer will notify the respondent of the identity of such appointed new member of the investigation committee and provide the  respondent with an additional ten (10) calendar days to provide a written objection to any member of the inquiry committee. 

charge to the investigation committee and first meeting. the research integrity officer will define  the subject matter of the investigation in a written charge to the investigation committee that:

describes the allegations and related issues identified during the inquiry;

• identifies the respondent;  
• informs the committee that it must conduct the investigation as set forth in the subsection below entitled “investigation process”;  
• defines the research misconduct that allegedly occurred; 
• informs the committee that it must evaluate the evidence and testimony to determine  whether, based on a preponderance of the evidence, research misconduct occurred and, if  so, the type and extent of it and who was responsible;  
• informs the committee that in order to determine if the respondent committed research misconduct it must find that a preponderance of the evidence establishes that:
  • research misconduct, as defined in this policy, occurred (respondent has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence any affirmative defenses raised, including  honest error or a difference of opinion);  
  • the research misconduct is a significant departure from accepted practices of the  relevant research community; and  
  • the respondent committed the research misconduct intentionally, knowingly, or  recklessly; and  
• informs the committee that it must prepare or direct the preparation of a written  investigation report that meets the requirements of this policy and 42 cfr § 93.313. 

the research integrity officer will convene the first meeting of the investigation committee to review the charge, the inquiry report, and the prescribed procedures and standards for the conduct of the  investigation, including the necessity for confidentiality and for developing a specific investigation plan. the investigation committee will be provided with a copy of this policy and 42 cfr part 93. the  research integrity officer will be present or available throughout the investigation to advise the committee as needed.  

investigation process. the investigation committee and the research integrity officer must:

• use diligent efforts to ensure that the investigation is thorough and sufficiently documented  and includes examination of all research records and evidence relevant to reaching a  decision on the merits of each allegation; (see 42 cfr § 93.310(e).) 
• take reasonable steps to ensure an impartial and unbiased investigation to the maximum  extent practical; (see 42 cfr § 93.310(f).)
• interview each respondent, complainant, and any other available person who has been  reasonably identified as having information regarding any relevant aspects of the  investigation, including witnesses identified by the respondent, and record or transcribe  each interview, provide the recording or transcript to the interviewee for correction, and  include the recording or transcript in the record of the investigation; (see 42 cfr §  93.310(g).) and  
• pursue diligently all significant issues and leads discovered that are determined relevant to the investigation, including any evidence of any additional instances of possible research  misconduct, and continue the investigation to completion. (see 42 cfr § 93.310(h).) 

time for completion. the investigation is to be completed within 120 days of beginning it, including conducting the investigation, preparing the report of findings, providing the draft report for comment and sending the final report to the office of research integrity. however, if the research integrity officer determines that the investigation will not be completed within this 120-day period,  he or she will submit to the office of research integrity a written request for an extension, setting forth the reasons for the delay. the research integrity officer will ensure that periodic progress reports are filed with the office of research integrity, if the office of research integrity grants the request for an extension and directs the filing of such reports. (see 42 cfr § 93.311.)  

the investigation report 
elements of the investigation report. the investigation committee and the research integrity officer are responsible for preparing a written draft report of the investigation that:

• describes the nature of the allegation of research misconduct, including identification of the  respondent; 
• describes and documents the phs support, including, for example, the numbers of any grants  that are involved, grant applications, contracts, and publications listing phs support;
• describes the specific allegations of research misconduct considered in the investigation;
• includes the lipscomb policies and procedures under which the investigation was conducted,  unless those policies and procedures were previously provided to the office of research integrity;  
• identifies and summarizes the research records and evidence reviewed and identifies any evidence taken into custody but not reviewed; and  
• includes a statement of findings for each allegation of research misconduct identified during the investigation. (see 42 cfr § 93.313.) each statement of findings must:  
  • identify whether the research misconduct was falsification, fabrication, or plagiarism, and whether it was committed intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly;  
  • summarize the facts and the analysis that support the conclusion and consider the merits  of any reasonable explanation by the respondent, including any effort by respondent to  establish by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she did not engage in research  misconduct because of honest error or a difference of opinion;  
  • identify the specific phs support;  
  • identify whether any publications need correction or retraction;  
  • identify the person(s) responsible for the misconduct; and  
  • list any current support or known applications or proposals for support that the  respondent has pending with non-phs federal agencies. (see 42 cfr § 93.313(f).) 

comments on the draft report and access to evidence. the research integrity officer must give the  respondent a copy of the draft investigation report for comment and, concurrently, a copy of, or supervised access to, the evidence on which the report is based. the respondent will be allowed 30  days from the date he or she received the draft report to submit comments to the research integrity  officer. the respondent’s comments must be included and considered in the final report.(see 42 cfr  §§ 93.312(a), 93.313(g).) 

the research integrity officer may, in his or her discretion, provide the complainant a copy of the draft investigation report, or relevant portions of it, for comment. in such circumstances, the  complainant’s comments must be submitted within 30 days of the date on which he or she received the draft report and the comments shall be included and considered in the final report. (see 42 cfr  §§ 93.312(b) and 93.313(g).) 

