5.2. Workplace Policies and Procedures
Kennesaw State University is an educational community comprised of individuals from different ethnic, racial and religious groups and of different genders, political beliefs, ages, abilities and sexual orientations. In light of this diversity, Kennesaw State University is resolved to contribute to the development of an integrated, pluralistic society in which individuals model and support humaneness and respect for the individual.
Kennesaw State University is committed to a diversity of intellectual viewpoints. We trust in a genuine free marketplace of ideas where faculty and students are encouraged to express their considered opinions openly. We further believe that this intellectual exchange is healthy, democratic, and produces new insights. The exchange of ideas is also a splendid means of encouraging "critical thinking" as long as it is conducted within an atmosphere that respects the dignity of all concerned.
The University is committed to providing quality education, which is enhanced by the perspectives provided by individuals and groups with varying backgrounds and views. Racism, sexism and other discriminatory attitudes and behaviors impede learning and working. Conversely, respect for differences enhances educational and work experiences. Kennesaw State University is dedicated to creating an environment that cherishes and nourishes this diversity.
Kennesaw State University ("University") is dedicated to teaching, research, and the extension of knowledge to the public. Among its primary objectives are the development of new and useful devices, processes, computer software, and artistic and literary works; and the publication and creation of scholarly works. Such activities:
- contribute to the professional development of the faculty, staff and students involved;
- enhance the reputation of the University;
- provide additional educational opportunities for participating students; and
- promote the general welfare of the public at large.
In some cases, patentable inventions, copyrightable materials, and other intellectual property may be developed through activities of University faculty, staff, or students who have been aided in their efforts by University resources. In such cases, the University has an interest in insuring and expediting the development, marketing, and utilization of the intellectual property. At the same time, the rights, privileges, and incentives of the inventor(s) or creator(s) must be preserved so that their abilities and those of other University faculty, staff, or students may be further encouraged and stimulated.
The University recognizes and encourages the publication of scholarly works as an integral part of the processes of teaching, research, and service. Frequently through individual effort and initiative, faculty, staff, and students develop articles, pamphlets, books, and other scholarly works which may be subject to copyright and which may generate royalty income for the author. Scholarly works may also result from work supported either partially or primarily by the University. Recent technological advances have increased the complexity of determining ownership interests in Intellectual Property. In some instances, Intellectual Property may become, in whole or in part, the property of the Board of Regents. When this Policy speaks to ownership of Intellectual Property by the University, the Board of Regents shall be the owner, unless the Board of Regents has transferred ownership to an affiliated nonprofit organization of the University.
The foregoing considered, the University does hereby establish the following policy with respect to the development, protection, and transfer of rights to Intellectual Property resulting from the work of its faculty, staff or students. This policy shall be applicable to all full or part-time faculty, staff or students of the University.
"Intellectual Property" (IP) shall be deemed to refer to patentable materials, copyrighted materials, trademarks, software, and trade secrets, whether or not formal protection is sought.
"Faculty Member, Staff Member, and Student": For purposes of this policy, students are individuals who are enrolled for any course at the University. A faculty or staff member is any person who is employed on a full-time or part-time basis by the University.
"Patentable Materials" shall be deemed to refer to items which reasonably appear to qualify for protection under the patent laws of the United States or other protective statutes, including Novel Plant Varieties and Patentable Plants, whether or not patentable thereunder.
"Copyrighted Materials" shall include the following: (1) books, journal articles, texts, glossaries, bibliographies, study guides, laboratory manuals, syllabi, tests and proposals; (2) lectures, musical or dramatic compositions, unpublished scripts; (3) films, filmstrips, charts, transparencies, and other visual aids; (4) video and audio tapes or cassettes; (5) live video and audio broadcasts; (6) programmed instructional materials; (7) mask works; and (8) other materials or works other than software which qualify for protection under the copyright laws of the United States (See 17 U.S.C. § 102 et seq.) or other protective statutes whether or not registered thereunder.
"Software" shall include one or more computer programs existing in any form, or any associated operational procedures, manuals or other documentation, whether or not protectable or protected by patent or copyright. The term "computer program" shall mean a set of instructions, statements or related data that, in actual or modified form, is capable of causing a computer or computer system to perform specified functions.
"Trademarks" shall include all trademarks, service marks, trade names, seals, symbols, designs, slogans, or logotypes developed by or associated with the University. (See 15 U.S.C. § 1127.)
"Trade Secrets" means information including, but not limited to, technical or nontechnical data, a formula, a pattern, a compilation, a program, a device, a method, a technique, a drawing, a process, financial data, financial plans, product plans, or a list of actual or potential customers or suppliers which: (I) derives economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use; and (ii) is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy. (See O.C.G.A. § 10- 1-761.)
"Patentable Plant" means an asexually reproduced distinct and new variety of plant.
(See 35 U.S.C. § 161.)
"Mask Work" means a series of related images, however fixed or encoded: (I) having or representing the predetermined, three-dimensional pattern of metallic, insulating, or semiconductor material present or removed from the layers of a semiconductor chip product; and (ii) in which series the relation of the images to one another is that each image has the pattern of the surface of one form of the semiconductor chip product. (See 17 U.S.C. § 901.)
"Novel Plant Variety" means a novel variety of sexually reproduced plant.
(See 7 U.S.C. § 2321 et seq.)
"Creator" and "Originator," which are used interchangeably in this Intellectual Property Policy, shall mean the creator, author, inventor, or similar person and that person's executor, heirs, successors, and assigns.
Determination of Rights and Equities in Intellectual Property
A. Individual Effort
Ownership rights to Intellectual Property developed by faculty, staff or students of the institution shall reside with the inventor or creator of such Intellectual Property provided that:
- there is no use, except in a purely incidental way, of institution resources in the creation of such Intellectual Property (unless such resources are available without charge to the public);
- the Intellectual Property is not prepared in accordance with the terms of an institution contract or grant;
- the Intellectual Property is not developed by faculty, staff or students as a specific institution assignment. The general obligation to produce scholarly and creative works does not constitute a specific assignment for this purpose. The nature and extent of the use of institution re-sources shall be subject to institution regulations and shall be determined by the institution.
