Download - SCIENCE INTEGRITY IN THE FWS Rick Coleman
SCIENCE INTEGRITY IN THE FWS
Rick Coleman
FWS Senior Science Advisor and Science Integrity Officer
U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceOffice of the Science Advisor
WebinarJune 20, 2013
Where do you work?
• A. Field station
• B. Regional Office
• C. Headquarters
• D. Other
What Service Program do you work in?
• A. Ecological Services• B. Migratory Birds• C. Refuges/Partners for Fish and Wildlife• D. Fisheries• E. Law Enforcement• F. Science Applications/LCCs• G. Administration
If you had a concern about scientific misconduct, how likely would you be to report it?
• A. Very unlikely• B. Somewhat unlikely• C. Neither• D. Somewhat likely• E. Very likely
Ethics Program
Scientific and Scholarly Integrity
Presidential Memo on Scientific Integrity, 3/9/09;
Sec. Order No. 3305, 9/9/10; DOI policy, 305 DM 3; FWS policy, 212 FW 7
Donations, Fundraising and
Solicitation
DOI Policy, 374 DM 6Draft FWS Policy, 212 FW 8
Ethics
Scientific IntegrityProfessional & Personal Ethics
Executive Order 1267418 U.S.C. 201 – 209
5 C.F.R. 2635FWS Policy, 212 FW 1-11
Scientific Integrity305 DM 3 and 212 FW 7
Inquiry ProcessStatus of complaints
Some examplesPolicy update
Decision making factorsmay include:
• Economic• Budget• Institutional• Social• Cultural• Legal• Environmental• Scientific and scholarly information
Scientific Integrity applies to:
• All DOI employees and volunteers• All DOI Political appointees• All DOI contractors dealing with science or
scholarship activities• All participants in Agreements, MOUs, Grants
with DOI bureaus dealing with science or scholarship activities
OIG Referrals
• Allegations of:– Reprisal for making a scientific misconduct
allegation– Waste, fraud, abuse
Referred to the Office of the Inspector General (OIG)
Scientific Misconduct defined:
• Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing science or scholarly activities; or
• Intentionally circumventing policy that ensures the integrity of science or scholarship, or
• Actions that compromise scientific or scholarly integrity, that is not an honest error or difference of opinion
A finding of scientific misconduct requires:
• There is a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant scientific community, and
• The misconduct is committed intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly, and
• The allegation is proven by a preponderance of evidence.
Based on my current understanding, are you aware of a scientific integrity concern?
a. Yesb. No
Allegation of scientific misconduct received by Office of the Executive Secretariat (OES)
Evaluation: Scientific Integrity Officer (SIO) initial review of allegation
Inquiry: SIO will convene Scientific Integrity Review Panel, or panel of experts to conduct further inquiry, reports to SIO
No meritClosed case, resolution memo to subject and complainant
No misconduct
Misconduct
Corrective Action: working with SIO and HR, Coordinating Manager will determine corrective action, if necessary
Memo to subject
Memo to subject & complainant
Appeal? To OES
Allegations of Science Misconduct or Loss of Scientific Integrity Regarding DOI Employees and Volunteers
DOI Political Appointees?• Inquiry process the same as for Employees,
• Except process is performed by:• Department Scientific Integrity Officer (DSIO)
Allegation of scientific misconduct received by Office of the Executive Secretariat (OES)
Evaluation: Scientific Integrity Officer (SIO) initial review of allegation
Inquiry: Subject’s organization will investigate and certify results to appropriate DOI official and SIO, who will review
No meritClosed case, resolution memo to subject’s organization and complainant
No misconduct
Misconduct
Corrective Action: Subject’s organization will take action according to their policy. DOI will take appropriate action too.