in distributing the draft report, or portions thereof, to the respondent and complainant, the research  integrity officer will inform the recipient of the confidentiality under which the draft report is made  available and may establish reasonable conditions to ensure such confidentiality. for example, the  research integrity officer may require that the recipient sign a confidentiality agreement.  

decision by deciding official. the research integrity officer will assist the investigation committee in  finalizing the draft investigation report, including ensuring that the respondent’s and complainant’s  comments are included and considered, and transmit the final investigation report to the deciding  official, who will determine in writing:  
∙ whether lipscomb accepts the investigation report, its findings, and the recommended  institutional actions; and  
∙ the appropriate institutional actions in response to any accepted findings of research  misconduct.  
if this determination varies from the findings of the investigation committee, the deciding official will, as part of his or her written determination, explain in detail the basis for rendering a decision different from the findings of the investigation committee. alternatively, the deciding official may return the report to the investigation committee with a request for further fact-finding or analysis.  

when a final decision on the investigation has been reached, the research integrity officer will normally notify both the respondent and the complainant in writing. after informing the office of  research integrity, the deciding official will determine whether law enforcement agencies,  professional societies, professional licensing boards, editors of journals in which falsified reports  may have been published, collaborators of the respondent in the work, or other relevant parties  should be notified of the outcome of the case. the research integrity officer is responsible for  ensuring compliance with all notification requirements of funding or sponsoring agencies. 

notice to the office of research integrity of institutional findings and actions. unless an extension for the investigation has been granted, the research integrity officer must, within the 120-day period  for completing the investigation, submit the following to the office of research integrity:

• a copy of the final investigation report with all attachments;  
• a statement of whether lipscomb accepts the findings of the investigation report;
• a statement of whether lipscomb found research misconduct and, if so, who committed the  misconduct; and  
• a description of any pending or completed administrative actions against the respondent.  (see 42 cfr § 93.315.)

maintaining records for review by the office of research integrity. the research integrity officer must maintain and provide to the office of research integrity upon request records of research  misconduct proceedings. unless custody has been transferred to hhs or the office of research  integrity has advised in writing that the records no longer need to be retained, records of research  misconduct proceedings must be maintained in a secure manner for seven (7) years after the later of the completion of the proceedings or the completion of any phs proceeding involving the research  misconduct allegation. (see 42 cfr § 93.317(b).) the research integrity officer is also responsible for providing any information, documentation, research records, evidence or clarification requested by the office of research integrity to carry out its review of an allegation of research misconduct or of lipscomb’s handling of such an allegation. (see 42 cfr §§ 93.300(g), 93.403(b) and (d).) 

completion of cases; reporting premature closures to the office of research  integrity 
generally, all inquiries and investigations will be carried through to completion and all significant issues will be pursued diligently. the research integrity officer must notify the office of research integrity in advance if there are plans to close a case at the inquiry or investigation stage on the basis that respondent has admitted guilt, a settlement with the respondent has been reached, or for any other reason, except:  

• closing of a case at the inquiry stage on the basis that an investigation is not warranted; or
• a finding of no misconduct at the investigation stage, which must be reported to the office of  research integrity, as prescribed in this policy and 42 cfr § 93.315.(see 42 cfr § 93.316(a).) 

institutional administrative actions 
if the deciding official determines that research misconduct is substantiated by the findings, he or  she will decide on the appropriate actions to be taken, after consultation with the research integrity  officer. the administrative actions may include, without limitation: 

• withdrawal or correction of all pending or published abstracts and papers emanating from  the research where research misconduct was found; 
• removal of the responsible person from the particular project, letter of reprimand, special  monitoring of future work, probation, suspension, salary reduction, or initiation of steps  leading to possible rank reduction or termination of employment;  
• restitution of funds to the grantor agency as appropriate; and 
• other action appropriate to the research misconduct. 

other considerations 
termination or resignation prior to completing inquiry or investigation. the termination of the  respondent’s employment with lipscomb, by resignation or otherwise, before or after an allegation of possible research misconduct has been reported, will not preclude or terminate the research  misconduct proceeding or otherwise limit any of lipscomb’s responsibilities under 42 cfr part 93. 
if the respondent, without admitting to research misconduct, elects to resign his or her position after  lipscomb receives an allegation of research misconduct, the assessment of the allegation will proceed, as well as the inquiry and investigation, as appropriate based on the outcome of the preceding steps. if the respondent refuses to participate in the process after resignation, the research integrity officer and any inquiry or investigation committee will use their best efforts to reach a conclusion concerning the allegations, noting in the report the respondent’s failure to cooperate and its effect on the evidence. 

restoration of the respondent’s reputation. following a final finding of no research misconduct,  including the office of research integrity concurrence where required by 42 cfr part 93, the  research integrity officer must, at the request of the respondent, undertake all reasonable and practical efforts to restore the respondent’s reputation. (see 42 cfr § 93.304(k).) depending on the particular circumstances and the views of the respondent, the research integrity officer should consider notifying those individuals aware of or involved in the investigation of the final outcome,  publicizing the final outcome in any forum in which the allegation of research misconduct was previously publicized, and expunging all reference to the research misconduct allegation from the  respondent’s personnel file. any institutional actions to restore the respondent’s reputation should first be approved by the deciding official. 