B. Institution-Assigned Efforts
Ownership of Intellectual Property developed as a result of assigned institutional effort shall reside with the institution; however, sharing of royalty income with the inventor or creator is authorized as an incentive to encourage further development of Intellectual Property. The nature and extent of inventor or creator participation in royalty income, however, shall be subject to institution regulations.
C. Institution-Assisted Individual Effort
Ownership of Intellectual Property developed by faculty, staff or students of the institution where the institution provides support of their efforts or use of institution resources in more than a purely incidental way (unless such resources are available without charge to the public) shall be shared by the inventor or creator and the institution. The nature and extent of inventor or creator participation in royalty income, however, shall be subject to institution regulations.
D. Sponsor-Supported Efforts
The grant or contract between the sponsor and the University, under which Intellectual Property is produced, may contain specific provisions with respect to disposition of rights or interests in the Intellectual Property. Where the creator(s) or the University retains any portion of these rights or interests, the classification of such portion of the rights or interests in the Intellectual Property may be deemed to be Individual-Effort, University-Assigned Effort, or University-Assisted Effort. This classification shall be determined in accordance with DEFINITIONS, Paragraphs 2. and 3. on or before the date on which the authorized University representative(s) execute the grant agreement or contract.
Policy Implementation and Procedures
A. Composition of the IPC
The IPC will consist of eight members. Six of these members shall be appointed by the President and two are members ex officio. The President shall appoint two (2) faculty members, one (1) staff member, one (1) student, one (1) academic department chair, and one (1) academic dean all based on recommendations from the appropriate constituent groups. IPC members appointed by the President shall serve two-year, staggered terms. The VP of finance or his or her designee shall be an ex officio, voting member. The Vice President for Research/Dean of Graduate Studies shall serve as an ex officio, nonvoting member. The President shall designate, from among the appointed members, one member as chair of the IPC.
B. Duties of the IPC
The duties of this group will include the following: oversee IPP implementation; recommend changes in the IPP; review IPs that are referred to it through the disclosure process described below in POLICY IMPLEMENTATION AND PROCEDURES, Section D of this IPP; and adjudicate IP-related disputes.
The IPC shall have exclusive jurisdiction of disputes brought by the creator regarding IP classifications made by deans or their equivalents, in accordance with POLICY IMPLEMENTATION AND PROCEDURES, Section D, paragraph 2, below. Such disputes will be heard by a panel of three IPC members appointed by the IPC Chair. Adjudication shall include an oral hearing, a decision rendered within 60 days of the request, and a written explanation of the decision and underlying rationale. Appeals, which may be made by either the creator or the University, shall be heard by the entire IPC plus two ad hoc members, one chosen by the creator and the other chosen by the relevant supervisor. Any further appeals go to the President.
C. The University has elected, through the IPC and with the approval of the President, to release the management of IP to which the University has title or an interest to the creator thereof for management and development as a private venture after the execution of an agreement providing for a suitable division of royalty income.
D. Disclosure Policy & Procedure
Property Requiring Disclosure. An IP that is a University-Supported effort that is the subject of an agreement between faculty, staff, or students on one hand, and an external entity on the other, shall be disclosed.
Disclosure Process & Content
A. If disclosure is required, the creator must disclose the IP before a contract or agreement is signed or consideration is accepted in exchange for any interest in the IP, before the IP is disclosed to the public, or before any application is made to patent a patentable IP.
B. Required disclosures shall be submitted on a standard KSU IP Disclosure Form ("Form") (see Appendix) signed by the creator. The Form shall disclose (i) the existence of an intellectual property; (ii) the legal category (such as copyright, patent, trade mark, trade secret, mask work, plant) of the intellectual property created; (iii) a brief description, that need not include confidential or proprietary information the disclosure of which would jeopardize the commercial value of the IP; (iv) the creator's classification of the IP; and (v) supervisory and IPC classifications of the IP, as applicable. The Form shall be signed by reviewing supervisor(s) and the IPC chair, as applicable.
C. All Forms shall initially be delivered in hardcopy to the department chair or immediate supervisor ("Supervisor"). After initial review the supervisor shall forward the Form, within 10 business days of receipt thereof, to the college dean or next immediate supervisor ("dean") with copy to the creator, indicating the supervisor's classification. If the creator disagrees with the supervisor's classification, the creator may submit to the dean a memorandum in support of the creator's classification. The dean, within 10 business days of receipt, shall review the Form and the creator's memorandum, if any, and either ratify or alter the supervisor's classification.
D. In the case of IP classified by the dean as "university assisted" or "university assigned," the disclosure and classification must then be reviewed and filed by the IPC.
E. If the creator disagrees with the supervisor's or dean's classification of an IP, then the creator may refer the dispute by a signed request copied to the chair, dean, and IPC chair, within 60 days of receipt of the supervisor's classification thereof, to the IPC for adjudication following the dispute resolution procedures set forth at POLICY IMPLEMENTATION AND PROCEDURES, Section B, above.
The University has adopted the following appeal procedure within the University in the event of a disagreement as to the classification, ownership and use of IP subject to this Policy.
Appeals of classification decisions of the IPC shall be made to the President of the University. Appeals shall be submitted in writing within 10 days of the committee's decision.
Preemption by Board of Regents' Policy
In the event of conflict between any provision of this policy and any policy of the Board of Regents, the latter shall prevail.
Intellectual Property Disclosure Form
Legal Category ______________________________________________________________
Annual net pre-tax income to the creator in $U.S. as estimated by Creator(s)
at the time of disclosure ______________________________________________________
I certify that I am the creator of the intellectual property hereby disclosed.
Creator(s) _______________________________ Date _____________________
Supervisor _______________________________ Date _____________________
Dean ___________________________________ Date _____________________
Purpose of this Policy
Kennesaw State University is committed to actions and policies that support the responsible conduct of research, that provide for prompt and fair investigations of alleged misconduct, and that appropriately protect the work and reputations of any faculty, staff, or students involved in such allegations or investigations.
