Science Integrity Policy – Breach Process Fact Sheet

The Department of National Defence (DND) and Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) Science Integrity Policy (SIP) seeks to foster and promote a culture of scientific integrity and to ensure the relevance and reputation of DND/CAF research, science and technology expertise.

The SIP applies to all DND employees and CAF members who design, conduct, communicate, manage, review or make use of defence and security research, science or related activities, and/or DND research facilities. This includes external contractors, collaborators and clients, as well as visiting scientists and students.

Science Integrity Policy breach process guidelines

The breach process guidelines are intended to assist in understanding the required process for the submission, assessment and investigation of SIP breaches.

These guidelines uphold seven principles for any allegations of SIP breaches and any assessment, investigation or adjudication must follow the following principles:

What is a breach of scientific integrity?

A breach of scientific integrity is defined as:

• Scientific misconduct: behaviour normally in the direct conduct or preparation of scientific activity by individuals inconsistent with or violating the following SIP provisions.( 7.3.3, 7.4.2, 7.4.3, 7.4.4, 7.4.9, 7.5.1, 7.5.2, 7.5.3, 7.5.6, 7.8)
• Unethical or unprofessional behaviour: behaviours of managers, supervisors or other relevant personnel in support of scientific activity, inconsistent with or violating the following SIP provisions. (7.3.3, 7.3.4, 7.4.6, 7.4.7, 7.5.4, 7.5.7)

Policy non-compliance refers to behaviours inconsistent with other specified provisions in the SIP and fall outside of the Breach process. Policy non-compliance is subject to organizational corrective measures.

How are breaches of scientific integrity addressed?

The process for addressing a potential breach of Scientific Integrity involves a sequence of up to five phases. Not all phases would be utilized in a breach allegation. Certain phases include actions taken prior to the submission of an allegation and the final phase leads to the formal resolution of the allegation, which could include corrective measures. Please note that a formal resolution can occur at certain stages within the process should the issue be resolved.

• Phase 1. Detection and consultation
• Phase 2. Notification and assessment
• Phase 3. Structured alternative dispute resolution (ADR) (if appropriate)
• Phase 4. Breach investigation (informal and formal if required)
• Phase 5. Resolution and conclusion

A process overview is presented at figure 1.

Breach process roles and responsibilities

• Science Integrity Lead (SIL): responsible for the process and resulting decisions.
• The Office of Scientific Integrity (OSI): the team dedicated to departmental administration of the SIP. Case manager (CM): ensures that cases are conducted properly and in accordance with the SIP guidelines.
• Alleger: the originator(s) or source of the allegation.
• Respondent: the person(s) who allegedly breached scientific integrity.
• SIP Breach Head of Response (BHR): the individual designated to oversee and manage a breach allegation investigation, if initiated.
• Expert advisor to the Head of Response: an impartial individual with knowledge of the scientific/research field central to the complaint.
• Breach Case Assessor(s) (BCA): appointed to conduct the “fact-finding” stage of an informal investigation.
• Breach Case Committee (BCC): a committee of independent experts chosen to conduct a formal investigation if needed.
• Science Integrity Committee: an advisory body to the SIL to consider the findings and recommendations of an assessment or investigation.

For questions, please contact: ScienceIntegrity-IntegriteScientifique@forces.gc.ca

Figure 1

• Long description of Figure 1

  The review and resolution of a Science Integrity Policy (SIP) breach allegation will generally follow a sequence through up to five phases.

  Phase 1 is a preliminary phase prior to an allegation being submitted, that focuses on detection and consultation regarding the issue at hand. The objective is to provide guidance and interpretations to anyone looking for information on the SIP or the breach process. It also ensures that when possible, options for informal resolution are explored prior to an allegation being submitted. These options include mediation, self-help and supervisor intervention.

  If the informal resolution is successful, the issue is resolved.

  If the informal resolution is unsuccessful, the breach process proceeds to Phase 2.

  Phase 2 is the phase of the breach process that facilitates the preparation and initial evaluation of an allegation, and ensures that notifications are submitted as required. An initial validation and assessment of the incident is then conducted for the science integrity lead (SIL). With this information, the SIL determines how to best proceed with resolution.

  Steps within Phase 2 include:

  • filing of an allegation
  • receipt and determination of jurisdiction
  • notification and clarification
  • validation and assessment
  • case report
  • decision and recommended course of action

  It may be necessary to proceed to phase 3 for alternative dispute resolution (ADR), if suitable to the allegation and both parties agree. In phase 3, the allegation is turned over to the conflict and complaint management service (CCMS) for a structured ADR process, leading to a settlement agreement.

  If, however, the parties disagree or the issue is too complex or urgent for ADR, the allegation may be investigated within the SIP breach process, by the breach head of response (BHR) at Phase 4.

  Steps within Phase 4 include:

  • Initiation of an investigation, led by the BHR
  • Fact-finding, led by the breach case assessor (BCA)
  • Fact-finding draft report, led by the BCA
  • Breach case committee (BCC) investigation
  • Investigation draft report (if required) from the BCC
  • Preparation of response final report

  The BHR will then prepare a final recommendation to the SIL.

  Phase 5 is the resolution and conclusion phase of the process for all allegations and investigations.

  Steps within Phase 5 include:

  • Official decision and recommendations by the SIL
  • Implementation
  • Formal review of investigation phase, if requested

  Ultimately, resolutions of allegations determined at phases 2, 3, or 4 are reviewed and finalized by a final decision by the SIL at phase 5.