Policy on Original Research Projects
Original research projects involve a collaboration between the Principal Investigator and his/her research team (on the one hand), and the Committee of Senior Research Fellows acting on behalf of the Dulles Research Institute (on the other). It is the job of the Principal Investigator and the research team to conduct rigorous, unbiased research and to arrive at the findings that flow from that research. It is the job of the Senior Research Fellows to ensure that the research maintains a focus that is in keeping with the mission of the DRI and that it is done in an academically honest and rigorous manner; it is also the job of the Senior Research Fellows to contribute questions and insights from the multiple disciplines represented by the SRF Committee. It is never acceptable for the Senior Research Fellows to try to censor a study’s legitimate findings or influence its outcomes.
This relationship between researchers and the DRI organization is a delicate one. In order to clarify the roles, policies, and procedures that will keep this relationship functioning properly, the Board of Directors has established the following Policy on Original Research Projects. It is expected that all research carried out in the name of the Dulles Research Institute will adhere strictly to this policy.
Summary of Original Research Process
Step 1: Initiation. The proposal is initiated either by an individual PI or by the Committee (which then chooses a PI). Both prior to and after the time of the formal written proposal, all members of the Committee are invited to contribute to the proposed project’s goals, objectives, questions, and methodology.
Step 2: Written Proposal. The formal written proposal is submitted to the Committee by the PI.
a. If accepted by majority vote of the Committee, it is forwarded to the Board of Directors for final approval and acceptance of financial responsibility.
b. If revisions are requested, the PI makes emendations and resubmits to the Committee for another vote.
c. If rejected by majority vote of the Committee, no appeal to the Board of Directors is possible, as that would impose on the Committee oversight responsibility for a research project that it does not support.
Step 3: Institutional Review Board. The PI applies to the IRB and reports its results to the Committee. Any substantial changes to the original proposal necessary to obtain IRB approval must be approved by a majority vote of the Committee and reported to the Board of Directors.
Step 4: Research. Research is undertaken, and the names and ordering of authors and contributors is determined. The Committee is kept apprised of the study’s progress through written quarterly reports and discussion at its regular meetings. All Senior Research Fellows are encouraged to contribute their questions and insights through these ongoing discussions.
Step 5: Results. When the study is complete, the PI submits the results to the Committee.
a. The Committee may accept the results by majority vote and recommend to the Board of Directors that they be published.
b. The Committee may request revisions by majority vote, to ensure that quality standards are met, and the PI may then revise and resubmit.
c. The Committee may reject the results of the study on the basis of its failure to meet quality standards, recommending to the Board of Directors that they not be published. If the Committee rejects the results of the study, the PI may:
i. appeal the decision to the Board of Directors, which may overrule the Committee by a majority vote;
ii. resign from the project and allow a new PI to be selected to bring the project to completion; or
iii. apply to have the project separated from the DRI so that he or she may publish the results apart from the Institute. Such a proposal would include either an application to have the funds already expended by the DRI designated as a research grant or it would detail how the funds will be recovered.
Step 6: Publication. When the results of the study are approved for publication, the PI makes a proposal for the place and manner of publication. The Committee votes on this proposal and makes a recommendation to the Board of Directors, with responsibility for the final decision resting with the Board. The results are published under the auspices of the Dulles Research Institute, with the PI and other researchers duly named as authors and contributors.
Step 7: Data. Anonymized data are made available to Senior Research Fellows for use in their own individual scholarly work, subject to IRB and Board approvals, and within the limits imposed by established DRI policy. Such scholarly work should acknowledge the source of the data but should not be published under the auspices of the Dulles Research Institute.
Policy
The relationship between the Dulles Research Institute and its individual researchers is a delicate one, requiring respect for both the needs and reputations of the individual researchers and those of the Institute as a whole. In order to ensure an harmonious and productive relationship, the Dulles Research Institutes seeks to promote freedom of inquiry and the maintenance of the highest standards of scholarly research through respect for all parties in this research. To this end, the Dulles Research Institute establishes the following Policy on Original Research Projects.
§1. Nature, Adoption, and Amendment of Policy.
