1 / 33

SCIENCE INTEGRITY IN THE FWS Rick Coleman

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Office of the Science Advisor Webinar June 20, 2013. SCIENCE INTEGRITY IN THE FWS Rick Coleman FWS Senior Science Advisor and Science Integrity Officer. Where do you work?. A. Field station B. Regional Office C. Headquarters D. Other.

hayley
Download Presentation

SCIENCE INTEGRITY IN THE FWS Rick Coleman

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Office of the Science Advisor Webinar June 20, 2013 SCIENCE INTEGRITY IN THE FWS Rick Coleman FWS Senior Science Advisor and Science Integrity Officer

  2. Where do you work? • A. Field station • B. Regional Office • C. Headquarters • D. Other

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. Ethics Program Ethics 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 Professional & Personal Ethics Executive Order 12674 18 U.S.C. 201 – 209 5 C.F.R. 2635 FWS Policy, 212 FW 1-11 Donations, Fundraising and Solicitation DOI Policy, 374 DM 6 Draft FWS Policy, 212 FW 8 Scientific Integrity

  6. Scientific Integrity305 DM 3 and 212 FW 7 Inquiry Process Status of complaints Some examples Policy update

  7. Decision making factorsmay include: • Economic • Budget • Institutional • Social • Cultural • Legal • Environmental • Scientific and scholarly information

  8. 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

  9. OIG Referrals • Allegations of: • Reprisal for making a scientific misconduct allegation • Waste, fraud, abuse Referred to the Office of the Inspector General (OIG)

  10. 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

  11. 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.

  12. Based on my current understanding, are you aware of a scientific integrity concern? Yes No

  13. Allegations of Science Misconduct or Loss of Scientific Integrity Regarding DOI Employees and Volunteers Allegation of scientific misconduct received by Office of the Executive Secretariat (OES) Closed case, resolution memo to subject and complainant Evaluation: Scientific Integrity Officer (SIO) initial review of allegation No merit Memo to subject Inquiry: SIO will convene Scientific Integrity Review Panel, or panel of experts to conduct further inquiry, reports to SIO No misconduct Corrective Action: working with SIO and HR, Coordinating Manager will determine corrective action, if necessary To OES Appeal? Misconduct Memo to subject & complainant

  14. DOI Political Appointees? • Inquiry process the same as for Employees, • Except process is performed by: • Department Scientific Integrity Officer (DSIO)

  15. Allegations of Science Misconduct or Loss of Scientific Integrity Regarding DOI Contractors, Cooperators, Partners, Permittees, Lessees, and Grantees Allegation of scientific misconduct received by Office of the Executive Secretariat (OES) Closed case, resolution memo to subject’s organization and complainant Evaluation: Scientific Integrity Officer (SIO) initial review of allegation No merit Memo to subject’s organization Inquiry: Subject’s organization will investigate and certify results to appropriate DOI official and SIO, who will review No misconduct Corrective Action: Subject’s organization will take action according to their policy. DOI will take appropriate action too. To OES Appeal? Misconduct Memo to subject’s organization & complainant

  16. If I did have a scientific integrity concern I would feel most comfortable first talking with: • My co-workers • My supervisor • c. Ombudsman • d. Scientific Integrity Officer • e. Office of the Inspector General • f. None of the above

  17. 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

  18. Resolution of allegations FY 12

  19. Resolution of allegations FY 13

  20. 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

  21. 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”

  22. 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

  23. 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 complain b. I am not sure if I will be protected if I complain c. I don’t believe that I will be protected

  24. 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.

  25. 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

  26. Proposed Revisions to 305 DM 3 • Add “self-plagiarism” • Add Ombudsman role to BSIO • Parse out scientific concern from other issues • Add appeals process

  27. 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

  28. FWS Ethics Presentation Scientific Integrity: FWS Scientific Integrity Officer: Rick Coleman, (303) 236-4443, rick_coleman@fws.gov Department Scientific Integrity Officer: Suzette Kimball (703) 648-7412, suzette_kimball@usgs.gov http://www.doi.gov/scientificintegrity/index.cfm

  29. FWS Ethics Presentation Office of Government Ethics: www.usoge.gov DOI Ethics Office (part of Solicitor’s office): 1849 CSt., 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, anne_badgley@fws.gov; Requests to serve in official capacity as officer/board member of non-profit organization: Temporary contact: Cathey Willis, (303) 236-4325, cathey_willis@fws.gov

  30. Ethics Contacts Donations, Fundraising and Solicitations: Contact while policy in draft: Rebecca Halbe, Refuges (703) 358-2635, rebecca_halbe@fws.gov Contact after policy final: LauryParramore, External Affairs, (703) 358-1711, laury_parramore@fws.gov

  31. Regional/Headquarters Assistant Ethics Counselors 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

  32. 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

  33. Thank you! Questions? Discussion?

More Related