protection of the complainant, witnesses and committee members. during the research misconduct  proceeding and upon its completion, regardless of whether lipscomb or the office of research  integrity determines that research misconduct occurred, the research integrity officer must undertake all reasonable and practical efforts to protect the position and reputation of, or to counter potential or actual retaliation against, any complainant who made allegations of research misconduct in good faith and of any witnesses and committee members who cooperated in good faith with the research misconduct proceeding. (see 42 cfr § 93.304(l).) the deciding official will determine, after consulting with the research integrity officer, and with the complainant, witnesses,  or committee members, what steps, if any, are needed to restore their respective positions or reputations or to counter potential or actual retaliation against them. the research integrity officer is responsible for implementing any steps the deciding official approves.  
allegations not made in good faith. if relevant, the deciding official will determine whether the  complainant’s allegations of research misconduct were made in good faith, or whether a witness or committee member acted in good faith. if the deciding official determines that there was an absence of good faith, the deciding official will determine whether any administrative action should be taken against the person who failed to act in good faith. 

responsibilities 
complainant. the complainant is responsible for making allegations in good faith, maintaining confidentiality, and cooperating with the inquiry and investigation. as a matter of good practice, the  complainant should be interviewed at the inquiry stage and given the transcript or recording of the  interview for correction. the complainant must be interviewed during an investigation, and be given  the transcript or recording of the interview for correction.31 
the research integrity officer may, in his or her discretion, provide to the complainant for comment  relevant portions of the draft inquiry report (for response within ten (10) calendar days), and/or the  draft investigation report or relevant portions of it (for response within 30 days). the investigation committee will consider any comments made by the complainant on the draft investigation report and include those comments in the final investigation report.  

respondent. the respondent is responsible for maintaining confidentiality and cooperating with the conduct of an inquiry and investigation. the respondent is entitled to:  

• a good faith effort from the research integrity officer to notify the respondent in writing at  the time of or before beginning an inquiry (see 42 cfr §§ 93.304(c), 93.307(b)); 
• an opportunity to comment on the inquiry report and have his or her comments attached to  the report (see 42 cfr §§ 93.304(e), 93.307(f));  
• be notified of the outcome of the inquiry, and receive a copy of the inquiry report that  includes a copy of, or refers to 42 cfr part 93 and this policy (see 42 cfr § 308(a));
• be notified in writing of the allegations to be investigated within a reasonable amount of time  after the determination that an investigation is warranted but before the investigation begins, and be notified in writing of any new allegations within a reasonable amount of time  after the determination to pursue allegations not addressed in the inquiry or in the initial notice of investigation (see 42 cfr § 310(c));  
• be interviewed during the investigation, have the opportunity to correct the recording or  transcript, and have the corrected recording or transcript included in the record of the  investigation (see 42 cfr § 310(g));  
• have interviewed during the investigation any witness who has been reasonably identified by the respondent as having information regarding any relevant aspects of the investigation,  have the recording or transcript provided to the witness for correction, and have the  corrected recording or transcript included in the record of investigation (see 42 cfr §  310(g)); and
• receive a copy of the draft investigation report and, concurrently, a copy of, or supervised access to, the evidence on which the report is based, and provide any comments on the draft  investigation report within 30 days of the date on which the copy was received, and have any such comments considered and addressed by the investigation committee before issuing the  final report (see 42 cfr §§ 93.304(f), 93.312(a)).  

the respondent should be given the opportunity to admit that research misconduct occurred and that he or she committed the research misconduct. with the advice of the research integrity officer and/or other lipscomb officials, the deciding official may terminate lipscomb’s review of an allegation that has been admitted, if lipscomb’s acceptance of the admission and any proposed settlement is approved by the office of research integrity. (see 42 cfr § 93.316.)  

deciding official. the deciding official will receive the inquiry report and after consulting with the  research integrity officer and/or other lipscomb officials, decide whether an investigation is warranted under the criteria in 42 cfr § 93.307(d). any finding that an investigation is warranted must be made in writing by the deciding official and must be provided to the office of research  integrity, together with a copy of the inquiry report meeting the requirements of 42 cfr § 93.309,  within 30 days of the finding. if it is found that an investigation is not warranted, the deciding official  and the research integrity officer will ensure that detailed documentation of the inquiry is retained  in a secure manner for at least seven (7) years after termination of the inquiry, and upon request,  provide them to the office of research integrity or other authorized hhs personnel. (see 42 cfr §  93.309(c).)  

the deciding official will receive the investigation report and, after consulting with the research  integrity officer and/or other lipscomb officials, decide the extent to which lipscomb accepts the findings of the investigation and, if research misconduct is found, decide what, if any, institutional administrative actions are appropriate. the deciding official shall ensure that the final investigation report, the findings of the deciding official, and a description of any pending or completed administrative actions are provided to the office of research integrity, as required by 42 cfr §  93.315. 

research integrity officer. the associate provost for research and graduate studies/chief research  officer will appoint the research integrity officer, who will have primary responsibility for implementation of lipscomb’s policies and procedures on research misconduct. these responsibilities include the following duties related to research misconduct proceedings:  

