Notice on the issuance of "Measures for Investigation and Handling of Misconduct in Scientific Research under the National Natural Science Foundation Project"
Guoke Jincheng [2020] No. 96
Bureaus (offices), Science Departments, Party committees, and units directly under them:
The "Measures for Investigation and Treatment of Misconduct in Scientific Research under the National Natural Science Foundation" was deliberated and adopted at the 22nd Executve Meeting of the Commission on November 3, 2020, and is hereby issued for implementation.
National Natural Science Foundation of China
December 25th, 2020
Measures for investigation and handling of misconduct in scientific research of National Natural Science Fund projects
(March 16, 2005, National Natural Science Foundation of China
Considered and adopted by the third Plenary meeting of the second session;
Revised and adopted at the Executive Meeting of the National Natural Science Foundation of China on 3 November 2020)
Chapter I General rules
Article 1 In order to regulate the investigation and handling of scientific research misconduct by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (hereinafter referred to as the Natural Science Foundation of China), safeguard the impartiality of science funds and the rights and interests of scientific and technological workers, promote the construction of scientific research integrity, academic norms and research ethics, and promote the healthy development of science funds, These Measures are formulated in accordance with the Science and Technology Progress Law of the People's Republic of China, the Regulations of the National Natural Science Foundation, Several Opinions on Further Strengthening the Construction of Scientific Research Integrity, the Interim Provisions on the Handling of Violations of Scientific and Technological Activities, and the Rules on the Investigation and Handling of Scientific Research Integrity Cases (Trial Implementation).
Article 2 These Measures shall be applicable to the investigation and treatment of scientific research misconduct occurring in the application, review, implementation, conclusion, publication and application of results of National Natural Science Foundation projects (hereinafter referred to as science foundation projects).
Article 3 The term "scientific misconduct" as mentioned in these Measures refers to the behavior that deviates from the norms of conduct of the scientific community, violates the integrity of scientific research and the code of conduct of scientific research ethics, which occurs in the activities of application, review, implementation, conclusion, publication and application of scientific fund projects. The details include:
(1) plagiarism, plagiarism or embezzlement;
(2) forging or tampering;
(3) buying, selling and writing on behalf of others;
(4) Providing false information, concealing relevant information and providing inaccurate information;
(5) Obtaining scientific fund projects through improper means such as bribery or benefit exchange;
(6) violating the standards for publication, attribution and citation of scientific research achievements;
(7) violation of the review code of conduct;
(8) violating norms of scientific research ethics;
(9) Other misconduct in scientific research.
Article 4 In accordance with the Articles of Association of the National Natural Science Foundation of China and the Articles of Association of the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Supervisory Committee of the National Natural Science Foundation of China is specifically responsible for accepting complaints and reports on misconduct in scientific research, organizing investigations, making recommendations for handling and supervising the implementation of handling decisions.
Article 5 The NSFC shall review the handling suggestions put forward by the Supervisory Committee and make a handling decision.
Article 6 Scientific researchers shall abide by academic norms, abide by professional ethics, be honest and trustworthy, and may not resort to fraud in scientific and technological activities.
When being investigated for alleged misconduct in scientific research, it shall truthfully state the relevant circumstances and provide relevant supporting materials.
Article 7 Project review experts shall conscientiously perform their review duties, conduct a fair review of the communication review, conference review, mid-term inspection, concluding review and other review matters related to the Science Fund project, and shall not violate the relevant avoidance, confidentiality provisions or seek improper benefits by taking advantage of work convenience.
Article 8 As the main responsible unit for the construction of scientific research integrity, the project support unit and the unit where the scientific research personnel are located shall establish and improve the relevant work system and organizational structure for dealing with scientific research misconduct, and perform the following duties in the prevention and investigation of scientific research misconduct:
(1) Publicize policies and regulations related to the investigation and handling of scientific misconduct;
(2) to actively investigate misconduct in scientific research committed by personnel of the unit;
(3) To carry out relevant investigations on the problem clue organizations assigned by the Natural Science Foundation;
(4) Handle the person responsible for scientific research misconduct according to his or her duties and powers;
(5) To report to the Natural Science Foundation of the scientific research misconduct related to the science fund projects of the unit and its investigation and punishment;
(6) To implement the handling decisions made by the Natural Science Foundation;
(7) To supervise the implementation of the decision;
(8) Other responsibilities related to scientific research integrity.
