���ӽ紫ý

Every once in a while, university units need to undergo a subtle-but-important restructuring to keep up with the times. This includes groups whose objectives are as obvious and straightforward as the placard on the office door reads.

Take, for example, the Office of Research Integrity, which exists within the ���ӽ紫ý Division of Research. As the name suggests, the office is responsible for ensuring that ���ӽ紫ý remains compliant with federal regulations and guidelines governing the conduct of research.

In recent years, though, research integrity has come under greater national scrutiny, with specific emphasis on research security and ethics regarding studies involving human participants and animal subjects.

In response to this growing national trend — as well as to feedback from the ���ӽ紫ý community — top administrators from the Division of Research spent the past 18 months looking for ways to maximize efficiencies within the ORI to more effectively serve ���ӽ紫ý researchers. 

The top-down review, conducted by David Hatchett, vice president for research, and Gwen Marchand, associate vice president for research, yielded this end result: a reorganization of the ORI into three distinct areas that better address the university’s changing landscape and current needs. Specifically, the ORI’s new structure is expected to leverage strengths in three key knowledge areas, while improving compliance oversight and customer service. 

ORI Restructuring

“We have a growing research enterprise, so it’s really not reasonable to expect one single person to have the depth of knowledge to run the office,” says Marchand. “We created the office to be more proactive instead of reactive. Now we have three people, each leading qualified teams, who know the best practices in their respective areas.”

Previously overseen by a singular executive director, the office is now composed of a three-person team, with each bringing a level of subject-specific expertise to their role:

• Jill Zimbelman serves as research compliance director
• Beverly Jacobik is the newly hired research protections director
• Joey Sassaman is the research integrity officer (RIO)

Each leader, along with their respective supporting teams, will focus on distinct areas of research integrity. 

For instance, research compliance and security addresses conflicts of interest, export control, foreign travel, and data security. Research protections oversees the university’s ethical conduct of research with human participants through the Institutional Review Boards (IRB), and with animal subjects through the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) and the Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC).

Finally, the RIO area handles concerns about research misconduct and manages ���ӽ紫ý’s Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) training program.

Zimbelman notes, “The reorganization of ORI means more robust customer service in getting faculty the information they need quickly. Now if they have questions, there is a specific person they can turn to for help.”

For Jacobik, the reorganization is the reason she applied for her position. 

“The commitment to this restructuring was key, because now there’s appropriate staffing spread between three positions. It just seems like the right thing to do,” she says. “We are very much working together, but we all have different expertise.”

An example of this commitment to improved services is clear through the newly redesigned RCR training program that Sassaman administers.

Recent changes at the federal level expanded the scope of training on responsible conduct of research to include many grant-active faculty members. ���ӽ紫ý views this change as an opportunity to expand the RCR offerings to help develop a shared understanding about research practices and resources among the campus’ research community.

To accommodate the growth in RCR demand, training sessions will be more frequent and offered in a more flexible, module-based approach. 

Perhaps most significantly, the addition of the RIO gives everyone on campus a resource to report any research-related concerns without fear of retaliation.

“I work with researchers across campus. I am always here for them if they have questions about any aspect of conducting research,” Sassaman says. “I look into all research misconduct allegations, including falsification, fabrication, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, and reviewing research results.”

The Division of Research recently completed its strategic plan, its first in 10 years, which included examining systems, processes, and structures. The process was vital in that it afforded Marchand and Hatchett an opportunity to reflect on how the unit was meeting the needs of ���ӽ紫ý researchers.

“Our goal is for researchers to receive more timely and responsive services in research integrity,” Marchand says. “Our job is to lessen the administrative burden of researchers without taking away their joy from teaching and doing research.” 

Marchand recognizes that the path to getting centralized and efficient information from the Office of Research Integrity has not always been clear or easy. She’s excited that the Division of Research has created through this reorganization a space to address some of the long-standing issues.

At the same time, she hopes that faculty and student researchers will view the new-look ORI as a partner in navigating the tensions, questions, and challenges that arise during the research process. 

“We are not the research police,” Marchand says. “Faculty and student researchers need a partner to help troubleshoot, not an office that puts up barriers. So it’s good to have a group of experts that can help you find a way to do the project you want to do — even if at first there are regulatory barriers.

“We are here to help find alternatives to support [everyone’s] research goals, working to make changes to be in compliance while still finding that path forward.”