• consult confidentially with persons uncertain about whether to submit an allegation of  research misconduct; 
• receive allegations of research misconduct; 
• assess each allegation of research misconduct in accordance with the section of this policy entitled “conducting the assessment and inquiry – assessment of allegations” to determine  whether it falls within the definition of research misconduct and warrants an inquiry;  
• as necessary, take interim action and notify the office of research integrity of special  circumstances, in accordance with the section of this policy entitled “general policies and  principles – interim administrative actions and notifying the office of research integrity of  special circumstances”;  
• sequester research data and evidence pertinent to the allegation of research misconduct in  accordance with the section of this policy entitled “conducting the assessment and inquiry – notice to respondent; sequestration of research records” and maintain it securely in  accordance with this policy and applicable law and regulation; 
• provide confidentiality to those involved in the research misconduct proceeding as required  by 42 cfr § 93.108, other applicable law, and lipscomb policy; 
• notify the respondent and provide opportunities for him or her to review, comment, and  respond to allegations, evidence, and committee reports in accordance with the section of  this policy entitled “rights and responsibilities – respondent”; 
• inform respondents, complainants, and witnesses of the procedural steps in the research  misconduct proceeding;  
• appoint the chair and members of the inquiry and investigation committees, ensure that  those committees are properly staffed and that there is expertise appropriate to carry out a  thorough and authoritative evaluation of the evidence;  
• determine whether each person involved in handling an allegation of research misconduct  has an unresolved personal, professional, or financial conflict of interest and take appropriate  action, including recusal, to ensure that no person with such conflict is involved in the  research misconduct proceeding; 
• in cooperation with other lipscomb officials, take all reasonable and practical steps to protect  or restore the positions and reputations of good faith complainants, witnesses, and  committee members and counter potential or actual retaliation against them by  respondents or other institutional members; 
• keep the deciding official and others who need to know apprised of the progress of the  review of the allegation of research misconduct;  
• notify and make reports to the office of research integrity as required by 42 cfr part 93;
• ensure that administrative actions taken by lipscomb and the office of research integrity  are enforced and take appropriate action to notify other involved parties, such as sponsors,  law enforcement agencies, professional societies, and licensing boards of those actions; and
• maintain records of research misconduct proceeding and make them available to the office of research integrity in accordance with the section of this policy entitled “the investigation report – maintaining records for review by the office of research integrity.” 

in addition to the foregoing, the research integrity officer has lead responsibility for ensuring that  lipscomb: 

• takes all reasonable and practical steps to foster a research environment that promotes the  responsible conduct of research, research training, and activities related to that research or  research training, discourages research misconduct, and deals promptly with allegations or  evidence of possible research misconduct; 
• has written policies and procedures for responding to allegations of research misconduct  and reporting information about that response to the office of research integrity, as required  by 42 cfr part 93; 
• complies with its written policies and procedures and the requirements of 42 cfr part 93; ∙ informs its institutional members about its research misconduct policies and procedures and  its commitment to compliance with those policies and procedures; and 
• takes appropriate interim action during a research misconduct proceeding to protect public health, federal funds and equipment, and the integrity of the phs supported research process. 

conflict 
this policy is subject to applicable law. in the event of a conflict between the provisions of this policy and applicable law, including, without limitation, 42 cfr § 93, the provisions of applicable law shall control.  
 

contact

for additional information or questions regarding this policy, contact the office of research and  grants by email at researchandgrants [at] lipscomb.edu or by phone at 615-966-5907. 

effective date 

this policy was approved by the office of the provost on july 15, 2024. 

download pdf

purpose

the purpose of this policy is to: 

• encourage research, creation, and innovation; 
• promote the dissemination of protected intellectual property for commercial development;  specify individual and institutional ownership and property rights of intellectual property;
• provide for income distribution or other benefits that encourages ongoing innovation; and
• ensure ongoing compliance with federal regulations and externally funded research or sponsored program requirements. 

applicability

this policy is applicable to the following individuals (each, a “covered person”):

• any employee of 世界杯2022预选赛录像回放 (“lipscomb”), including any full- or part-time faculty,  staff, or student-worker of lipscomb; 
• any individual or entity who provides services to lipscomb pursuant to a work-for-hire,  independent contractor, or other similar agreement or arrangement with lipscomb;
• any student enrolled in any full- or part-time program of study at lipscomb, regardless of employment status with lipscomb while enrolled; and 
• any individual who is not employed by or affiliated with lipscomb but utilizes lipscomb facilities, equipment, and/or other resources, including, without limitation, individuals conducting research on- or off-campus, except for individuals who provide services solely to external third parties who lease space on campus from lipscomb.  

definitions

capitalized terms that are used but not otherwise defined in this policy have the following meanings:

cfr means the code of federal regulations. 

copyright means a protected work of authorship, such as writings, music, and works of art that have been tangibly expressed. the subject matter for copyright protection is set forth in 17 u.s.c. § 102.  

creator or inventor is the covered person(s) who invented, authored, or were otherwise responsible for the creation, invention or discovery of intellectual property. 

cro means lipscomb’s chief research officer. 

derivative work means a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation,  musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast,  transformed, or adapted. a work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications, which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a derivative work. 

externally funded research or sponsored program means a grant or contract between lipscomb and an external entity (such as a federal, state or local government, higher education institution, nonprofit organization, or for-profit entity) pursuant to which funding or other resources are provided to lipscomb for the purpose of completing a specified project or program.  

