| Overall Rating | Silver |
|---|---|
| Overall Score | 53.94 |
| Liaison | DeLayne Miller |
| Submission Date | Dec. 15, 2022 |
Tennessee Technological University
IN-1: Academy-Industry Connections
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
0.00 / 0.50 |
DeLayne
Miller Sustainability Manager Facilities:Office of Sustainability |
Does the institution require that all significant consulting contracts be reported to a standing committee charged with reviewing and managing individual and institutional conflicts of interest?:
The policy language that requires that all significant consulting contracts be reviewed for conflicts of interest:
Policy No.: 132
Policy Name: Conflict of Interest
I. Purpose
Tennessee Tech employees serve the interests of the State of Tennessee and its citizens and have a duty to avoid activities and situations that, either actually or potentially, put personal interests before the professional obligations they owe to the State and its citizens. This policy is intended to 1) define the general principles that guide the actions of Tennessee Tech employees, 2) offer illustrations of activities that potentially constitute a Conflict of Interest, 3) make employees aware of disclosure requirements related to conflicts of interest, 4) describe the process by which those disclosures shall be evaluated and decisions rendered, and 5) describe the appeals process regarding such decisions.
Conflict of Interest
TTU Policy 735 (updated 1/1/2018)
I. Purpose
The purpose of this policy is to promote objectivity in research by establishing standards that provide a reasonable expectation that the design, conduct, and reporting of research, including those supported by grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts, will be free from bias resulting from Investigator Financial Conflicts of Interest. In particular, the Public Health Service (PHS) has promulgated regulations on “Promoting Objectivity in Research.” This Policy is premised on the Public Health Service (PHS) regulation 42 CFR Part 50.601 and the Code of Federal Regulations on Financial Conflict of Interest regarding research (45 CFR Part 94.1).
Does the institution prohibit faculty, staff, students, postdoctoral fellows, medical residents, and other academic professionals from engaging in industry-led “ghostwriting” or “ghost authorship”?:
The policy language that prohibits industry-led “ghostwriting” or “ghost authorship”:
Does the institution prohibit participation in sponsored research that restricts investigator access to the complete study data or that limits investigators’ ability to verify the accuracy and validity of final reported results?:
The policy language that prohibits sponsored research that restricts investigator access or verification:
Does the institution ban confidential corporate research?:
The policy language that bans confidential corporate research:
Website URL where information about the institution’s policies regarding industry-sponsored research is available:
Additional documentation to support the submission:
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:
The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution or simply email your inquiry to stars@aashe.org.