This policy is adopted in compliance with various federal laws, regulations and policies dealing with misconduct in research including the Health Research Extension Act of 1985 (42 U.S.C. 289b) and Public Health Service (PHS) regulations to be promulgated pursuant to that Act. Also applicable is the National Science Foundation (NSF) regulation 45 CFR Part 689. These laws, regulations, and policies require universities receiving federal funds to establish administrative procedures for reviewing allegations of misconduct in connection with research. This policy pertains to all research and creative activity (including federally funded research) conducted at Kennesaw State University. The Vice President for Research and Dean of the Graduate College, acting as the University's Research Integrity Officer, is responsible for implementing this policy and for acting as liaison with external agencies and/or individuals making allegations.
This policy shall apply to Kennesaw State University (KSU) staff, instructional, administrative, and research faculty, and other members of the University's community including, without limit, graduate student research assistants, graduate student teaching assistants, graduate student staff, undergraduate students employed in research or other scholarly activity, post-doctoral fellows and post doctoral research associates, visiting faculty or staff, faculty or staff on sabbatical leave, adjunct faculty when performing University work, and faculty or staff on leave without pay. This policy applies to students only when acting in the course of their employment with the University.
"Allegation" means any written or oral statement or other indication of possible scholarly misconduct made to an institutional official.
"Complainant" is an individual filing a written complaint of misconduct.
"Conflict of Interest" means the real or apparent interference of one person's interests with the interests of another person, where potential bias may occur due to prior or existing personal or professional relationships.
"Day" or "Days" shall refer to working days.
"Evidence" refers to documents, statements of any type which support or refute allegations and testimony.
"Good faith allegation" means an allegation made with the honest belief that scholarly misconduct may have occurred. An allegation is not in good faith if it is made with reckless disregard for or willful ignorance of facts that would disprove the allegation.
"Initial Inquiry" is an information-gathering and initial fact finding process to determine whether an allegation or apparent instance of misconduct warrants a formal Investigation. An Inquiry should be conducted with minimum publicity and maximum confidentiality.
"Investigation" is a formal examination and evaluation of all relevant facts to determine if an instance of misconduct has taken place, to evaluate its seriousness, and if possible, to determine responsibility and the extent of any adverse effects resulting from the misconduct.
"Misconduct" or "scholarly misconduct" is the fabrication or falsification of data, plagiarism, or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the academic or research community for proposing, conducting or reporting research or scholarly activity. It does not include honest error or honest differences in interpretation or judgments of data. Additionally, this definition includes violations of University policy pertaining to research, including the failure to obtain proper review and approval by the University committees responsible for research involving human subjects; radioactive materials; biohazards, as well as the failure to comply with rules and guidelines set forth by the committees responsible for these areas.
"NSF" refers to the National Science Foundation.
"Plagiarism" is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his or her writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one's own mind. It involves the deliberate use of any outside source without proper acknowledgment. Plagiarism is scholarly misconduct whether it occurs in any published work, or in applications for funding.
"PHS" refers to the Public Health Service.
"President" is the President of Kennesaw State University.
"Respondent" is an individual who is the subject of an inquiry or investigation.
"University" is Kennesaw State University.
"Provost and Vice President" refers to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.
Reporting of Possible Misconduct
All employees or individuals associated with Kennesaw State University shall report observed, suspected, or apparent misconduct to the Research Integrity Officer (Vice President for Research and Dean of the Graduate College). If an individual is unsure as to whether a suspected incident falls within the definition of scholarly misconduct, he/she may call the Research Integrity Officer to discuss the suspected misconduct informally. Such consultation shall be kept confidential to the extent permissible by law.
Ultimately, all allegations of misconduct shall be made in writing, signed by the Complainant, and shall be made in confidence directly to the Research Integrity Officer. Upon receipt of a written complaint, the Research Integrity Officer shall inform the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, the University Legal Advisor, and the Respondent of the allegation. Every effort should be made to resolve the situation at this level. In the event that the person making the allegation considers the Research Integrity Officer and/or the Provost and Vice President to have a conflict of interest, the allegation may be reported directly to the President. Actions constituting misconduct as defined herein shall not be grieveable through the Faculty Grievance Process.
Should attempts to resolve the situation be unsuccessful, the Research Integrity Officer shall review the written complaint and consult with the University Legal Advisor to determine whether probable cause exists to conduct an Initial Inquiry, whether PHS or NSF support is involved, and whether the allegation falls under either the PHS or NSF definition of misconduct. There is not always sufficient evidence or information to permit further inquiry into an allegation. If the issue involved is found not to warrant further inquiry, satisfactory resolution through means other than this policy should be sought and to the extent possible, the identity of the complainant(s) shall remain confidential.
Following the preliminary assessment, if the Research Integrity Officer, in consultation with the Provost and Vice President and the University Legal Counsel, determines that the allegation provides sufficient information to allow specific follow-up, he or she will notify, in writing, with return receipt, the Respondent's College Dean and the Respondent, and immediately begin the Initial Inquiry. At this point, if outside funding is involved, the funding agency should be notified that an investigation has been initiated. The purpose of the Initial Inquiry is to make a preliminary evaluation of the available evidence and testimony of the Complainant, the Respondent, and key witnesses to determine whether there is sufficient evidence of possible scholarly misconduct to warrant an investigation. The purpose of the Inquiry is NOT to reach a final conclusion about whether misconduct definitely occurred or who was responsible. If it is determined that an Initial Inquiry is necessary, every reasonable effort shall be made to protect the identity of the individual(s) involved. (If the process reaches the investigative phase, however, the right of the Respondent to confront the Complainant requires that the identity of the Complainant be revealed).
The Research Integrity Officer is responsible for forming an Inquiry Committee, the membership of which shall be determined by the Research Integrity Officer, the Dean of the Respondent's College, and the Provost and Vice-President.
If it is determined that the formation of an Inquiry Committee is necessary, the Committee and Committee chair will be appointed within 10 days of the initiation of the Inquiry. The Inquiry Committee shall consist of a minimum of three persons who do not have real or apparent conflicts of interest in the case, are unbiased, and have the necessary and appropriate expertise to carry out a thorough and authoritative evaluation of the relevant evidence, interview the principals and key witnesses, and to conduct the Inquiry. These individuals may be faculty, subject matter experts, administrators, lawyers, or other qualified persons, and they may be from inside or outside the University.