federal agency, as defined in 5 u.s.c. § 551(1), generally means each authority of the government of  the united states, whether or not it is within or subject to review by another agency. 

federal award, as defined in 2 cfr § 200.1, has the following meaning, depending on the context:

• the federal financial assistance that lipscomb receives directly from a federal awarding  agency or indirectly from a pass-through entity, as described in 2 cfr § 200.101; or (ii) the  cost-reimbursement contract under the federal acquisition regulations that a non-federal entity receives directly from a federal awarding agency or indirectly from a pass-through  entity, as described in 2 cfr § 200.101.  
• the instrument setting forth the terms and conditions. the instrument is the grant agreement, cooperative agreement, other agreement for assistance covered in paragraph (2)  of the definition of federal financial assistance in 2 cfr § 200.1, or the cost-reimbursement contract awarded under the federal acquisition regulations (48 cfr § 52.204-17). 

federal award does not include other contracts that a federal agency uses to buy goods or services  from a contractor or a contract to operate federal government owned, contractor operated facilities. see also the definitions of federal financial assistance, grant agreement, and cooperative agreement  in 2 cfr § 200.1. 

federal awarding agency, as defined in 2 cfr § 200.1, means the federal agency that provides a  federal award directly to a non-federal entity. 

instructional materials means the content, assessment, and structure of the course and materials  prepared in any form, including, without limitation, lectures, lecture notes, course syllabi, reading  lists, exams, supplemental materials, assignments, study guides, bibliographies, visual aids, images  (audio and/or visual), diagrams, slides, lab exercises, tools, simulations, multimedia presentations,  web pages, digital media, or any combination thereof. 

intellectual property means any invention, discovery, improvement, copyrightable work, patent,  trademark, trade secret, and licensable know-how and related rights. intellectual property includes, without limitation, individual or multimedia works of art or music, records of confidential information generated or maintained by the university, date, texts, instructional materials, tests,  bibliographies, research findings, organisms, cells, viruses, dna sequences, other biological materials, probes, crystallographic coordinates, plant lines, chemical compounds, and theses. intellectual property may exist in a written or electronic (digital) form, may be raw or derived, and  may be in the form of text, multimedia, databases, graphics, digital images, video and audio  recordings, live video or audio broadcasts, performances, two- or three-dimensional works of art,  musical compositions, executions or processes, film, film strings, slides, charts, transparencies, or other visual/audio aids.

invention, as defined in 35 u.s.c. § 101, is any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof. an invention is patentable or  may otherwise be protected under 35 u.s.c § 101 et seq., and may include any novel variety of plant which is or may be protectable under the plant variety protection act (7 u.s.c. §2321 et seq.). 

net income means all gross revenue, including, without limitation, royalties, received by lipscomb with respect to intellectual property rights less all expenses incurred or encumbered by lipscomb for the protection, development, administration, or transfer of such intellectual property, including, without limitation, registration or licensing costs, legal expenses, and costs associated with any external management entities.  

org means lipscomb’s office of research and grants. 

patent means a property right granted by the u.s. government to an inventor to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling the invention throughout the united states or importing  the invention into the united states for a limited time in exchange for public disclosure of the  invention when the patent is granted. 

scholarly work product means any copyrightable work product that is an artistic creation of which constitutes, or is intended to disseminate the results of, academic research or scholarly study.  scholarly work product may include, without limitation, books, instructional materials, theses and dissertations, articles, poems, musical works, dramatic works, pantomimes and choreographic works, pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works, or other works of artistic imagination. software specifically needed to support a scholarly work product or which is designed to disseminate the results of academic research and scholarly study is also considered a scholarly work product. 

significant use of institutional resources means the utilization of lipscomb resources or facilities,  which may include, without limitation, any of the following: the utilization of lipscomb funding such  as start-up or seed funding; release/reassigned time provided to a covered person pursuant to the  terms of the covered person’s employment contract (unless the terms of such contract expressly  state that the covered person will own, together with any other applicable creator(s), the intellectual  property that is created, invented or discovered in connection with such release/reassigned time);  externally funded research or sponsored program funding; lipscomb facilities (including, without  limitation, classrooms, laboratories, athletic spaces, music spaces, theater spaces, offices, or other  physical space); lipscomb educational or research equipment; and/or student workers; provided,  however, that significant use of institutional resources does not relate to the utilization of lipscomb’s  library facilities. in general, intellectual property created, invented or discovered within the scope of employment or with substantive utilization of lipscomb resources or facilities is considered to be created, invented, or discovered through the significant use of institutional resources, while intellectual property created, invented or discovered outside of the scope of employment and with  no substantive utilization of lipscomb resources or facilities is not considered to be created, invented  or discovered through the significant use of institutional resources.  

trade secret means information that companies keep secret to give them an advantage over their competitors. 

trademark means any word, phrase, symbol, design, or a combination thereof that identifies the  source of goods or services. businesses and individuals use trademarks with their goods or services  so that customers recognize them in the marketplace and distinguish them from competitors.

u.s.c. means the united states code.  

usco means the united states copyright office, a part of the library of congress. 

work for hire means any of the following: 

• a work prepared by an employee of lipscomb within the scope of his or her employment; 
• a work specially ordered or commissioned and which lipscomb and the creator(s) expressly  agree in a signed, written instrument shall be considered as such; or  
• solely for copyright purposes, a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work, as a part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, as a translation, as a supplementary work, as a compilation, as an instructional text, as a test, as answer material for a test, or as an atlas, if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire. for purposes of the foregoing sentence, a “supplementary work” is a work prepared for publication as a secondary adjunct to a work by another author for the purpose of introducing, concluding,  illustrating, explaining, revising, commenting upon, or assisting in the use of the other work,  such as forewords, afterwards, pictorial illustrations, maps, charts, tables, editorial notes,  musical arrangements, answer material for tests, bibliographies, appendixes, and indexes,  and an “instructional text” is a literary, pictorial, or graphic work prepared for publication and with the purpose of use in systematic instructional activities. 

procedures

ownership of intellectual property 

lipscomb ownership of intellectual property 
general rule. subject to the exceptions set forth below, lipscomb shall be the sole owner of all  intellectual property that is (i) created, invented or discovered through the significant use of  institutional resources, (ii) supported directly or indirectly by funds administered by lipscomb, (iii)  developed within the scope of employment by employees, (iv) agreed in writing to be a work for  hire, or (v) assigned in writing to lipscomb. 
if applicable, the provost, upon consultation with the cro and general counsel, will determine  whether or not intellectual property has been created, invented or discovered through the significant  use of institutional resources based on information provided by the creator(s) in the org  intellectual property disclosure form. 

externally funded research or sponsored programs. any invention “conceived or first actually reduced to practice in performance” of a government-funded project is, in general, deemed to be owned by lipscomb. see 37 cfr § 401.1. any determinations regarding ownership of such  inventions, including assigning an exclusive license for federal use, shall be made by the provost,  upon consultation with the cro and general counsel. inventions and creations under federal  awards, regardless of the amount of funding received, are required to be disclosed to the federal government within a reasonable period of time pursuant to 37 cfr § 401 et seq. all disclosures to  lipscomb must be reported on the org intellectual property disclosure form, and org will be available to assist in identifying the appropriate federal or agency-specific intellectual property disclosure form. if the provost, upon consultation with the cro and general counsel, determines not to secure or protect intellectual property under the federal award, the federal government may secure or protect the intellectual property; provided, however, if the provost determines to secure or protect such intellectual property, the federal government shall be granted perpetual nonexclusive license(s) of all intellectual property. creators must comply with all contractual  requirements, terms and agreement clauses, and regulatory requirements of externally funded  research or sponsored programs. 

exceptions to lipscomb ownership of intellectual property 
scholarly work product. any scholarly work product shall be owned by the creator(s) and not  lipscomb, and any revenue generated as a result of such ownership shall reside entirely with the  creator(s), unless such scholarly work product was (i) created, invented or discovered through the  significant use of institutional resources, (ii) supported directly or indirectly by funds administered by lipscomb, (iii) developed as part of an externally funded research or sponsored program, (iv)  agreed in writing to be a work for hire, or (v) assigned in writing to lipscomb.  

with respect to scholarly work product (other than commercial textbooks) that is wholly owned by one or more covered persons and will be published, the covered persons shall use best efforts to secure a perpetual, royalty-free, nonexclusive, and nontransferable license from the publisher(s) for  lipscomb to use the scholarly work product for institutional and administrative purposes, provided that lipscomb does not distribute the work to third parties other than covered persons. any exceptions to this requirement must be approved by the provost, upon consultation with the cro  and general counsel.  

pre-existing rights. if intellectual property was wholly created, invented or discovered by a  creator(s) prior to the creator’s(s’) employment or engagement by lipscomb, or is otherwise a  derivative work of intellectual property that was wholly created, invented or discovered prior to the  creator’s employment or engagement by lipscomb, ownership shall reside with the creator(s). 

course requirement. intellectual property created, invented or discovered by any student(s) solely in fulfillment of an academic requirement (whether classroom, laboratory, research, or clinical),  including student scholarly work product, is owned by the student(s)-creator(s). the student(s) will not have ownership of such intellectual property if it was co-created, co-invented or co-discovered with a lipscomb employee, involved the significant use of institutional resources, was a work for  hire, was developed as part of an externally funded research or sponsored program, was governed under an existing legal agreement that specifies different intellectual property ownership rights, or  if the student(s) was employed by lipscomb and the intellectual property was developed as a  function of the student’s employment.  

unclear determination. if the ownership of intellectual property is not clearly determinable under the terms of this policy, ownership shall be determined by the provost, upon consultation with the  cro and general counsel, based upon available information, including, without limitation, any information provided on the org intellectual property disclosure form. 

disclosure of intellectual property 
general reporting requirement. any intellectual property that is created, invented or discovered by  a covered person must be reported with a reasonable amount of detail to org on the org intellectual  property disclosure form within thirty (30) days of creation, invention, or discovery, and in all cases,  prior to publishing the intellectual property publicly or disclosing the intellectual property to any individual or entity not affiliated with lipscomb. the purpose of this reporting requirement is to enable lipscomb to determine commercial potential, novelty, copyright or patent requirements,  ownership rights, and other related issues.  

