The following guidelines provide that certain materials may be copyrighted in the name of the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System.

These guidelines are an effort to bring into focus some of the underlying issues involved in the ownership and copyrighting of instructional materials. This is necessary because the University, with greater frequency, may have a direct interest in certain instructional materials because substantial public resources have been used in their creation and production or because a faculty member contracted with the University specifically to develop the materials. An example of this would be a written agreement between the University and the faculty member with the specific, stated intention that a videotaped lecture series with a published course outline and bibliography would be produced at University expense.

These guidelines do not assert a University property interest in materials which result from the activities of faculty members in the pursuit of their traditional teaching, research, and scholarly activities. These materials, including theses, scholarly articles, journal articles, research bulletins, monographs, and books are implicit in the faculty member's role as a faculty member and should be contrasted with materials produced pursuant to an explicit agreement where the faculty member acts under contractual arrangements to produce copyrightable materials.

Resolution of the interests of the University and of the faculty member must be on a case-by-case basis, applying the principles and considerations of these guidelines.

The following types of material are among those which may now, or in the near future, be subject to copyright:

·        Books, texts, glossaries, bibliographies, study guides, laboratory manuals, syllabi, tests, etc.

·        Lectures, musical or dramatic compositions, and unpublished scripts

·        Films, filmstrips, charts, transparencies, and other visual aids

·        Video and audio tapes and cassettes

·        Live video or audio broadcasts

·        Programmed instructional materials

·        Computer programs

·        Other materials.

These materials may be produced or developed by the faculty and staff under varying circumstances:

·        No University support or involvement

·        Minimal University support and involvement (such as the use of  laboratories and/or equipment), but with no release time (i.e., from assigned University duties)

·        Substantial University support and involvement and/or release time with the expectation that copyrightable instructional materials will result

·        "Work-for-hire" or as an assigned duty

·        Direct support from an extramural sponsor

It is the policy of the University that copyrightable materials produced as stated in (1) and (2) above belong solely to the author(s), artist(s), or other creator(s).

In situations where the interested parties expect copyrightable materials to evolve, the creation of a written agreement shall be considered. In the absence of a written agreement, the rights to scholarly, research or instructional materials are assumed to lie with the author(s), artist(s), or other creator(s). Materials produced with substantial University support or during release time [as in (3) above] shall be the subject of a written understanding or agreement between the author(s), artist(s), or other creator(s), and the Chancellor or his designee, that equitably determines copyright and ownership rights. If the University chooses not to copyright materials to which it has a right, the faculty member(s) may do so in his/her own name if he/she wishes. This latter situation will apply to the vast majority of regular scholarly and research publications of the academic staff which are part of their normal academic activities.

When the production of copyrightable materials is a primary purpose of employment, a written "work-for-hire" agreement shall be executed. Fair payment shall be made to the creator(s), for which the University shall receive all rights to the material and receive all royalties and fees. When such materials are produced as an assigned duty, the University shall own all rights and receive all royalties and fees, except where a contrary agreement has been reached between the creator(s) and his/her administrative head.

When copyrightable materials are produced with extramural support, as stated in (5) above, the agreement with the extramural sponsor shall determine the copyright and ownership rights of the parties. Additional guidelines on specific types of materials will be issued by Central Administration of the UW System as needed.

The University of Wisconsin-Green Bay's administration and research community endorses the importance of protecting the welfare and rights of all individuals who take part in any study initiated by UWGB faculty, staff or students. While many studies involve little or no risk to the individual, certain studies may involve short or long-term risks which will require the informed consent* of those involved and a collegial determination that the risks are minimal and justified in terms of the expected benefits.

All studies, either funded or unfunded, which involve other than trivial risk to the individual or groups of individuals as determined by the Principal Investigator or the Coordinator of the Institute for Research, and/or the Vice-Chancellor's Office, will require formal review by the Human Subjects Review Committee which serves as the Institutional Review Board (IRB) as defined in the Federal Government Regulations 45 CFR Part 46 (Federal Register 1/26/81, PP8366-8392). It should be noted that the UWGB policy goes beyond the federal regulations and seeks to provide advice on all projects, whether federally funded or not, which involve non-trivial risks to human subjects.