1.1. Nature of Policy. This policy governs the manner in which research projects are undertaken as official projects of the Dulles Research Institute (“DRI”), and the requirements that must be met in order for results to be released in the name of the DRI.
1.2. Adoption of Policy. This policy will be considered to be in force only upon adoption by a majority vote of the Board of Directors of the DRI.
1.3. Amendment of Policy. This policy may be amended by a majority vote of the Board of Directors at any time. Such amendments shall take effect immediately upon adoption, unless the amendment specifies another effective date.
1.3.1. Amendments may be recommended to the Board of Directors by a majority vote of the Committee of Senior Research Fellows (“the Committee”), in which case they will be proposed to the Board of Directors by the Committee’s Board liaison.
1.3.2. Amendments may also be proposed by any member of the Board of Directors. In case of proposal by an individual member of the Board of Directors, the amendment to this policy will be referred to the Committee by its Board liaison so that the Committee may discuss the proposed amendment and make a recommendation to the Board of Directors on adoption or rejection of the proposed amendment, which shall be done by majority vote of the Committee. The vote of the Committee shall be reported to the Board of Directors by the Committee’s Board liaison. Once the Board of Directors has been informed of the Committee’s recommendation, the Board of Directors may vote to adopt or reject the amendment as it sees fit.
1.3.3. All amendments to this policy that are adopted by the Board shall be recorded in the official Minute Book of the Board of Directors.
§2. Role of the Committee in Research Projects.
2.1. Delegated Responsibilities of the Committee. Undertaking original research is one of the three main initiatives of the Dulles Research Institute, and it is the principal purpose of the Committee of Senior Research Fellows. While all final decisions on actions of the Dulles Research Institute rest with the Board of Directors, the Board of Directors delegates to the Committee of Senior Research Fellows the responsibility of proposing, designing, vetting, and carrying out all original research projects of the DRI, and of making final recommendations to the Board of Directors on adoption and publication of final research results.
2.2. Committee Voting. Recommendations of the Committee of Senior Research Fellows are, unless otherwise noted, made on the basis of a majority vote of all Senior Research Fellows duly appointed by the Board of Directors as of the date of the Committee’s vote. New members of the Committee have voting rights on the Committee as of the date of their appointment by the Board of Directors, including voting rights on decisions regarding projects which may already be in progress at the time of their appointment. Members of the Committee who resign or are removed from the Committee lose all voting rights from the time their resignation or removal takes effect. Voting may never be done by proxy.
2.3. Adoption of Projects. Adoption of original research projects for the Dulles Research Institute shall be undertaken by a majority vote of the Board of Directors upon recommendation by a majority vote of the Committee. The recommendation of the Committee shall be communicated to the Board of Directors by the Committee’s Board liaison, and the approval or disapproval of the Board of Directors shall be communicated to the Committee by the same liaison.
2.4. The Committee’s Oversight Role. Throughout the course of the research project, and with due regard for the role of the Principal Investigator (PI) assigned to the project, all Senior Research Fellows shall have input into the project’s goals, research questions, and methodology, and may raise relevant questions about the progress of the project. The project’s PI shall keep the Committee apprised of the study’s progress, in particular by filing quarterly progress reports, and shall answer questions of the Senior Research Fellows as they arise.
2.4.1 The Committee is responsible for maintaining the focus and safeguarding the high scholarly standards of the Dulles Research Institute on all projects it oversees. To this end the PI will file quarterly progress reports while the research is ongoing, will seek the input of the Committees members, and will answer questions from Committee members about the project at any of the Committee’s meetings.
2.4.2 For its part, the Committee must never impede the legitimate freedom of inquiry the PI requires for honest scholarly work within the scope of the approved proposal, nor may it ever attempt to censor the legitimate findings of a study conducted according to accepted research standards in the field of inquiry.
2.4.3 In rare cases, and only when necessary to maintain the quality of the research (and never for the sake of arriving at a particular set of outcomes), the PI may be removed from the project by a two-thirds majority vote of the Committee, confirmed by a majority vote of the Board of Directors.
