CHARGES TO THE FACULTY SENATE RESEARCH COMMITTEE

FOR FY-07

 

Approved by FacEx: 6/8/06

Chg. #9 added: 8/29/06

 

Standing Charges

1.       Monitor the administration of the General Research Fund (GRF) and make recommendations, as needed, to ensure its effectiveness and appropriate utilization. Specifically, the committee should:

    1. Submit to FacEx a list of the GRF recipients for the previous Spring. For each GRF award, this list should include the name and affiliation of the project director and the title of the project, the award amount, and the date of the most recent previous award.  
    2. Review and clarify 1) general policies related to GRF, 2) GRF reporting requirements, 3) the composition of committees that evaluate GRF proposals, and, where necessary, 4) the policies of specific entities and units related to the GRF fund, and 5) clarify the amount and percentage of total GRF funds that are distributed as faculty awards.
    3. Identify issues with general GRF policies, forward suggested modification of policies to FacEx, and seek Faculty Council endorsement for proposed changes to these policies.
    4. Identify issues with the GRF policies of specific entities and units and communicate the need for changes in the policies to those units.

 

2.       Advise and assist the Vice Provost for Research in formulating and articulating policy related to research at the University of Kansas, to include exceptions policies. Among its tasks under this charge, the committee should specifically:

    1. Consult with the Vice Provost for Research regarding the University's implementation of its policy on Restricted Research (Faculty Senate Rules and Regulations, Article IX), continuously assess policies and procedures for handling requests for exception, and make recommendations to the Vice Provost for Research regarding this policy.
    2. Serve as the body to hear faculty appeals of research rejected by the restricted research committee or by the Vice Provost for Research, as specified in the Restricted Research Policy.
    3. Maintain a current record, open for review, of the review actions taken by the Restricted Research Committee and the Office of the Vice Provost for Research.
    4. Make an annual report to the Faculty Senate Executive Committee listing each restrictive grant or contract considered during the year, to include

                                                               i.      Title of project

                                                             ii.      Name of principal investigator or project director

                                                            iii.      Source or sources of funds for support of project

                                                            iv.      Action by the Restricted Research Committee as to approval or disapproval

                                                              v.      If approved, a short statement of justification for the proposed research in terms of the purposes of the University and if disapproved, a short statement of the reasons for rejection.

    1. Monitor the implementation of recommendations that the KU Center for Research (KUCR) broadly disseminate the University's scientific/scholarly misconduct policy by:

                                                               i.      Establishing clear, labeled links on Research Compliance website to the policy

                                                             ii.      Listing the policy on the Provost’s webpage along with other major policies such as the Grievance policy, policies on Intellectual Policy, Workplace Violence, etc.

                                                            iii.      Linking the policy from websites hosted by departments and research centers, especially those listing grievance procedures

The committee should collaborate with the Vice Provost and the dean of the Graduate school to ensure that faculty, staff, and students engaged in research are fully informed of this policy and understand the practical implications of it.

 

3.       Work with ACTC and the recommended Special Task Force on Research Computing to consider needs for and issues with research computing and telecommunications, to include recommendations for sustainable policies and procedures.

 

4.       Submit to FacEx:

    1. The approved minutes of each meeting,
    2. Recommendations for action as they are approved by the committee, and
    3. A final report by April 1, 2007. The final report should make clear what was done (or not done) about each of the charges to the committee and make recommendations to FacEx for action.

 

Additional Charges

        

  1. On April 27, 2006, the Faculty Council approved a new Restricted Research Policy for the University of Kansas Lawrence Campus to replace the “Classified Research Policy” that appears in FSRR as Article IX.  After considerable and serious discussion, Faculty Council amended the “harm to humans” language originally proposed by the classified research task force and FSRC in section III.5 from “The University will not enter into or renew any agreement or contract or accept any grant that has only harmful consequences for humankind” to “ . . . that has primarily harmful consequences for human beings.” At this time, it is not known which language will be adopted by the administration. It is apparent that there is room for continued review on this section, and FSRC should evaluate the language eventually adopted by the University, and make any recommendations deemed necessary for a sustainable research policy.

 

  1. Coordinate with the Office of the Vice Provost for Research to develop a Compliance Plan for accepting limited dissemination research with total or indefinite classifications. This plan will include but not be limited to establishing an educational program for Export Controls and Embargoes, and widely disseminating this information among key academic administrators (including Deans, Center Directors and Chairs) and research faculty and staff.

 

 

  1. Consult with KUCR on the modification and adaptation of the online database for reporting (and compiling) the outcomes of GRF awards, to include assessing the effectiveness of the percentage reporting.

 

  1. Investigate the mechanism by which the total pool of money for the GRF can be increased in order to encourage these units to engage in even more research and scholarship. The total pool of money available for the GRF has not increased in the last six years.

 

9.   External funding agencies are increasingly limiting the number of proposals that will be accepted from an institution in response to a particular call.  In lieu of this, investigate the current practices of KUCR in selecting which proposals will be sent forward, to include procedures used in review of any internal preproposals. Make recommendations for sustainable and transparent institutional procedures for internal review of limited submission proposals and forward to FacEx by February 1, 2007.