Members of the Committee and experts will agree in writing to observe the confidentiality of the proceeding and any information or documents reviewed as part of the Inquiry. Outside of the official proceedings of the Committee, they may not discuss the proceedings with the Respondent, Complainant, witnesses, or anyone not authorized by the Research Integrity Officer to have knowledge of the Inquiry.
The Research Integrity Officer will notify the Respondent of the proposed Committee membership within five (5) days of its formation, in writing, with return receipt. If the Respondent submits a written objection to any appointed member of the Inquiry Committee or expert based on bias or conflict of interest, within five (5) days, the Research Integrity Officer will immediately determine whether to replace the challenged member or expert with a qualified substitute.
Notification of the Appropriate Parties
Upon initiation of the Inquiry, the Research Integrity Officer shall notify the Respondent in writing, with return receipt, that a complaint of misconduct has been received and advise the Respondent of the Inquiry. The notification shall identify the research project in question, and the specific allegations, define misconduct, identify PHS or NSF funding, if involved, list the names of the members of the Inquiry Committee (if appointed) and experts (if any), explain the Respondent's opportunity to challenge the appointment of a member of the Committee or expert for bias or conflict of interest, to be assisted by counsel, to be interviewed, to present evidence to the Committee, and to comment on the Inquiry report; address the Respondent's obligation as an employee of the University to cooperate; describe the University's policy on protecting the Complainant against retaliation, and the need to maintain the Complainant's confidentiality during the Inquiry, and any subsequent proceedings.
Simultaneously, the Respondent will be notified that the relevant research records will be located, collected, inventoried, and secured in order to prevent the loss, alteration, or fraudulent creation of records. (Research records produced under federal grants, cooperative agreements, and most contracts are the property of the University, and employees cannot interfere with the University's right of access to them.) The documents and materials to be sequestered shall include all of the original items (or copies, if originals cannot be located) that may be relevant to the allegations. Additionally, records from other individuals, such as co-authors, collaborators, or Complainant(s) may need to be sequestered. The Research Integrity Officer shall obtain the assistance of the Respondent's supervisor and University Legal Counsel in this process, as necessary. If the Respondent is not available, sequestration may begin in the Respondent's absence. The Respondent shall not be notified in advance of the sequestration of research records.
To protect the rights of the Respondent and all other involved individuals, as well as to enable the University and its representatives to meet their institutional, regulatory, and legal responsibilities, documentation of custody must be ensured and maintained, with the originals kept intact and unmodified. Therefore, a copy of a dated receipt should be signed by the sequestering official, and the person from whom an item is collected, and a copy of the receipt should be given to the person from whom the record is taken.
If it is not possible to prepare a complete inventory list at the time of collection, one should be prepared as soon as possible, and then a copy should be given to the person from whom the items were collected within ten working days of the request. If the copy cannot be delivered to the individual within ten working days, a written explanation of the relevant circumstances, along with the anticipated delivery date, shall be transmitted in confidence to that individual. This explanation shall become a part of the Inquiry records. When the requested copy is delivered to the person from whom the original item has been taken, a dated receipt shall be signed by that person and the designated University official, with copies given to both individuals. The Research Integrity Officer shall be responsible for maintaining files of all documents and evidence and for the confidentiality and the security of the files.
The Research Integrity Officer and Vice President, in consultation with appropriate (including legal) advisor(s) shall determine what additional notification(s) is necessary, including if and when external funding agencies should be notified. Any such notification shall include a complete description of the evidence and shall be provided by the Vice President. The Research Integrity Officer, the Provost and Vice President and/or the Inquiry Committee may meet separately with the Respondent and Complainant and shall review all pertinent and reasonable documentation to determine if a formal Investigation should be recommended. Refusal on the part of the Respondent to cooperate shall be grounds for the recommendation for an Investigation.
The Respondent may consult with legal counsel or a non-lawyer personal advisor (who is not a principal or witness in the case) to seek advice, and may be accompanied by legal counsel or a non-lawyer personal advisor to any meeting on this matter. The Respondent's legal counsel's role, as well as the personal advisor's role is limited to advising the Respondent. Neither the legal counsel nor the personal advisor may participate in any administrative proceedings.
Charge to the Committee and the First Meeting
The Research Integrity Officer, or his or her designee will prepare a charge for the Inquiry Committee that states the purpose of the Inquiry, describes the allegations and any related issues, outlines the appropriate procedures for conducting the Inquiry, assists the Committee with organizing plans for the Inquiry, and answers any questions raised by the Committee. The Research Integrity Officer, his or her designee, and the University Legal Counsel will be present or available throughout the Inquiry to advise the Committee as needed.
The purpose of an interview at the Inquiry stage is to allow each Respondent, Complainant, or witness to tell his or her side of the story. Before an interview, the Committee should provide each witness with a summary of the matters or issues intended to be covered at the interview. If the Committee raises additional matters, the witness should be given an opportunity to supplement the record in writing or in another interview. Interviews with the Respondent will be transcribed or tape recorded. Interviews with anyone else will be summarized, tape-recorded, or transcribed. A transcript or summary of the interview will be provided to each witness for review and correction of errors. Witnesses may add comments or information. Changes to the transcript or summary will be made only to correct factual efforts.
Witnesses may be accompanied and advised by legal counsel or by a non-legal advisor who is not a principal or witness in the case. However, the counsel or advisor may only advise the witness and may not participate directly in the interview. Witnesses will respond directly to the interview questions.
If the Respondent admits to the misconduct, the Respondent should be asked immediately to sign a statement attesting to the occurrence and extent of the misconduct. Normally, an admission is a sufficient basis to proceed directly to an Investigation. However, the admission may not be a sufficient basis for closing a case. Further investigation may be needed to determine the extent of the misconduct or to explore additional issues. If an admission is made, the Research Integrity Officer, in consultation with University Legal Counsel and other appropriate persons, will determine whether there is a sufficient basis to close a case, after the admission is fully documented and all appropriate procedural steps are taken.
The Inquiry Committee will evaluate the evidence and testimony obtained during the Inquiry. After consultation with the Research Integrity Officer, Vice-President, and University Legal Counsel, the Committee members will decide whether there is sufficient evidence of possible misconduct to recommend further investigation. The scope of the Inquiry does NOT include deciding whether misconduct occurred or conducting exhaustive interviews and analyses.
