���ϲ�����

Group

Concordat Requirement

University Compliance

Researchers will:

1.1 Understand the expected standards of rigour and integrity relevant to their research

The expected standards of behaviour are made clear within University policy and procedures (see 1.4). Links to professional standards are also provided within the Research Integrity and related toolkits.

1.2 Maintain the highest standards of rigour and integrity in their work at all times

The University aims to support researchers to achieve and maintain the highest standards of rigour and integrity. See 1.3 and 1.4.

Employers of researchers are responsible for:

1.3 Collaborating to maintain a research environment that develops good research practice and nurtures a culture of research integrity, as described in commitments 2 to 5

The University works closely with national organisations/forums such as the UK Research Integrity Office, the Association of Research Ethics Committees, and the Russell Group Integrity Forum (amongst others) to share sectoral best practice and resources, to gather intelligence on emergent areas and resolve issues.

The University has a significant training and support network for PGR students and academic staff, significant portions of which are delivered in collaboration with other organisations. (See 3.2 for further details of our training programmes)

In addition, the University runs a collaborative post graduate training programme with Newcastle University offering our Research Integrity Training to Newcastle PGR students. At the doctoral level the University is also involved in the delivery of joint programmes. There are also key framework collaborations which share practice well beyond the UK, such as FAPESBY which involves Brazilian institutions.

1.4 Supporting researchers to understand and act according to expected standards, values and behaviours, and defending them when they live up to these expectations in difficult circumstances

The University has put in place clear policies to set out responsibilities and support for research integrity. The sets out the University’s commitment to social responsibility, its framework of accountability, and the key behaviours expected of all members of the University.  Specific responsibilities relating to research are set out in the ; this, and the related , were updated in 2017. In 2018, a new University-wide was approved (see 2.1). The policies are supported at institution level by the and the (the latter significantly expanded during 2018), with more specific support embedded within local documents e.g. within departmental handbooks. The University also provides high level policies on , .

Training is provided to researchers in different formats and tailored according to research discipline. An assessment of central training provision was carried out in 2017/18.  For further detail on training and mentoring available, see 3.2.

Funders of research expect:

1.5 Researchers to adhere to the highest standards of professionalism and integrity

See 1.4

1.6 Employers of researchers to have procedures in place to ensure that research is conducted in accordance with standards of best practice; systems to promote research integrity; and transparent, robust and fair processes to investigate alleged research misconduct

See 1.4 regarding policies and procedures to support research integrity.

See Section 4 regarding Research Misconduct processes.

Group

Concordat Requirement

University Compliance

Researchers will:

2.1 Ensure that all research is subject to active and appropriate consideration of ethical issues

The University requires that all research is subject to appropriate scrutiny and approval prior to any work beginning. In 2018 a new University-level was approved, which sets out the University’s expectations regarding ethical review and approval.  This year RIS have piloted an online ethics form with four departments in different Faculties, which is intended to remove the need for individual departmental forms and facilitate greater reporting and compliance.  Together, these developments will facilitate a more consistent and thorough review of ethical issues across the University.

The senior responsible committee is . The Ethics Framework is set out within the and . Practical review of applications for (non animal / non NHS) projects is devolved to each department, who must provide assurance via returns and audit to the relevant faculty committee (which also functions as a forum for sharing good practice and enforcing University policy) and then upwards to Ethics Advisory Committee.

The University also operates an AWERB committee for all animal research (licensed and unlicensed) which reports to Ethics Advisory Committee on a termly basis.

Any NHS projects go through the relevant HRA process, however the University retains a registry of all projects and approvals.

The has been further developed in conjunction with the Ethics Policy and online ethics system.  This provides guidance on the high-risk ethical areas and acts as a central hub for support and information. Whilst systems already exists to monitor the completion of funding staff and student projects, the adoption of the new system will both extend this assurance to unfunded projects and make assurance easier. Additional support and training for researchers on ethical considerations is available from a variety of sources (see 2.4 and 2.5).

2.2 Comply with ethical, legal and professional frameworks, obligations and standards as required by statutory and regulatory authorities, and by employers, funders and other relevant stakeholders

The University requires that all research complies with the expectations and standards of all relevant bodies. Where there is a difference in standards the University operates a principle of subsidiarity. This is explicit within the Research Integrity Policy & Code of Good Practice. Sections , , and .  Information on relevant funder and professional bodies’ is now included in the ethics toolkit.

This year, guidance on consent and template information sheets and consent forms have been updated to comply with the requirements of GDPR.  Specific guidance has also been provided for researchers on compliance with GDPR. 

In addition, more detailed guidance on responsibilities for individuals involved with human tissue have been drawn up and integrated into the Human Tissue governance master file. 

Employers of researchers are responsible for:

2.3 Having clear policies on ethical approval available to all researchers

In addition to the and toolkit, documentation for Ethics Advisory Committee and for the Faculty Ethics Committees are publically available on the .  Terms of Reference and detailed duties of AWERB have also been made available.   Specific departmental policies and guidance are available on the relevant departmental webpages and DUO sites. (Not linked as not all are universally available).

2.4 Making sure that all researchers are aware of and understand policies and processes relating to ethical approval

Specific training is provided to researchers on the ethical approval processes. This is delivered at both department level and by the Professional Support Services, particularly Research & Innovation Services (RIS) and the Durham Centre for Academic Development (DCAD).  See 2.5 for further information on training.

The Ethics and Governance Toolkit includes and aligns with the new policy (which was disseminated via the Faculty ethics committees), and includes specific pages on the relevant processes (AWERB, departmental processes, NHS and acceptance of external approvals.)

The new online ethics system being piloted this year helps to guide researchers through the review process and contains links out to relevant guidance in the toolkit.  As this system automates some of the administrative tasks associated with the approval process, it has also enabled pilot departments to introduce a requirement for all students to complete the initial ethics checklist for final year projects.

All staff are reminded of their obligations to ensure research receives appropriate review at their Board of Studies meeting. The ethical review process is well integrated with the processes for project approval and set-up for any externally funded work. The formalises the requirement that ethics is considered and makes it an explicit part of both the PI and Head of Department sign-off processes.

Ethical approval for student projects is a condition of (variously) ability to progress, credit bearing and a requirement before a project will be considered for marking.

2.5 Supporting researchers to reflect best practice in relation to ethical, legal and professional requirements

The Ethics and Governance Toolkit directs researchers to best practice guidance and resources. Discipline-specific training is available to all staff and students via an online platform. Most PG programmes now have ‘Independent Researcher Development Modules’ of which ethics is a part, integrated into their programme. Bespoke sessions for staff e.g. on research involving sensitive data are organised via RIS. Staff are also reminded of their responsibilities as supervisor for student level research and for the development of their students’ ethical awareness.

Staff are encouraged and supported to join appropriate professional associations and to adhere to their professional standards and disciplinary norms.

2.6 Having appropriate arrangements in place through which researchers can access advice and guidance on ethical, legal and professional obligations and standards

The responsibilities of PIs, researchers and the University for supporting good practice are detailed in of the Research Integrity Policy & Code of Good Practice (Culture Leadership and Mentoring).

Ethics support is embedded within each department through their ethics committee chair and members. Additional support and guidance is available via the Research Policy team in RIS.

Support for students is available via their supervisors.  In the Research Integrity Policy & Code of Good Practice , it is explicit that “In the case of student research, the principal investigator is always the supervisor.”

Funders of research will expect researchers and employers of researchers:

2.7 To conform to the ethical, legal and professional standards relevant to their research; this includes any specific codes