Overall Rating Gold
Overall Score 83.85
Liaison Mark Maxwell
Submission Date March 1, 2019
Executive Letter Download

STARS v2.1

University of California, Merced
IN-3: Academy-Industry Connections

Status Score Responsible Party
Complete 0.50 / 0.50 Breeana Sylvas
Assistant Director
"---" indicates that no data was submitted for this field

Does the institution have published policies or guidelines governing industry-sponsored research that fully meet all of the credit criteria?:

A copy of the policies or guidelines governing academy-industry connections:

The policies or guidelines governing academy-industry connections:

-- Require that all significant consulting contracts (e.g. those worth $5,000 or more a year) be reported to a standing committee charged with reviewing and managing individual and institutional conflicts of interest: The UCM Conflict of Interest Committee is a panel of faculty members from disciplines across the campus. They review positive disclosures of financial interests to determine whether these interests constitute significant conflicts that must be eliminated, reduced or managed before research support can be accepted. If research support may be accepted, the Committee then also determines an appropriate strategy for management of any significant conflict.
https://www.ucop.edu/research-graduate studies/_files/research/policies/documents/coipolicy.pdf

-- Prohibit faculty, students, postdoctoral fellows, medical residents, and other academic professionals from engaging in industry-led “ghostwriting” or “ghost authorship”:
APM - 190 Appendix B: University Policy on Integrity in Research: The policy contains the following language: “University policies set forth expectations for high standards of ethical behavior for faculty and students involved in research and provide procedures for addressing allegations of misconduct in research… Misconduct means fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the scholarly and scientific community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research.” It can be accessed here: https://www.ucop.edu/academic-personnel-programs/_files/apm/apm-190-b.pdf.
APM - 015: The Faculty Code of Conduct: The policy contains the following language under the Scholarship heading in Part II: “Types of unacceptable conduct: Violation of canons of intellectual honesty, such as research misconduct and/or intentional misappropriation of the writings, research, and findings of others.” https://www.ucop.edu/academic-personnel-programs/_files/apm/apm-015.pdf.

-- 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: This can be found in the Principles Regarding Research Results

-- Ban confidential corporate research (i.e. research that cannot be published).
This is also addressed in the UC Principles Regarding Rights to Future Research Results
“Agreements with external parties shall not abridge the ability of University researchers to disseminate their research methods and results in a timely manner. The most fundamental tenet of the University is the freedom to interpret and publish or otherwise disseminate research results in order to support the transfer of knowledge to others and maintain an open academic environment that fosters intellectual creativity.”

The website URL where information about the programs or initiatives is available:

Additional documentation to support 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 and complete the Data Inquiry Form.