Admissions and Resolutions – Standard Operating Procedures

ERIK, Office of Research Compliance, Revised 02/04/2026

I. Regulatory and Policy Authority and Requirement

The Public Health Service (PHS) Policies on Research Misconduct, 42 C.F.R. Part 93 (the “PHS Policies”), and the Research Misconduct policy (the “Policy”) specify the responsibilities of institutions for acting on alleged research misconduct activities. Under 42
C.F.R. §93.317, regarding the completion of the research misconduct process, an institution may close a matter at any stage of the process under the conditions where a Respondent has admitted to committing research misconduct or a settlement with the respondent has been reached. 

42 C.F.R. § 93.317 Completing the research misconduct process.
(a) ORI expects institutions to carry inquiries and investigations through to completion and to pursue diligently all significant issues and credible allegations of research misconduct. Institutions must notify ORI in advance if the institution plans to close a research misconduct proceeding at the assessment, inquiry, investigation, or appeal stage on the basis that the respondent has admitted to committing research misconduct or a settlement with the respondent has been reached.

The Policy, Procedures IV.A. states:

At any stage of the proceedings under this policy, and consistent with the requirements of the relevant oversight agency or funding entity, the Research Integrity Officer (RIO) may attempt to resolve a complaint. At the initiation of the resolution process, the university and the Respondent will agree to terminate the research misconduct proceedings with an admission to the research misconduct (subject to approval by the funding of oversight agency), or the Respondent will accept the university’s findings and actions without an admission of research misconduct.

II. Criteria for Admissions and Resolutions

In resolving a research misconduct matter under the Policy Procedures IV., the following specific criteria must be met:

  1. Resolution actions shall be handled in accordance with the general responsibilities for compliance as described in 42 C.F.R. §93.300(b), which states that the institution must respond to each allegation of research misconduct “in a thorough, competent, objective and fair manner, including taking precautions to ensure that individuals responsible for carrying out any part of the research misconduct proceeding do not have unresolved personal, professional or financial conflicts of interest with the Complainant, Respondent or witnesses.”
  2. At any stage of the proceedings under the policy and acting consistently with any requirements of the relevant oversight agency or funding entity, the RIO may attempt to resolve the matter to the satisfaction of all involved parties and terminate the proceedings. The RIO will describe in writing any such resolution and the Respondent must sign the resolution document. Such resolutions must have the approval of the Institutional Deciding Official (IDO) and the relevant oversight agency or funding entity, as required by law or contract.
  3. When the Respondent admits to the finding(s) of research misconduct, the University will review the Respondent’s research record relevant to the allegation(s) and/or other research as required, to determine whether the admission comprises the full scope of the Respondent’s research misconduct.
  4. When the Respondent admits to the finding(s) of research misconduct, the Respondent will agree to accept any and all corrective action(s) or sanction(s) the university deems appropriate, including referral to other University disciplinary processes and correction or retraction of published papers.
  5. Case closure with an admission must have the approval of the IDO and the relevant oversight agency or funding entity, as required by law or contract.
  6. When the Respondent accepts the university’s finding(s) of research misconduct without an admission to the research misconduct, the Respondent agrees to terminate the research misconduct proceedings but neither accepts nor denies responsibility for the allegations. The Respondent must accept any and all of the university’s finding(s) of research misconduct and any and all corrective action(s) or sanction(s) the university deems appropriate, including referral to other University disciplinary processes and correction or retraction of published papers.
  7. The RIO will consider the following conditions in determining such resolutions.
    1. Respondent confirmed that the full scope of the potential research misconduct was identified;
    2. Respondent was cooperative with the proceedings;
    3. Respondent demonstrated remorse;
    4. Respondent took steps to correct or prevent recurrence of future research misconduct; and/or
    5. Respondent took, or will take, steps to correct the research record.
  8. Case closure with such a resolution must have the approval of the IDO and the relevant oversight agency or funding entity, as required by law or contract
  9. In any resolution, if approval by the IDO or the relevant oversight agency or funding entity is not obtained, the research misconduct proceedings will proceed through assessment, inquiry, and investigation, as necessary.

Article ID: 117
Created: August 28, 2025
Last Updated: February 19, 2026

Online URL: https://ohiostateresearch.knowledgebase.co/article/admissions-and-resolutions-standard-operating-procedures-117.html