2.4.3.1 In recommending the removal of the PI, the Committee must submit to the Board a written list of the reasons for seeking to replace the PI, and this list must be signed by no less than two-thirds of the Committee’s members.
2.4.3.2 Before taking such a step, the Committee must first inform the PI in writing of its intention to pursue this course of action and of the specific grievances that lead the Committee in this direction. The Committee must then provide the PI thirty calendar days to submit a proposal for addressing the Committee’s concerns in order to remain in the role of PI. The Committee will accept or reject the PI’s proposal by majority vote and will convey its recommendation to the Board, as provided in §2.4.3.1.
2.4.3.3 The PI may appeal the Committee’s recommendation directly to the Board, but in all cases the decision of the Board of Directors shall be final.
2.4.4 In case of a vacancy in the role of PI, whether through resignation or removal as described herein, a new PI will be appointed by a majority vote of the Committee, and the Board will confirm this change by majority vote.
2.5. Final Report. Upon completion of the project, the Committee shall approve the final report by majority vote. Since the project has been adopted by the Board of Directors upon recommendation of the Committee of Senior Research Fellows, and since the Committee has been kept apprised of the progress of the study through quarterly reports and the regular opportunity to raise questions and offer input, the disapproval of a final report shall only be on the basis of the failure of the report to meet recognized research and analysis standards. Any such disapproval shall be communicated to the PI with recommendations for bringing the final report into conformity with those standards.
2.5.1 When faced with a disapproval vote, the PI may exercise one of four options:
(a) The PI may follow the recommendations of the Committee and, upon having done so, resubmit a revised final report for a new vote;
(b) The PI may appeal the decision of the Committee to the Board of Directors, which shall either confirm or reject the Committee decision by a majority vote of the Board;
(c) The PI may resign from the project and be replaced by a new PI to be chosen by the Committee, with the new PI taking responsibility for addressing inadequacies in the report and bringing the project to completion; or
(d) The PI may submit a proposal to the Committee for separating the project from the Dulles Research Institute and publishing the results as a private individual. Such a separation proposal must include either a request that the funding of the project be adopted as a research grant by the DRI, or an explanation of how the funding will be recovered. Separation proposals are accepted by a majority vote of the Committee, with confirmation by the Board of Directors; negative results from the Committee may be appealed directly to the Board of Directors by the PI.
2.5.2 Whenever the final results of a DRI-sponsored original research project are published, the publication will list the researchers and contributors on the project and will also note that this is a project of the Dulles Research Institute.
§3. Initiating and Carrying Out an Original Research Project.
3.1. Initiating the Project. An original research project of the Dulles Research Institute may be initiated in one of two ways: (a) by an individual researcher who makes a written proposal to the Committee of Senior Research Fellows for a project on which he or she would serve as PI; or (b) by a resolution adopted by majority vote of the Committee of Senior Research Fellows. In the case of (b), the Committee will designate a PI, who will then develop a written proposal in consultation with the Committee.
3.2. Written Proposal. The PI on any proposed original research project of the DRI shall submit a written proposal to the Committee detailing all salient aspects of the project, including but not limited to: (a) research goal and objectives; (b) research methodology; (c) proposed research questions; (d) research population; (e) name of governing Institutional Review Board and a copy of the IRB proposal; (f) detailed policy on the protection of participants’ identities; (g) proposed list of personnel required to carry out the study; (h) proposed timeline; (i) proposed budget; and (j) proposed funding sources.
3.2.1 The Committee may take one of three actions on such a proposal:
(a) The Committee may accept the proposal by majority vote and send it to the Board of Directors for final approval;
(b) The Committee may seek revisions and invite the PI to resubmit a revised proposal; or
(c) The Committee may reject the proposal and report its rejection to the Board of Directors via the Committee’s liaison. There is no direct appeal to the Board of Directors to consider a research proposal that has been rejected by a majority vote of the Committee of Senior Research Fellows, as this would impose on the Committee responsibility for overseeing a project it does not support.
3.2.2 When the Board of Directors votes to accept the Committee’s recommendation to undertake an original research project, the Board of Directors assumes responsibility for the funding of the project according to the terms laid out in the approved written proposal.