Memo to subject’s organization
Memo to subject’s organization & complainant
Appeal? To OES
Allegations of Science Misconduct or Loss of Scientific Integrity Regarding DOI Contractors, Cooperators, Partners, Permittees, Lessees, and Grantees
If I did have a scientific integrity concern I would feel most comfortable first talking with:
a. My co-workersb. My supervisor
c. Ombudsman d. Scientific Integrity Officer e. Office of the Inspector General f. None of the above
SI allegations – FY 12
• 7 Formal allegations– filed with the Department Office of the Executive
Secretariat,– status tracked by Department
• 10 Informal allegations(calls and referrals to Scientific Integrity officer directly)– Referrals from OIG, Ethics Officer, employees
• Some informal complaints become formal
Resolution of allegations FY 12Complaints Closed Nearly
closedReview Panel
Open
7 Formal 5 2
10 Informal
9 1
Resolution of allegations FY 13Complaints Closed Nearly
closedReview Panel
Open
1 Formal 0 1
2 Informal
1 1
Scientific Integrity Allegation Examples
• Omission of relevant data in decision document or court testimony
• Misuse of modeling in Sec. 7 maps• Interference with data collection• Plagiarism• Contractor fabricated field data/invoices
SI Observations/Trends
• Ombudsman role important• “no surprises” vs. “no bad news”• Adequate peer review• Communication• Modeling, everyone’s doing it• Structured Decision Making• “Prior statements”/”promises”
Scientific Integrity Policy Update
• Department SIO : Suzette Kimball, USGS• New DOI on-line training Fall 2013
– One hour course, focus: Code of Conduct– Who should take this course in FWS?
• Closer working with Office of Inspector General and DOI Solicitor Office.
• Reprisal actions could be a concern
Which of the following statements best represents your perception of protection afforded under “Whistleblower protection”?
a. I am confident that I will be protected if I complainb. I am not sure if I will be protected if I complainc. I don’t believe that I will be protected
Proposed Revisions to 305 DM 3
• Add “Loss of Scientific Integrity” per DOI Code of Scientific and Scholarly Conduct in addition to “Scientific Misconduct”
• Failure to abide by code “may” lead to a loss of scientific integrity.
Code of Scientific and Scholarly Conduct, 305 DM 3.7
• 3 Sections– All DOI employees, volunteers, contractors,
Cooperators, Partners, Permittees, Leasees, and Grantees must abide by:…… I will…..
– All Scientists and Scholars must abide by: ….I will…..
– All decision-makers must abide by: …I will
Proposed Revisions to 305 DM 3
• Add “self-plagiarism”
• Add Ombudsman role to BSIO
• Parse out scientific concern from other issues
• Add appeals process
Proposed Revisions to 305 DM 3
• Assignment of “Coordinating manager” and “Servicing Human Resource Officer”
• Add Boilerplate language to all science-related contracts, grants, agreements, MOU, etc.
• Appendices become DOI website “Scientific Integrity Handbook”
• Strengthen Whistleblower protection
Scientific Integrity:• FWS Scientific Integrity Officer: Rick Coleman, • (303) 236-4443, [email protected]
Department Scientific Integrity Officer: Suzette Kimball(703) 648-7412, [email protected]
http://www.doi.gov/scientificintegrity/index.cfm
FWS Ethics Presentation
Office of Government Ethics: www.usoge.gov DOI Ethics Office (part of Solicitor’s office): 1849 C St.,
N.W. MS 4251, Washington, D.C. 20240; (202) 208-4980, www.doi.gov/ethics
FWS Ethics Program:• Deputy Ethics Counselor/National Ethics Program
Director, Anne Badgley, (503) 326-2008, [email protected];
• Requests to serve in official capacity as officer/board member of non-profit organization: Temporary contact: Cathey Willis, (303) 236-4325, [email protected]
FWS Ethics Presentation
Donations, Fundraising and Solicitations:• Contact while policy in draft: Rebecca Halbe, Refuges (703)
358-2635, [email protected]• Contact after policy final: Laury Parramore, External Affairs,
(703) 358-1711, [email protected]
Ethics Contacts
• Headquarters - Nicole Hall (703) 358-2647; Marion Campbell (703) 358-1935
• R1/8 -Jeff Hardgrove/Michelle Bowden (503) 231-6141 • R2 - Anna Vargas (505) 248-6936; Duane Padilla (505) 248-
6610; • R3 - Karen Schul (612) 713-5267; Katie Eull (612)713-5245; • R4 - Fred Thomas (404) 679-4045; Ben Livingston (404)
679-4023; • R5 -Sheri Kania (413) 253-8263; Louise Barry (413) 253-
8262; • R6 - Kathy Bevan (303) 236-4499; • R7 – Mildred Riley (907) 786-3647; Helen Stewart (907)
786-3307
Regional/Headquarters Assistant Ethics Counselors
If you had a concern about scientific misconduct, how likely would you be to report it?
• A. Very unlikely• B. Somewhat unlikely• C. Neither• D. Somewhat likely• E. Very likely
Thank you!
Questions?Discussion?