The Inquiry Report
The Inquiry shall be completed and a written report of the findings shall be prepared and submitted to the Provost and Vice President within 45 days following its first meeting, unless the Research Integrity Officer approves an extension for good cause. If the Inquiry cannot be completed within 60 days, a report shall be made to the Provost and Vice President citing progress to date, the reasons for the delay, and the estimated completion date. The Respondent and any other individual(s) involved shall be informed of the delay.
The final report shall contain the name and title of the committee members and experts, if any; the allegations; whether a PHS or NSF funded project; a summary of the Inquiry process used; a list of the records reviewed; summaries of any interviews; a description of the evidence in sufficient detail to demonstrate whether an Investigation is warranted or not; and the Committee's determination as to whether an Investigation is recommended and whether any other actions should be taken if an Investigation is not recommended. University Legal Counsel will review the Report for legal sufficiency. The Respondent shall be provided a copy of the Inquiry Report, with return receipt. The Complainant will be provided with those portions of the draft report that address the Complainant's role and opinions in the Investigation. The Research Integrity Officer may establish reasonable conditions for review to protect the confidentiality of the draft report. Within 15 days of the receipt of the draft report, the Respondent and Complainant will provide their comments, if any, to the Inquiry Committee. Any comments that the Respondent or Complainant submits on the draft report will become part of the final report and record. Based on the comments, the Inquiry Committee may revise the report as appropriate.
If the University plans to terminate an Inquiry of an allegation of misconduct on a PHS or NSF funded project, for any reason, without completing all relevant requirements under the applicable subparts or sections (e.g., 50.103 (d) for PHS and 689.3 for NSF), a report of such planned termination, including a description of the reasons for such termination shall be made to the agency's cognizant office, which will then decide whether further Inquiry should be undertaken.
If the Inquiry reveals substantial evidence of misconduct, the Research Integrity Officer will transmit the final report and any comments to the Provost Vice President who will make the determination of whether findings from the Inquiry provide sufficient evidence of possible scholarly misconduct to justify conducting an Investigation. The Inquiry is completed when the Provost and Vice President makes this determination.
The Vice President, in consultation with the Research Integrity Officer, the University Legal Advisor, and other appropriate parties, shall reach his/her determination on a case by case basis, considering all relevant factors, including, but not limited to: (1) the accuracy and reliability of the source of the allegation of misconduct; (2) the seriousness of the alleged misconduct; (3) the scope of the alleged incident, and the context in which it became known; and (4) other information obtained during the Inquiry. If an Investigation is initiated, any outside sponsoring agency that may be involved or have an interest in the alleged misconduct shall be notified. The Vice President, in consultation with the Research Integrity Officer and University Legal Advisor, shall determine what such notification will include and to whom it will be directed. The Complainant and the Respondent shall be notified in writing, with return receipt, when an Investigation will follow.
If the Inquiry does not produce substantial evidence of misconduct, the Provost and Vice President shall so inform the person who made the allegation, the Respondent, the University Legal Advisor and the President, and any other individual(s) involved in the Inquiry to whom the identity of the Respondent was disclosed, and the matter shall be closed. The University shall make diligent efforts to restore the reputation of the Respondent by providing all relevant parties with a factual report of the outcome and the conclusions of the Inquiry. The University shall maintain sufficiently detailed documentation of the Inquiry to enable it to respond to potential requests to review the reasons for determining that an Investigation was not warranted. Such records will be maintained in the Office of the Vice President for Research/Graduate Dean in a secure manner in accordance with University System of Georgia Records Retention Policies.
If the allegation had been made in good faith, the University shall make diligent efforts to protect against retaliation the positions and reputations of the Complainant(s) and other individuals who have cooperated with the University's Inquiry. Any alleged or apparent retaliation will be reported immediately to the Research Integrity Officer or Vice President. If either the Research Integrity Officer or Provost and Vice President is considered to have a conflict of interest, the alleged or apparent retaliation will be reported directly to the President.
Interim Administrative Actions
Upon recommendation of the Research Integrity Officer, the Provost and Vice President and the University Legal Advisor, the Dean of the Respondent's College may meet with the Respondent for the purpose of imposing temporary interim administrative actions prior to the completion of an Inquiry or Investigation if necessary to safeguard the integrity of the research or scholarly activity, prevent inappropriate use of sponsored funding, or otherwise protect the interests of a sponsor, the University or the public. If temporary suspension of duties is imposed, such suspension shall be without loss of pay, pending the conclusion of the process described herein. The Respondent shall be informed of the reasons for such action taken and afforded the opportunity to oppose such action.
The purpose of the Investigation is to explore in detail the allegations, to examine the evidence in depth, and to determine specifically whether misconduct has been committed, by whom, and to what extent. The Investigation will also determine whether there are additional instances of possible misconduct that would justify broadening the scope beyond the initial allegations. This is particularly important where alleged 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.
The Research Integrity Officer will notify the Respondent, in writing, with return receipt, as soon as reasonably possible after the determination is made to open an Investigation. The notification should include a copy of the Inquiry Report; the specific allegations; the sources of funding, if any; the definition of scholarly misconduct; the procedures to be followed in the Investigation, including the appointment of the Investigation Committee and experts; the opportunity of the Respondent to be interviewed, to provide information, to be assisted by counsel, to challenge the membership of the committee and experts based on bias or conflict of interest, and to comment on the draft report. The Research Integrity Officer will immediately sequester any additional pertinent research records that were not previously sequestered during the Inquiry. This sequestration will occur before or at the time the Respondent is notified that an Investigation has begun. The procedures to be followed for sequestration during the Investigation are the same procedures that apply during the Inquiry.
The Research Integrity Officer is responsible for conducting or designating others to conduct the Investigation. In cases where the allegations and apparent evidence are straightforward, such as an allegation of plagiarism or simple falsification or an admission of misconduct by the Respondent, the Research Integrity Officer may choose to conduct the Investigation directly or designate another qualified individual to do so. In such cases, the Investigation official will obtain the necessary expert and technical advice to consider properly all scientific issues.
