• research, scholarly and creative works;
  
• training in research, scholarly and creative activity;
  
• related research, scholarly and creative activities.

(Note: Allegations of academic fraud against students shall be dealt with under the University of Manitoba Student Discipline Bylaw.)

Members of the University who hold what they believe to be well-founded suspicions of academic fraud should normally seek an explanation of the suspicion from the person(s) involved, to identify misunderstandings. Failing resolution, the matter should be reported to the person's Dean or Director. Any report shall be in writing, signed, include all pertinent details of the allegation and be accompanied by such supporting evidence as may be available. If the allegation is against the person's Dean or Director then the matter should be reported to the Vice-President (Academic) and Provost. In the case where a graduate student has made an allegation of academic fraud against his/her supervisor, the Dean of Graduate Studies should give due consideration to any impact this action may have on the student's academic program.

Once a written allegation of academic fraud has been received by an administrator of the University the following procedures shall apply:

1. The Dean or Director concerned shall advise the Vice-President (Academic) and Provost of the allegation.

2. The Vice-President (Academic) and Provost shall direct a Senior Administrator in the Office of the President with the responsibility for Research and the Dean of Graduate Studies to conduct an inquiry jointly, in confidence, to determine whether the allegation warrants an investigation.

3. Normally the inquiry shall be completed within 60 calendar days of its initiation. If the inquiry takes longer than 60 calendar days to complete, the record of the inquiry shall include documentation of the reasons for exceeding the 60 calendar day period. A written report of the inquiry to the Vice-President (Academic) and Provost shall include a statement of what evidence was reviewed, summaries of relevant interviews and the conclusions as to whether or not the allegation is supported and whether or not an investigation is warranted. The person(s) against whom the allegation was made shall receive a copy of this report and have the opportunity to add written comments. The person(s) who made the allegation shall be advised in confidence and in writing of the conclusions of the inquiry.

4. If as a result of the inquiry the allegation is not supported and an investigation is reported not to be warranted, the University shall act as described in item 11 below.

5. If the person(s) against whom the allegation was made, admit(s) guilt but as a result of the inquiry an investigation is reported not to be warranted, the University and the President shall act as described in item 10 below.

6. Whenever an investigation is reported not to be warranted, documentation of the inquiry in sufficient detail to permit a later assessment of the reasons for determining that an investigation was not warranted shall be rendered for safekeeping to the Vice-President (Academic) and Provost for a period of at least three (3) years.

7. If as a result of the inquiry an investigation is reported to be warranted the Vice-President (Academic) and Provost shall, within 30 calendar days of receipt of the report of the inquiry, appoint a committee to conduct an investigation.

8. The committee referred to in item 7 shall:

   a) consist of three (3) impartial members of the academic staff appointed by the Vice-President (Academic) and Provost such that no more than two (2) are from the same general academic area as the person(s) against whom the allegation was made and at least one (1) is from a different academic area (e.g. natural sciences, social and behavioural sciences, health sciences, humanities, applied sciences);

   b) name a Chair from among its three (3) members;

   c) establish its own procedures with the following provisions:

   • normally all documentation (including but not necessarily limited to relevant research data and proposals, publications, correspondence and memoranda of telephone calls) shall be examined;
   • whenever possible, interviews shall be conducted of all persons involved either in making the allegation or against whom the allegation was made, as well as others who might have information regarding key aspects of the allegation;
   • complete summaries of interviews shall be prepared, provided to the interviewed party for comment or revision and included as part of the investigatory file;
   • the committee shall request any information it deems necessary;
   • the committee shall consult with such external experts as it may deem necessary and appropriate;
   • decisions shall be made by majority vote; and
     
     

   d) complete its activities with due dispatch, normally within 120 calendar days of its being appointed. If the committee determines that it will not be able to complete the investigation in 120 calendar days, it shall submit to the Vice-President (Academic) and Provost an explanation for the delay which includes an interim report on the progress to date and an estimate for the date of completion of the report.

9. The mandate of the committee referred to in item 7 shall be:

   a) to carry out a detailed examination of the facts relevant to the alleged academic fraud;

   b) to establish on a balance of probabilities whether or not academic fraud has been committed;

   c) to identify, as far as is reasonably possible, whether or not any established academic fraud compromises earlier research or scholarly work of the person(s) against whom the allegation was made;

   d) to identify the role and responsibility, with respect to any academic fraud, of any others involved in the research or scholarly work under question and to report to the Vice-President (Academic) and Provost on any need for further inquiry respecting the role and responsibility of others;

   e) to make a full written report to the President and the Vice-President (Academic) and Provost of its findings and its decision on the case; and

   f) to render all documentation substantiating its findings for safekeeping by the Vice-President (Academic) and Provost for a period of at least three (3) years.

10. If it has been established that academic fraud has been committed by one or more person(s):

    a) the President shall make recommendations to the Board of Governors regarding appropriate disciplinary action; and

    b) the University shall, through the Office of the President:

    i) send each of those person(s) the portion of the report of the committee that pertains to him/her;

    ii) notify external sponsors of the research in question of the decision and any comments of those person(s) upon the report;

    iii) send to the person(s) who made the allegation those portions of the report of the committee that address their role and opinions in the investigation;

    iv) notify any immediate research collaborators and responsible administrators of the decision and arrange for the continuance or discontinuance of research currently in progress;

    v) take appropriate remedial measures with regard to any publications or reports invalidated by the academic fraud; and
    
    vi) make appropriate public statements.
    
    

11. If the allegation of academic fraud against one or more person(s) is not established the University shall, through the Office of the President:

    a) send each of those person(s) the portion of the report of the committee that pertains to him/her;

    b) send to the person(s) who made the allegation those portions of the report of the committee that address their role and opinions in the investigation;

    c) take appropriate action against person(s) making allegations that were found to be malicious; and

    d) take appropriate action on any other related concerns.