APPENDIX TO POLICY
Guidelines for Reviewing Requests to Accept Restricted Research Agreements
The "to consider" section is for the Open Research Subcommittee to use when considering requests.
Specific issues for the section to be completed by the principal investigator:
Question #2: Please provide a summary of the intellectual significance of the proposed research.
To consider: Is the significance of the project enough to outweigh the principle of academic freedom? Does the project help the University achieve its strategic goals?
Question #3: Please provide a summary of any history you have of work with this sponsor.
To consider: A researcher who has worked with the sponsor before may be better able to predict how the proposed restriction will be handled.
Question #4: Will any special security arrangements be needed?
To consider: There might be financial impacts to the University, including the renovation of buildings before and after the project. If the space will not be accessible to other faculty and students, will different space need to be renovated to accommodate them? Will an additional server be needed to secure data?
Question #5: How will this project affect the educational progress of students working in your group?
To consider: Are students depending on the publication in order to complete their degree? Has the student been informed of the potential restriction and if so, what does the student think? Can they use the data for their thesis? Is there access for other students working with the equipment or data? Would lab meetings be open to all group members or would some information be classified?
Question #6: How will this project affect the career progress of faculty, staff, or post-docs working in your group? How will they be accommodated?
To consider: Are any faculty or staff working on the project depending on the publication for their evaluation? Are there restrictions on equipment once the project is over?
Question #7: To what extent will faculty, staff, post-docs and students involved in the project be able to publish and discuss the progress and results of their work with individuals not involved in the project?
To consider: What is the scope of proposed sponsor review? Is it drawn as narrowly as possible? What is the likelihood any review will lead to restrictions in dissemination and for how long? Can the researcher still work with the data while the analysis of the data is being reviewed?
Specific issues for the section to be completed by the Director of Sponsored Projects Administration:
Question #4: Does the sponsor request this restriction on all agreements, regardless of need or is the sponsor asking for this restriction because of the nature of this particular project? Is the sponsor or prime contractor a government agency?
To consider: If the restriction relates to who can work on the project, the restriction may have no practical effect on the project because no individuals fitting the restricted criteria will be employed on the project. If it will have an effect on the project, the University could seek a permit to allow an individual to work on the project. However it may take several months to get the permit. How will this delay affect the individual's academic progress and general progress for the project? Can another individual do the work?