should there be any disagreement regarding the date that an invention was created, invented or discovered, the prevailing date shall be the date that is identified by the creator(s) on the org  intellectual property disclosure form. for copyrightable material, the effective date shall be recognized as the date that the copyrightable material was completed.  

disclosure to third parties. covered persons shall not disclose any unpublished, non-patented or non copyrighted intellectual property that is wholly or partially owned or controlled by lipscomb to any external third party without prior approval of the provost, upon consultation with the cro and  general counsel. if a covered person plans, desires or intends to discuss with or disclose to an external third party any such intellectual property, the covered person must first coordinate with the cro and general counsel to prepare a confidentiality agreement, which must be signed by the appropriate parties prior to the discussion or disclosure of such intellectual property. a covered person may disclose the need for such an agreement in the org intellectual property disclosure  form. if a covered person receives a proposed agreement from a third party that relates to intellectual property that is wholly or partially owned or controlled by lipscomb, the covered person shall deliver the agreement to the cro and general counsel for review, approval, and consideration prior to execution. all agreements with third parties related to lipscomb-owned intellectual  property must be prepared, processed and executed in accordance with lipscomb policies and procedures, including, without limitation, lipscomb’s contract approval policy.  

utilization of artificial intelligence. in all circumstances, creators must disclose, through proper  completion and submission of the org intellectual property disclosure form, the level at which any  artificial intelligence was utilized in the creation, invention or discovery of intellectual property,  including, without limitation, the use of text and image resources, and other similar resources,  whether subscription-based or open source. this disclosure requirement excludes the utilization of  common editing and writing tools, including, without limitation, auto-correct, spellcheck, and other  similar resources embedded within applicable software. (this requirement is aligned with the  statement of policy issued by usco on march 16, 2023.) 

public domain. if a creator(s) decides that all rights to any intellectual property that is created,  invented or discovered by the creator(s) should irrevocably be released to the public domain, the creator(s) must first obtain approval of the provost, upon consultation with the cro and general  counsel, to ensure that such release does not create a conflict with any of lipscomb’s current or  pending agreements or arrangements, including with any third party who contributed toward  creation, invention or discovery of the intellectual property. 

lipscomb rights 
use of intellectual property for certain purposes 
for copyrightable works that are not owned by lipscomb, in accordance with the section above entitled “exceptions to lipscomb ownership of intellectual property,” lipscomb retains a fully paid,  perpetual, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use, re-use, distribute, reproduce, display, make  derivative works, and make all traditional, customary or reasonable academic use of all student assignments, papers, essays, theses, dissertations, and instructional materials for the educational and  research purposes of lipscomb and covered persons. such license includes the right to use content and structure of any course and to revise and update course material for the purpose of continuing to offer the course of instruction or to develop and offer derivative courses of instruction, in both conventional and non-conventional settings (including, without limitation, any online distance education class, course, project or program). the foregoing license does not include a royalty-free  license to use or to reproduce a published textbook for classroom or library use. lipscomb will acknowledge the creator(s) of these works unless the creator(s) request otherwise. lipscomb retains the right to use such course materials for its own educational and research purposes,  including archiving the materials. 

brands 
lipscomb’s trademarks, copyrights, service marks, brand, logos, and names are the property of  lipscomb. no intellectual property that is wholly or partially owned or controlled by lipscomb shall  include lipscomb’s trademarks, copyrights, service marks, brand, logos, or names without the  express written permission of lipscomb. any requests for such use must be approved by the provost,  upon consultation with the cro and general counsel.  

common law rights 
lipscomb’s ownership of intellectual property may exist at the time of the creation, invention, or  discovery thereof. covered persons shall only utilize copyright, trademark, or other intellectual  property markings or symbols with respect to intellectual property that is wholly or partially owned  or controlled by lipscomb when permitted under applicable law and upon approval by the provost,  upon consultation with the cro and general counsel, whether or not intellectual property protection has been applied for or granted. 

net income from intellectual property 
distribution of net income 
unless otherwise agreed to in writing by lipscomb and the creator(s), in the event that lipscomb  receives revenue from intellectual property that is derived from academic research or scholarly  study and is not a work for hire, the net income will be distributed as follows on an annual basis:

• 50% to the creator(s), and their legally recognized heirs; 
• 20% to org; 
• 20% to lipscomb; and 
• 10% to the creator’s college or academic unit, which shall be allocated pro rata among  colleges or academic units if one or more creators are associated with different colleges or  academic units.  

the distribution of any net income to a creator who is an employee of lipscomb will be subject to  customary withholding tax, social security tax and other employment taxes as may be required by  the state of tennessee and the united states 

changes to distribution 
the net income distribution set forth above shall be recognized and followed unless a different distribution is approved by the provost, the dean(s) of the creator’s college(s), and the senior vice  president for finance and technology, or their equivalents, upon consultation with the cro and  general counsel. a different distribution might be approved for the following reasons, among others: 

• if the intellectual property was created, invented, or discovered in connection with an  externally funded research or sponsored program, and the awarding agency (including any  federal agency) has specified distribution rates or amounts with respect to such intellectual  property in the corresponding terms and conditions governing such award or such  distribution rates or amounts are specified by federal or state laws or regulations;
• a non-governmental third party (e.g., an institution of higher education, business, industry,  hospital, or other entity) has a shared right and interest in the intellectual property and is  entitled to receive a distribution pursuant to an enforceable, written agreement; 
• a different distribution is required pursuant to federal or state laws or regulations; or
• unforeseen circumstances create an exigent need for redistribution, such as the elimination or change of an academic unit that was previously entitled to receive a distribution. 

net income sharing 
in the event that multiple creators have contributed to the creation, invention or discovery of intellectual property that is subject to distribution, as set forth above, the creators must mutually agree upon the allocation of net income distributions among the creators and notify the org in  writing of such allocation. 

disputes 
resolution 
questions or disputes related to the treatment or characterization of intellectual property pursuant to this policy, including the ownership of intellectual property, should be submitted to and will be resolved by the provost, upon consultation with the cro and general counsel.  

appeals 
any decisions and determinations made by the provost with respect to this policy may be appealed  by providing a written statement with supporting documentation to the president within thirty (30)  days of the determination by the provost. an appeal to the president does not include a hearing, nor  does it require the president to meet with the covered person(s) who submitted the appeal. the  president, or his or her designee(s), may, in the president’s sole discretion, consider any such written  statement and supporting documentation along with any other information provided by the provost.  the president, or his or her designee(s), shall issue a determination, which shall be final and effective  immediately, or as otherwise indicated by the president.  

research misconduct 
concerns regarding research misconduct or the misappropriation of resources in the creation,  invention, discovery or reporting of intellectual property shall be reported to the cro or research  integrity officer, which will be addressed in accordance with lipscomb policies and procedures. 

roles and responsibilities 
provost 
in addition to the other responsibilities set forth in this policy, the provost will, upon consultation  with the cro and general counsel: 

• determine the necessity of securing any intellectual property protection, based upon  information provided in the org intellectual property disclosure form, the novelty of the  intellectual property, the potential for revenue generation (above the costs required for  intellectual property protection), and other relevant factors; and 
• identify the type of intellectual property protection sought on behalf of lipscomb after full  disclosure has been received, or conversely, identify if lipscomb will assign or release all  intellectual property rights to the creator(s).

org 
org reports to the office of the provost and provides support for certain intellectual property  matters. in particular, org has the following responsibilities in connection with this policy: reviews  the submission of org intellectual property disclosure forms; provides support for reporting and  compliance requirements related to externally funded research or sponsored programs; assists  with certain matters related to technology transfer and the protection of intellectual property; and  has other responsibilities set forth in this policy. org does not provide support or management of any intellectual property that is not owned, at least in part, by lipscomb. the org will, upon  consultation with general counsel:  

• establish appropriate maintenance/management protocols for certain protected intellectual  property; and 
• provide guidance regarding the transfer of ownership, sale, or marketing/commercialization  of certain intellectual property that is wholly or partially owned or controlled by lipscomb. 

covered persons 
in addition to the other responsibilities set forth in this policy, each covered person must:

• timely disclose to org any conflict of interest, either real or perceived, related to the  creation, invention or discovery of intellectual property, including any disclosures required  for the administration or reporting of externally funded research or sponsored programs;
• maintain and utilize intellectual property in accordance with local, state, and federal laws and  regulations, and ensure that all ongoing activities are compliant with lipscomb policies and  procedures; 
• if applicable, assign title to intellectual property to lipscomb to enable lipscomb to satisfy  the terms of any applicable funding or contractual arrangement; 
• as necessary, cooperate with lipscomb in securing and protecting any intellectual property that is wholly or partially owned or controlled by lipscomb, including cooperation in  obtaining patent, copyright, or other suitable protection for such intellectual property and in  legal actions taken in response to alleged infringement; 
• if the covered person engages in outside consulting work, ensure that no agreement or  arrangement with an external third party is ever in conflict with the terms of this policy,  including any arrangement that might result in the assignment of intellectual property rights  to a third party without approval of the provost; 
• if the covered person is entitled to receive distributions of net income in accordance with  the terms of this policy, ensure that org has current contact information upon the covered  person’s departure from lipscomb so that lipscomb may make appropriate payments and  properly submit irs reports on form 1099-misc, as may be necessary; and 
• retain all data, information, schematics, artwork, files, and other materials related to intellectual property in a format that is reasonable accessible. such materials should be  retained for the life cycle of the intellectual property that is wholly or partially owned or  controlled by lipscomb, regardless of the covered person’s employment status. upon  departure from lipscomb, each covered person should retain copies of such materials,  ensuring that all original sources of such materials remain within the archives of org.  

for avoidance of doubt, covered persons do not have any authority to own, sell, or transfer  ownership of rights of intellectual property that is wholly or partially owned or controlled by  lipscomb without prior approval of the provost and senior vice president for finance and  technology, or its equivalent, upon consultation with the cro and general counsel. 

conflict 
this policy is subject to applicable law. in the event of a conflict between the provisions of this policy  and applicable law, including, without limitation, 17 u.s.c. § 101 et seq. or 37 cfr, the provisions of  applicable law shall control.  

forms

org intellectual property disclosure form. download here.  

contact  

for additional information or questions regarding this policy, contact the office of research and  grants, which can be reached at 615.966.5907.
 

download pdf