Handling Misconduct Introduction Technical Assistance Complainant Respondents Allegations Preliminary Assessment Inquiries Investigations Institutional Decision ORI Oversight Review PHS/HHS Decision Hearings Administrative Actions Case Summaries Legal Concerns

Handling Misconduct - Complainant

Retaliation Complaints from Complainants

The PHS Policies on Research Misconduct (42 C.F.R. Part 93) requires institutions to "take all reasonable and practical steps to protect the positions and reputations of good faith complainants, witnesses and committee members and protect them form retaliation by respondents and other institutional members." 

The PHS Policies state that "good faith as applied to a complainant or witness, means 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 an institution meet its responsibilities under this part.  A committee member does not act in good faith if his/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."

A retaliation complaint is assessed by the following criteria to determine whether it falls under PHS jurisdiction: