Individual Conflict of Interest and Commitment ICIC

1. Individual Conflict of Interest and Commitment (ICIC) Supervisor Training

2. 2 I. Supervisor Responsibilities Understanding the policy, process, and procedures Ensuring employees are aware of the policy Ensuring employees complete DAPA form Identifying conflicts of interest/commitment Providing a department monitoring plan (as needed) Engaging the employee in discussions around disclosures Referrals to ICIC Committee for disputes or non-compliance

3. 3 Understanding the Process Familiarize yourself with the policy and procedures http://finweb.rit.edu/legalaffairs/compliance Review Case Studies/FAQs For further clarification: Compliance Officer, Denis Charlesworth ICIC Committee members

4. Disclosure Questionnaire After reviewing the policy, click the link to the Disclosure Questionnaire To be completed: New hire Annually Change in circumstances Any answer other than “no” will require completion of a Disclosure and Prior Approval (DAPA) form

5. 5 The DAPA Form If an employee answers “yes” it is her/his responsibility to fill out a DAPA form. It is your supervisory responsibility to make sure that the DAPA form is complete and to ask for additional information as needed.

6. 6 Reviewing the DAPA Did employee disclose outside activities? Did employee disclose family member activities? Did employee provide a complete description of his/her role(s)? Do any of these items present a conflict? Is the conflict of low, medium, or high risk to RIT? Is disclosure enough, or does a monitoring plan need to be established?

7. 7 Disclosing Outside Activities Business partnerships Consulting agreements Outside employment Financial holdings/stakes Contracts/Sub-contracts Family members If in doubt, disclose it!

8. 8 II. Identifying Possible Conflicts Compromising the employee’s judgment Biasing the nature or direction of scholarship Influencing the employee’s decision or behavior with respect to teaching, student affairs, promotions and appointments, use of Institute resources, interaction with human subjects, or other matters of interest to the Institute To an outside source, would it appear to hurt public trust? Does it involve a financial relationship with RIT?

9. 9 Types of Possible Conflicts Teaching Students Start-ups Consulting and Other Outside Activities Research Conflict of Commitment Students employment and doing business with students.Students employment and doing business with students.

10. 10 Case Study 1 Jane Smith is the financial administrator of an RIT department. Her husband owns a company, Acme Office Supply, which sells office furniture and supplies. Using her procurement card, Jane would like to purchase all new furniture for her department exclusively from Acme Office Supply.

11. 11 Case Study 1 Is this a potential conflict? YES What kind of conflict does this situation present? Conflict of Interest What is the level of risk? Low to Moderate: inferior products could lead to work-related injuries

12. 12 Case Study 1 What are the issues? Purchaser is married to company owner Was this information disclosed? Inferior quality of products Possibly higher cost than university-contracted vendors No competitive bidding process Is grant/research funding being used for the purchase?

13. 13 Case Study 1 What are some possible solutions? Make sure relationship is disclosed Jane cannot be directly involved in negotiating costs Furniture purchase out for competitive bidding Supervisor and/or Purchasing department approve purchase If items cannot be procured from another vendor, then justification for using the vendor should be documented.

14. 14 Case Study 1 Sample Monitoring Plan

15. 15 Case Study 2 Super Computer, Inc. would like to sponsor a study at RIT to assess usability by college students of a new software package. Professor John White would like to serve as Principal Investigator (PI) on this study. Professor White has a 51% ownership interest in Super Computer, Inc.

16. 16 Case Study 2 Is this a potential conflict? YES What kind of conflict does this situation present? Conflict of Commitment What is the level of risk? Moderate

17. 17 Case Study 2 What are the issues? Professor White may not be objective in determining whether or not University setting is appropriate for study. Financial interest may compromise the integrity of the research. Bias or perceived bias will undermine public trust. Professor White’s students may feel obligated to participate in the study as an expectation of taking his course.

18. 18 Case Study 2 What are some possible solutions? Make sure financial relationship is disclosed Professor White should be excluded from negotiations with Super Computer, Inc. Professor White cannot be sole PI; an alternate PI who does not report to him should be selected. Depending on the terms of the research, Prof. White may have to completely remove himself from all aspects of conducting and reporting on the research. Students understand that participation is completely voluntary and will not affect their course grade.

19. 19 Case Study 2 Sample Monitoring Plan

20. 20 III. Conversations with Employees In certain situations, disclosure of specific information is enough to minimize potential conflicts of interest/commitment. If information provided on the DAPA form is unclear, ask the employee for more details. Reminder: all of this information is confidential to the extent possible within the process.

21. 21 Managing a Conflict In most cases, the form and Department Monitoring Plan provide adequate documentation. Once a plan has been established and agreed upon, all parties will sign off on the DAPA form and monitoring plan: the employee you (first-level supervisor) your supervisor (second-level supervisor) Supervisor enforces the monitoring plan.

22. Managing Disputes What happens if an employee disputes that there is a conflict? What if the supervisor has a related conflict? What happens if an employee disputes the monitoring plan? What happens if an employee agrees to the terms of the plan, but then fails to carry it out?

23. 23 IV. Handling Disputes/Non-Compliance Most disputes can be resolved internally between employee and immediate supervisor Be clear on which relationships/interests pose potential risks to the Institute and why. Company ownership or financial interest Consulting agreement Research Second job

24. 24 Disputes: The Supervisor’s Role If an employee does not agree to the proposed monitoring plan, work with him/her on possible alternative solutions. Notify second-level supervisor. Consult with Office of Legal Affairs. If no agreement can be reached, second-level supervisor refers the matter to the ICIC Committee by contacting the Office of Legal Affairs.

25. 25 Disputes: The Supervisor’s Role The ICIC Committee will review the case and develop a Conflict Management Plan. The employee is expected to comply with the plan. If the employee believes that proper procedures were not followed in developing the plan, he/she may file a grievance. Difference between dept monitoring plan and conflict mngmt plan. Supervisors must still enforce CMP even if the supervisor disaagrees. Difference between dept monitoring plan and conflict mngmt plan. Supervisors must still enforce CMP even if the supervisor disaagrees.

26. 26 Non-Compliance: The Supervisor’s Role Most times non-compliance is accidental. Is the employee non-compliant because circumstances have recently changed? Promotion Change in marital status New ownership or financial interest New consulting agreement Have the employee amend his/her DAPA form and monitoring plan(s).

27. 27 Non-Compliance: The Supervisor’s Role Create a new monitoring plan. Remind employee of the agreed-upon plan. If employee ignores the monitoring plan: Examples: Jane Smith goes ahead and buys the office furniture on her pro-card John White does not relinquish his role as primary PI in the research study

28. 28 Non-Compliance: Supervisor’s Role The Procedures for the ICIC Policy set forth sanctions for non-compliance. Report non-compliance immediately to the second-level supervisor. Second-level supervisor reports non-compliance to dean/director/ranking divisional officer.