The definition of low or trivial risks follows the federal guidelines which, for example, generally exclude school based testing in subject areas, and questionnaires which provide anonymity and require generally public information.

Student research projects normally will not be reviewed by the IRB but should be reviewed at the faculty/department/unit level. The faculty member or members supervising student research requiring review will inform their unit chair, who will appoint a Unit Review Committee (URC). Any case which, in the judgment of the Unit Review Committee, involves significant risk or minimum benefit must be submitted to the IRB for review.

Faculty and staff must declare the level of risk on the "Internal Review Form" (the green sheet) which accompanies the review of each formal proposal for extramural funding. PI's will be asked to rate their proposal involving human subjects as:

·        No human subjects

·        Little or no risk to human subjects

·        IRB approval requested  

In cases where there is uncertainty on the level of risk, the IRB review will be mandatory.

Approval by the IRS will be based on the federal guidelines referred to above, but the essential components are:

·        Minimum risk to the individual in terms of physical or psychological factors as well as guaranteeing rights to privacy

·        Desirable benefit to the individual, to society or to social groups

·        Signed forms from the research subjects indicating full compliance with informed consent

·        The PI will be required to file a report requesting approval using the attached format for funded or unfunded projects deemed to need IRB review. Detailed information on compliance with the federal regulations and request for review forms are available in the Institute for Research. The request must reach the IRB two weeks before the submission deadline. Approval is for a period of 12 months.

*As defined by the Nuremberg Code, the AMA and the NIH.         Revised 11/90

Recognizing that honesty in the conduct of academic research is fundamental to its integrity and credibility, and to the maintenance of public trust in the university, the UW-Green Bay adopts these policies and procedures for reviewing and investigating allegations of scientific misconduct.

Policy and Definition
For purposes of these policies and procedures, "misconduct in science" or "misconduct" means fabrication, falsification, plagiarism or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the scientific community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research. Misconduct in science is prohibited at the UW-Green Bay, and may be cause for discipline or dismissal.

Procedures

1.   Inquiry upon allegation or other evidence of possible misconduct

a.       Informal allegations or reports of possible misconduct in science shall be directed initially to the person with immediate responsibility for the work of the individual against whom the allegations or reports have been made. The person receiving such an informal report or allegation is responsible for either resolving the matter or encouraging the submission of a formal allegation or report. Upon receipt of formal allegations or reports of scientific misconduct, the person with immediate responsibility for the work of the individual against whom the allegations or reports have been made shall immediately inform, in writing, the Dean responsible for the academic unit with which the accused individual is affiliated.

b.   The appropriate Dean shall appoint an individual or individuals to conduct a prompt inquiry into the allegation or report of misconduct.

1)         The individual or individuals conducting the inquiry shall prepare a written report for the Dean describing the evidence reviewed, summarizing relevant interviews and including the conclusions of the inquiry.

2)         The inquiry must be completed within 60 calendar days of its initiation unless circumstances clearly warrant a longer period. If the inquiry takes longer than 60 days to complete, the reasons for exceeding the 60-day period shall be documented and included with the record.

3)         The individual against whom the allegation was made shall be given a copy of the report of the inquiry by the Dean and shall have an opportunity to respond to the report within 10 days of receipt. Any response must be in writing, and will become a part of the record of the inquiry.

4)         To protect the privacy and reputation of all individuals involved, including the individual in good faith reporting possible misconduct and the individual against whom the report is made, information concerning the initial report, the inquiry and any resulting investigation shall be kept confidential and shall be released only to those having a legitimate need to know about the matter.

c.     If the inquiry concludes that the allegation of misconduct is unsubstantiated, and an investigation is not warranted the reasons and supporting documentation for this conclusion shall be reported to the Dean, who shall be responsible for reviewing the conclusion of the inquiry. If the Dean concurs in the conclusion that an investigation is not warranted, his or her determination, and all other supporting documentation from the inquiry shall be recorded and the record maintained confidentially for a period of three years after the termination of the inquiry. If the inquiry or the Dean determines that an investigation is warranted, the procedures in paragraph (2) shall be followed.