3.3. Institutional Review Board. Upon acceptance of a proposal for original research by the Committee and confirmation by the Board of Directors, the PI shall make application to the Institutional Review Board designated in the proposal. The ruling of the IRB shall be reported back to the Committee by the PI.
3.3.1 If the IRB requires any substantive changes to the research proposal, those changes shall be communicated to the Committee by the PI, and the Committee shall accept or reject the amendments to the proposal by majority vote, communicating this to the Board of Directors through the Board liaison.
3.3.2 At no time will any research involving human subjects be undertaken without IRB approval.
3.4. The PI and the Committee. Once a project is approved and is underway, the PI is understood to be in charge of the project, subject to oversight by the Committee. The PI shall make quarterly reports to the Committee of Senior Research Fellows in advance of the Committee’s regular meetings, and shall then take questions and recommendations from the Committee as they arise. The PI and the Committee shall endeavor to respect both the oversight role of the Committee, designed to safeguard standards and to maintain focus, and the freedom of inquiry required for the PI to produce a high-quality scholarly work. While the Committee may legitimately insist upon recognized standards of research and analysis, the Committee must never seek to influence the outcomes of the study or censor legitimate findings.
3.5. Authors and Contributors. The PI shall make every effort to avoid conflicts over the published listing of authors and contributors to the study by clarifying this matter early in the project, including the order in which authors and contributors will be listed in the final published results. Since the role of researchers may change over time, any changes to the naming and ordering of authors and contributors shall be announced to the Committee in the quarterly reporting process, as the PI becomes aware of the need for such changes. Every reasonable effort shall be made to avoid delaying decisions about the naming and ordering of authors and contributors until the end of the project, when conflicts might be more likely to arise.
§4. Results and Data.
4.1. Publication. Publication of the results of the research is the means by which the Dulles Research Institute contributes its work to the wider community.
4.1.1 Ordinarily, publication would take place by means of an article (or articles) in recognized, peer-reviewed, scholarly journals, although there may be times when the DRI would choose to publish its results in the form of a book or white paper.
4.1.2 The final choice of how and where to publish the results of the study rests with the Board of Directors, but it shall be made with due regard for the recommendations of the PI and his or her research team.
4.1.2.1 In making this decision, careful consideration should be given to the value of publishing the results in the DRI’s own journal vis-à-vis the value of publishing in other established scholarly journals.
4.1.2.2 The decision of where to publish the study’s results shall be made on the basis of recommendations submitted by the PI and approved by a majority vote of the Committee, confirmed by a majority vote of the Board of Directors.
4.1.2.3 In the event that the PI’s proposal on this matter is rejected by the Committee, the PI may appeal the Committee’s decision directly to the Board of Directors.
4.1.2.4 With the advice of the PI and the Committee, the Board of Directors is charged with the responsibility of ensuring that the means of publication will uphold the DRI’s reputation for high standards of scholarship, and that the publication of the study will be done in a manner that most effectively contributes to the DRI’s mission.
4.2. Crediting Authors, Contributors, and DRI. Publication of the results will be done under the names of the PI and the authors and contributors who have been identified as noted in §3.5 above, and will in all cases clearly identify the role of the Dulles Research Institute in the study.
4.3. Copyright. The copyright for the publication of the study’s findings will ordinarily be held by the publisher of the journal in which the findings are published. With an eye toward making results available as widely as possible, open-access publication may be permitted with the approval of the Board of Directors, but such publication should ordinarily be done under a license that requires that the publication not be altered and that the authors, contributors, and DRI be duly credited in all re-publication.
4.4. Data. The complete data for the study shall be safeguarded as detailed in the IRB proposal. An anonymized set of data shall be made available, under clearly defined circumstances, to Senior Research Fellows who apply for access and present IRB approval; Senior Research Fellows may then make use of those data for their own analyses and publication as they see fit, limited only by the terms of their contract with the DRI and established DRI policy. When a Senior Research Fellow publishes analyses that rely on DRI proprietary data, the DRI should be credited appropriately; however, such publication is not made in the name of the DRI.