In complex cases, the Research Integrity Officer shall appoint an Investigation Committee (herein the "Investigative Committee") within 10 days of the notification to the Respondent that an investigation is planned. The Research Integrity Officer will be a member of the Committee, and will serve as Chairperson. The Investigative Committee should consist of at least three individuals who do not have real or apparent conflicts of interest in the case, are unbiased, and have the necessary expertise to evaluate the evidence and issues related to the allegations, interview the principals and key witnesses, and to conduct the investigation. These individuals may be scientists, administrators, subject matter experts, lawyers, or other qualified persons, and they may be from inside or outside the University. Individuals appointed to the Investigative Committee may also have served on the Inquiry Committee.
Members of the Committee and experts will agree in writing to observe the confidentiality of the proceedings and any information or documents reviewed as part of the Inquiry. Outside of the official proceedings of the Committee, they may not discuss the proceedings with the Respondent, Complainant, witnesses, or anyone not authorized by the Research Integrity Officer to have knowledge of the Inquiry.
The Research Integrity Officer will notify the Respondent of the proposed Committee membership within five (5) days of its formation, in writing, with return receipt. If the Respondent submits a written objection to any appointed member of the Investigative Committee or expert based on bias or conflict of interest within five (5) days, the Research Integrity Officer will immediately determine whether to replace the challenged member or expert with a qualified substitute.
The Respondent may consult with legal counsel or a non-lawyer personal advisor (who is not a principal or witness in the case) to seek advice and may be accompanied by legal counsel or a non-lawyer personal advisor to any meeting on this matter. The Respondent's legal counsel's role, as well as the personal advisor's role is limited to advising the Respondent. Neither the legal counsel nor the personal advisor may participate in any administrative proceedings.
Once formed, the Investigative Committee shall, in consultation with the University Legal Advisor, establish the procedures to be followed in conducting the Investigation. The Complainant and Respondent shall be fully informed of the procedures. The Investigative Committee shall initiate the Investigation within 30 days of the completion of the Inquiry, and shall take no more take no more than 60 days to complete the Investigation, prepare a report of its findings, including recommended action(s), and submit the report to Provost and Vice President and President. In undertaking this investigation, the Investigation Committee shall act promptly, ensure fairness to all, secure the necessary and appropriate expertise to carry out a thorough and authoritative evaluation of the relevant evidence, and take precautions against real or apparent conflicts of interest.
Charge to the Committee and the First Meeting
The Research Integrity Officer, with the assistance of the University Legal Advisor, will convene the first meeting of the Investigation Committee. The Research Integrity Officer will define the subject matter of the Investigation in a written charge to the Committee that describes the allegations and related issues identified during the Inquiry, defines scholarly misconduct, and identifies the name of the Respondent.
The Investigation may consist of a combination of activities including but not limited to: (1) examination of all documentation including, but not necessarily limited to, relevant research records, computer files, proposals, manuscripts, publications, correspondence, memoranda, and notes of telephone calls; (2) review of the report from the Inquiry; (3) interviews of parties and witnesses who may have been involved in or have knowledge about the case. Interviews of the Respondent should be tape recorded or transcribed. All other interviews should be transcribed, tape recorded, or summarized. Summaries or transcripts of all interviews should be prepared, provided to the interviewed party for comment or revision, and included as part of the investigatory file. The Investigative Committee shall provide the Respondent an opportunity to comment on the allegations and shall include his or her comments in its report. Members of the University's community who are involved in, or learn of, an Investigation of the alleged scholarly misconduct will protect, to the maximum extent possible, the confidentiality of information regarding the Complainant, the Respondent, and other affected individuals.
If the Respondent admits to the misconduct, he or she should be asked immediately to sign a statement attesting to the occurrence and extent of the misconduct, acknowledging that the statement was voluntary, and stating that the Respondent was advised of his or her right to seek the advice of counsel. The Committee should consult with the University Legal Advisor on the specific form and procedure for obtaining this statement. The admission may not be used as a basis for closing the Investigation, unless the Committee has adequately determined the extent and significance of the misconduct and all procedural steps for completion of the Investigation have been met. The Investigation should not be closed unless the Respondent has been appropriately notified and given an opportunity to comment on the Investigative Report. Completion of the Investigation shall include conducting the Investigation, preparing the Report of the findings, making the draft report available to the Respondent for comment, and submitting the final report to the Provost and Vice President. If the case is considered complete, it should be forwarded to the Provost and Vice President with recommendations for appropriate University actions and to any outside funding agencies, as appropriate.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) provides civil rights protection to individuals with disabilities. It guarantees equal opportunity for this protected group on the areas of public accommodations, employment, transportation, state and local government services, and telecommunications.
Kennesaw State University, a member of the University System of Georgia, does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age or disability in employment or provision of services. Kennesaw State University does not discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment or employment in, its programs or activities.
The following individuals have been designated by the President to provide assistance and ensure compliance with the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA):
Assistant Director of Disabled Student Assistant VP of Human Resources & Services
Support Services ADA Officer for Faculty & Staff
ADA Officer for Students Campus Services Building
Room 269C Carmichael Student Center (770) 423-6030
Assistant VP of Facilities & Services
ADA Officer for Facilities
101 Chastain Pointe
It is our vision to create a strong multicultural and diverse educational environment at KSU in order to increase student satisfaction and to promote an understanding and awareness of people from various backgrounds upon graduation. In this way, KSU students will be educated for, and can effectively compete in the global society.
Kennesaw State University endeavors to encourage in each student, faculty, staff member, and the community, a respect for the worth of the environment and a desire and capacity to recycle, to conserve energy and to take other measures to help conserve limited resources. This institution focuses on developing an environmental ethic that promotes excellence, responsibility and stewardship in environmental affairs and is committed to educating the community about environmental issues.
It is the goal of Kennesaw State University to provide a safe work and health environment for all faculty members, staff, students and University visitors. Toward this end, the Department of Environmental Health, Safety and Risk Management will ensure compliance with federal, state and local codes and regulation; provide technical assistance to other departments; and conduct routine facility audits to recognize, evaluate and control potential hazards. The department also advises University employees on hazard recognition and accident prevention through targeted environmental health and safety trainings.