2.   Investigation of reported misconduct in science

a.       If an investigation is determined to be warranted under paragraph (1), the Dean shall so inform the Chancellor. The Chancellor shall immediately appoint a committee to conduct the investigation. The committee shall be composed of impartial faculty members possessing appropriate competence and research expertise for the conduct of the investigation, and no faculty member having responsibility for the research under investigation, or having any other conflict with the university's interest in securing a fair and objective investigation, may serve on the investigating committee. If necessary, individuals possessing the requisite competence and research expertise who are not affiliated with UW-Green Bay may be asked to serve as consultants to the investigating committee.

b.      The investigation must be initiated within 30 days of the completion of the inquiry. The investigation normally will include examination of all documentation, including but not necessarily limited to relevant research data and proposals, publications, correspondence, and memoranda of telephone calls. Interviews should be conducted of all individuals involved either in making the allegation or against whom the allegation is made, as well as others who might have information regarding key aspects of the allegations. Summaries of interviews shall be prepared and provided to the parties interviewed for their comments or revision. These summaries shall be made a part of the record of the investigation.

c.       The individual making the allegations and the individual against whom the allegation is made, and all others having relevant information shall cooperate fully with the work of the investigating committee, and shall make available all relevant documents and materials associated with the research under investigation.

d.      The investigation should ordinarily be completed within 120 days of its initiation. This includes conducting the investigation, preparing the report of the findings, making that report available for comment by the subjects of the investigation, and submitting the report to the Chancellor. If the investigating committee determines that it cannot complete the investigation within the 120-day period, it shall submit to the Chancellor a written request for an extension explaining the need for delay and providing an estimated date of completion. If the research under investigation is funded by an agency within the Public Health Service (PHS), the procedures under paragraph (3) (d) of this policy shall also apply.

e.       The report of the investigation should include a description of the policies and procedures under which the investigation was conducted, information obtained and the sources of such information, an accurate summary of the position of the individual under investigation, the findings of the committee, including the bases for its findings, and the committee's recommendation to the Chancellor concerning whether the evidence of scientific misconduct is sufficient to warrant discipline or dismissal under the applicable faculty or academic staff personnel rules. All documentation substantiating the findings and recommendations of the investigating committee, together with all other information comprising the record of the investigation, shall be transmitted to the Chancellor with the report, upon completion of the investigation.

f.        A copy of the investigating committee's report shall be provided to the individual being investigated. The Chancellor or appropriate administrative officer shall afford the individual under investigation an opportunity to discuss the matter prior to taking action under paragraph (3) of this policy.

3.   Reporting to Office of Scientific Integrity (OSI) where research is funded by PHS grants.

      Where research is funded by an agency within PHS:

a.       A determination that an investigation should be initiated under paragraph (1) (c) must be reported in writing to the OSI Director on or before the date the investigation begins. The notification should state the name of the individuals against whom the allegations of scientific misconduct have been made, the general nature of the allegations, and the PHS application or grant number involved

b.      During the course of the investigation, the granting agency should be apprised of any significant findings that might affect current or potential funding of the individual under investigation or that might require agency interpretation of funding regulations.

c.       The OSI must be notified at any stage of an inquiry or investigation if the university determines that any of the following conditions exist:

1)         There is an immediate health hazard involved;

2)         There is an immediate need to protect federal funds or equipment;

3)         There is an immediate need to protect the interests of the person making the allegations as well as his or her co-investigators and associates, if any;

4)         It is probable that the alleged incident is going to be reported publicly;

5)         There is a reasonable indication of possible criminal violation. In that instance, the university must inform OSI within 24 hours of obtaining that information.

d.      If the university is unable to complete the investigation within the 120-day period, as described above, the Dean must submit to OSI a written request for an extension and an explanation of the delay including an interim progress report and an estimated date of completion of the investigation. If the request is granted, the institution must file periodic progress reports as requested by OSI. If satisfactory progress is not made in the institution's investigation, the OSI may undertake an investigation of its own.

e.   If the university plans to terminate an inquiry or investigation for any reason without completing all of the relevant requirements, a report of such planned termination, including a description of the reasons for such termination, shall be made to OSI, which will then decide whether further investigation should be undertaken.

g.       Upon completion of the investigation, UW-Green Bay will notify OSI of the outcome, in a report which shall include the information and documentation specified in paragraph (2)(e) of this policy.