Kennesaw State University shall provide academic programs, support services, and social and/or recreational activities to all eligible individuals. In the event that an employee or a student is (or becomes) HIV positive, that individual shall retain his/her right to these programs, services and activities. All actions taken by Kennesaw State University will comply with the laws pertaining to public health practices and the rights of individuals to privacy and confidentiality. Situations which arise will be handled individually in order to provide maximum support to any faculty member, administrator, classified staff employee, or student who is HIV positive and to protect the welfare of the community.
I. Alcohol Policy
Kennesaw State University expressly prohibits the use, possession, sale, or distribution of alcoholic beverages on campus by any campus constituency. Alcoholic beverages may be served at off-campus activities to adults of legal drinking age for the state in which the activity is being held, providing that a responsible club or organization representative acknowledges responsibility for monitoring alcohol consumption. Student Activity funds or institutional funds may not be used for the purchase of alcoholic beverages. Kennesaw State University is committed to recognizing, upholding, and enforcing the laws of the state of Georgia. Violation of those state laws, incorporated into the Kennesaw State University Alcohol Policy shall not be condoned on the campus or at any activity held off campus by any constituency. Exceptions to the policy of no alcohol on campus may from time to time be permitted at the discretion of the President, and there are other limited exceptions to this policy within the residence halls by those aged twenty-one or older who do not reside in substance-free communities. See the Residential Code of Conduct at subsection III R of KSU Student Code of Conduct for more information. https://web.kennesaw.edu/scai/content/ksu-student-code-conduct
II. Drug-Free Workplace and Campus Policy
As a recipient of Federal funds, Kennesaw State University supports and complies with the provisions of the Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act of 1989 and the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988. The unlawful possession, manufacture, distribution, dispensation, and/or use of illicit drugs and alcohol by employees or students on the university campus is prohibited and violations of this policy will result in appropriate disciplinary action. Faculty, staff and students are expected to adhere to the policies of the university and observe the basic standards of good conduct, meet appropriate standards of performance, and observe all local, state and federal laws relative to unlawful use of illicit drugs and alcohol. Penalties for violations of these standards range from warnings and probation to expulsion, loss of academic credit, suspension, temporary or permanent suspension and withdrawal of organization recognition, referral to the legal system for prosecution, demotion, and termination of employment. Detailed sanctions are defined in the Student Handbook (Student Code of Conduct), Board of Regents' Policy Manual, Classified Employee Handbook, and in the complete policy statement available in the Office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs upon request.
Kennesaw State University is dedicated to maintaining a healthy working and learning environment for employees, students, and visitors. The former KSU Smoking Policy has been updated to align with the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia (USG) Tobacco and Smoke-Free Campus Policy, effective October 1, 2014. The purpose of this policy is to create a smoke-free and tobacco-free environment at Kennesaw State University (KSU) and to establish the KSU Smoke/Tobacco-Free Committee with the responsibility for developing, implementing, and overseeing this policy, procedures, best practices, and activities for the University.
Go here for the full policy: https://policy.kennesaw.edu/sites/web.kennesaw.edu.policy/files/smokefreeandtobaccofreepolicy_10012014.pdf
Kennesaw State University follows the established policy on Sexual Harassment of the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia. That policy (8.2.16 in the Regents' Policy Manual) is as follows:
Federal law provides that it shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice for any employer, because of the sex of any person, to discharge without cause, to refuse to hire, or otherwise discriminate against any person with respect to any matter directly or indirectly related to employment or academic standing. Harassment of an employee on the basis of sex violates this federal law. Sexual harassment of employees or students in the University System is prohibited and shall subject the offender to dismissal or other sanctions after compliance with procedural due process requirements. Unwelcome sexual advancements, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitutes sexual harassment when:
Submission to such conduct is made explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment or academic standing; or
Submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as a basis for employment or academic decisions affecting an individual;
Such conduct unreasonably interferes with an individual's work or academic performance or creates an intimidating, hostile or offensive working or academic environment. (BR Minutes, 1980- 81, p. 237-37)
Using the definition contained in the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidelines, the 1984 "Policy Statement on Sexual Harassment" defines sexual harassment as follows:
Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitutes sexual harassment when (1) submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment [or academic advancement], (2) submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions [or academic decisions] affecting such individual, (3) such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work [or academic] performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working [or academic] environment.
Sexual harassment can occur in situations where one person has power over another, but it can also occur between equals. Both men and women can be sexually harassed, though women are most often victimized.
Examples of Sexually Harassing Behavior
Examples of sexual harassment may be found in campus brochures and other documents. Such examples include sexual innuendoes and comments, intrusive sexually explicit questions, offensive jokes or language, unwanted physical contact, offensive gestures or motions, repeatedly asking a person out for a date, threats, leering or ogling at a person's body, stalking, displaying of sexually suggestive pictures or written materials, etc.
A relationship between a faculty member and a student should be considered one of professional and client in which sexual relationships are inappropriate. The power differential inherent in such relationships, as well as in those between a supervisor and an employee, compromise the subordinate's ability to freely decide.
Although the University does not specifically forbid sexual relationships between individuals where a professional power differential exists, it actively discourages consenting sexual relationships between faculty and student or supervisor and employee. It warns that a faculty member who enters into a sexual relationship with a student (or a supervisor with an employee) where a professional power differential exists, must realize that if a charge of sexual harassment is subsequently lodged, it will be exceedingly difficult to prove immunity on grounds of mutual consent.
AAUP Statement on Sexual Harassment
Kennesaw State University follows the basic principles and procedures recommended by the American Association of University Professors in its "Sexual Harassment: Suggested Policy and Procedures for Handling Complaints" printed in its Policy Documents & Reports (1984).
Procedures for Handling Complaints of Sexual Harassment
As illustrated in the examples, sexual harassment includes a range of behaviors, some more harmful than others, but none acceptable. If an individual is uncertain about whether something happening is sexual harassment, he or she should seek the advice of a trusted individual about the situation.
If the person harassing an individual has power over his or her education or employment, it is understandable that the individual might fear reprisal if steps are taken to end the harassment. An individual has the right to pursue an education and work in an environment free of this kind of interference. The University's policies are intended to protect an individual against reprisals.
Early efforts to control a potential harassing situation are very important. Sometimes an individual can stop sexual harassment by telling the person directly that he or she is uncomfortable with the person's behavior and would like it to stop. Writing a letter can also be effective.
Formal Complaints and Grievances
A faculty or staff member who wishes to file a formal complaint of sexual harassment against another employee of the university should contact the university's Affirmative Action/EEO Officer in the Legal Affairs Office. Once a complaint is received the following process shall be followed.
A. The EEO officer (or his/her designee) must notify in writing the person(s) whose actions or behavior is/are at issue of the allegation of sexual harassment as soon as possible, but definitely within one week of receiving the complaint from the aggrieved faculty or staff member. The immediate supervisor of the person against whom the complaint is made should be notified at the same time.
B. If the EEO officer (or his/her designee), after investigation, finds that the complainant does not have reasonable grounds for complaint he/she shall so notify in writing the complainant, the person(s) about whom the complaint is made, and that person(s)' immediate supervisor. This investigation and notification will take place within sixty days of the receipt of the complaint by the EEO office.
C. If the EEO officer (or his/her designee), after investigation, finds the complainant may have reasonable cause for complaint he/she will so notify in writing the complainant, person(s) about whom the complaint is made, and that person(s)' immediate supervisor. The investigation and notification will take place within sixty days of the receipt of the complaint by the EEO's office. On the same date that such written notification is delivered to the parties, the EEO officer (or his/her designee) will contact the chair of the university council. The chair of the council will then be responsible for establishing an ad hoc committee of five (faculty/administrative faculty/staff members) to hear the discrimination complaint and make recommendations. The names and contact information of the five members of the ad hoc committee shall be communicated by the chair of the university council to the EEO officer (or his/her designee).
D. Prior to the hearing the EEO officer (or his/her designee) will arrange that the ad hoc committee shall meet and elect a chair from among the five members. The chair will conduct the hearing. The chair may participate in all deliberations, but will not vote except in the case of a tie.
E. The hearing committee may draw up its own rules of procedure, and the committee is not bound by any formal rules of legal proceedings and may hear any information that may be of value in determining the issues involved, but minimum due process shall include the right of both parties to be notified in writing at least ten business days in advance of the date, time, and place of the hearing; the right of the person against whom the complaint has been made to be informed in writing of the specific nature of the complaint against him/her and of the evidence and/or witnesses on which it is based; and the right of both parties to present evidence and witnesses on their behalf and to question witnesses. The EEO officer (or his/her designee) shall act to make certain these due process rights are met. The supervisor of the person about whom the complaint is made will be notified that a hearing has been scheduled. The EEO officer (or his/her designee) will attend the hearing and may present any report created or evidence or information obtained during the EEO office's investigation if requested to do so by either party or by the committee. The EEO officer (or his/her designee) shall retain all records associated with the complaint, his/her investigation, the hearing, the committee's written report, and the President's written decision for such length of time as required by Georgia law.
F. Each party has the right to a non-attorney adviser to assist in preparing and presenting his/her case before the committee. Those present during the hearing will be the members of the ad hoc committee, the EEO officer (or his/her designee), the parties to the complaint, one non-attorney adviser for each party, and such witnesses as are necessary. Each witness shall be present only when his/her presence is necessary to present information and/or answer questions. No other persons shall be present unless agreed upon in writing by the chair of the committee, both parties, and the EEO officer (or his/her designee).
G. All decisions and recommendations will be based on a majority vote, and be rendered according to the principle of the preponderance of evidence. Only the five members of the ad hoc committee should be present during deliberation except that the EEO officer (or his/her designee) may be present to answer policy questions.
H. The hearing committee will be expected to produce a written report summarizing the information presented, indicating and explaining its decision, and making recommendations, if desirable, to any party or parties. Copies of the written report will be submitted to each party in the case (complainant and person about whom complaint is made), immediate supervisor of person about whom complaint is made, the EEO officer (or his/her designee), the chief legal officer for the university, and the President of the university within five business days from the completion of the hearing. The chair of the hearing committee shall act to make certain the written report is delivered to the proper persons. The opinions and recommendations of the ad hoc committee are advisory and in no way bind the President to the recommended actions.
I. After consideration of the ad hoc committee's written report, the President shall make a decision and communicate it in writing within five business days to the complainant, the party or parties against whom the complaint has been made, the EEO officer (or his/her designee), the chief legal officer of the university, and the immediate supervisor(s) of the employee(s) against whom the complaint has been made.
J. Nothing in this process prohibits the parties from settling this matter at any stage with the assistance of mediation through the Office of the University Ombuds (770-423-6112), if appropriate. However, any attempt to settle the matter through mediation does not affect time deadlines for this process.
K. Any faculty or staff complaints of sexual harassment against a KSU student or student complaints of sexual harassment against other students should be addressed to the KSU Department of Student Conduct and Academic Integrity (formerly Office of Judiciary Programs).
L. Any student complaint of sexual harassment against a KSU faculty or staff member shall be addressed as outlined in the Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities (found in the catalogue) under the heading, "Student Grievance Procedures for Discrimination and/or Retaliation."
The university cannot accommodate children of the faculty, staff, and students on campus during normal operating hours; i.e., 8:00 a.m. - 10:30 p.m., Monday through Thursday, and 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., Friday. Children are welcome to attend scheduled events and to make brief visits when accompanied by a parent or other adult.
Kennesaw State University adopts these regulations pursuant to the authority conferred upon the Board of Regents to regulate the University System of Georgia Campus Traffic, Official Code of Georgia Annotated (OCGA), Title 20. These regulations supersede all previous KSU Parking and Traffic Regulations pertaining to motor vehicle operation and parking on campus.
These regulations apply to all persons operating motor vehicles at Kennesaw State University and become part of the terms and conditions accepted by all persons permitted to operate motor vehicles on campus. Students, faculty and staff shall not operate or park any motor vehicle on campus unless qualified to do so under applicable State law and KSU regulations. The Campus includes that property owned or leased by the Board of Regents and designated as Kennesaw State University. Additional information is available at https://web.kennesaw.edu/auxiliaryservices/parking .
See Board of Regents Policy on Amorous Relationships here: http://www.usg.edu/hr/manual/amorous_relationships.