4.   Other action following completion of investigation

a.       If the allegation of scientific misconduct is substantiated as a result of an investigation, the Dean shall notify the agency, if any, sponsoring the research project of the result of the investigation. In such a case, the individual involved will be asked to withdraw all pending abstracts and papers emanating from the scientific misconduct, and the Dean will notify editors of journals in which relevant papers appeared. In addition, other institutions and sponsoring agencies with which the individual has been affiliated shall be notified if, based on the results of the investigation, it is believed that the validity of previous research by the individual under investigation is questionable.

b.   Where scientific misconduct is substantiated, the UW-Green Bay will take appropriate action, which may include discipline or dismissal, with regard to the employment status of the individual or individuals involved. Applicable personnel rules, policies and procedures set forth in Chapters UWS 4, 6, 11 and 13, Wisconsin Administrative Code and related university policies shall govern discipline or dismissal actions resulting from an investigation of scientific misconduct.

c.   Where allegations of scientific misconduct are not substantiated by the investigation, the UW-Green Bay shall make diligent efforts, as appropriate, to restore the reputations of persons alleged to have engaged in misconduct, and to protect the positions and reputations of those persons who, in good faith, make allegations.

The Office of Management and Budget has mandated that all colleges and universities receiving federal funds account for time and effort of employees charged directly to federal funds or used as cost sharing on a federal project. UWGB has chosen to certify these employees after the fact.

The following information has been provided to assist you in appropriate administration of your project. Failure to comply with these guidelines could result in audit disallowances requiring the return of some or all of your federal funds. Please read these guidelines carefully and direct any questions you might have to the Controller's Office (2302).

I. What is time and effort certification?

A.     Time and effort certification is a method of comparing the estimated percent of time spent by an employee on a federal project with the actual percent of time. The estimated percent of time is taken from payroll records. Each employee paid from federal funds or used for cost sharing purposes must certify the accuracy of the estimated time.

II. Who is included in this process?

A.     All classified and unclassified staff.

III. What is the frequency of certification?

A.     Classified staff and LTEs must be certified monthly.

B.     Unclassified annual staff -- twice annually:  December 31 and June 30

C.     Unclassified academic year staff (including graduate assistants)

1.      End of fall semester

2.      January Interim

3.      End of spring semester

4.      End of summer

IV. Who must sign certifications?

A.     Anyone with first-hand knowledge of 100% of the employee’s workload.  It is preferred that the employee sign the certification.  The principal investigator may also sign, but primary reliance is on the employee’s judgment of his/her workload.

V. Miscellaneous Information.

A.     Certification must be signed and returned to the Office of Grants Administration within 30 days of date of preparation.

B.     Variances of actual effort to estimated effort in excess of ± 5% require a salary cash transfer to correct accounting and payroll records. This will be monitored in the Controller's Office.

C.     Accounting codes for Federal projects requiring cost sharing will not be released to principal investigators until cost sharing is identified. Specific employees will have to be named and their funding source identified.

D.     Cash transfer requests for non-salary items must be originated by the principal investigator within 90 days of the payment date.

E.      Salary cash transfer requests must be originated by the principal investigator and approved by the Controller or the Assistant Chancellor for Fiscal and Administrative Services. These requests should be initiated within 30 days of the payment date or within 30 days of the end of the certification period in which the error occurred.

F.      Certification must equal 100% of employee's time and effort in all cases (i.e., a 50% time employee paid solely from one grant would certify 100% of his/her effort on that grant.

G.     The employee must fill in the "actual percentage of total effort" column on the personnel activity reports.

10/13/82