Article 9 In investigating and handling misconduct in scientific research, the NSFC shall adhere to the principles of clear facts, solid evidence, accurate characterization, proper handling, legal procedures and complete procedures.
Article 10 The NSFC shall implement credit management for scientific researchers, project review experts and project supporting units for related review, implementation and management activities。
Article 11 Project applicants, persons in charge, participants, review experts and supporting units should actively fulfill the relevant contracts or commitments signed with the NSFC. If they violate the corresponding obligations, the NSFC may deal with them according to the contracts or commitments.
Chapter II investigation and processing procedures
Section 1 Complaints, reports and acceptance
Article 12 Any citizen, legal person or other organization may file a written complaint to NSFC about misconduct in scientific research, and the complaint and report shall meet the following requirements:
(1) There are clear targets for complaints and reports;
(2) having verifiable clues or evidentiary materials;
(3) related to the work of scientific fund;
(4) Misconduct in scientific research involving the application of these Measures.
Article 13 The National Science Foundation encourages real-name complaints and reports, and strictly keeps confidential the information of whistleblowers, informants, witnesses and other relevant personnel to fully protect the legitimate rights and interests of relevant personnel.
Article 14 The NSFC shall conduct initial verification of the complaint and report materials within 15 working days, and the initial verification shall be carried out by two staff members. After initial verification that the complaint reporting materials meet the requirements of Article 12 of these measures, a decision shall be made to accept, and inform the real-name complaint informant within five working days. If it does not meet the acceptance conditions, it shall make a decision not to accept the case, and inform the real-name complaint informant within five working days。
Where the above decision involves the contents not to be made public or confidential, the complainant shall keep them confidential. Those who leak, spread or improperly use relevant information shall bear corresponding responsibilities.
Article 15 In the process of investigation and handling, if it is found that the complainant has fabricated facts, false accusations and framed, etc., the Natural Science Foundation will notify the unit to which it belongs.
Article 16 Complaints and reports fall under the following circumstances, shall not be accepted:
(1) the complaint has been handled according to law, and the complaint informant repeatedly complains and reports on the same fact or reason without new clues;
(2) the case has been filed by a public security organ or a supervisory organ for investigation or entered into judicial proceedings;
(3) Other circumstances that should not be accepted according to law.
Complaints and reports contain content that should be accepted and should not be accepted at the same time, and can be treated differently, the content that should not be accepted is not accepted.
Section 2 Investigation
Article 17 For accepted cases of misconduct in scientific research, the Natural Science Foundation shall organize, jointly, directly transfer or entrust relevant departments to carry out investigations. The NSFC reserves the right to investigate directly transferred or entrusted units or units to which the wrongdoers belong.
If the person under investigation is the main person in charge of the unit or the person under investigation is a legal entity, the Natural Science Foundation may directly transfer or entrust its superior competent department to carry out the investigation. If there is no superior competent department, the Natural Science Foundation may directly transfer or entrust the provincial science and technology administrative department where it is located to the responsible unit for scientific research integrity construction to organize the investigation.
For reports involving the use of project funds, NSFC may hire a third-party institution to supervise and inspect the use of relevant funding funds, and handle them according to the conclusions of supervision and inspection in accordance with these Measures.
Article 18 The investigation of suspected misconduct in scientific research may be carried out by means of interview, letter inquiry, written investigation, on-site investigation, relying on the unit or the unit to which the perpetrator belongs. If necessary, it can also take the form of inviting experts to participate in the investigation, inviting experts or third-party agencies to evaluate, and holding hearings.
Article 19 The NSFC shall promptly review and deal with the suspected scientific research misconduct discovered in accordance with its functions and powers and in accordance with relevant regulations.
Article 20 Where a written investigation is conducted, the complaint and report materials, statements of the parties and relevant certification materials shall be reviewed and a written investigation report shall be formed.
Article 21 When an on-site investigation is conducted, the number of investigators shall not be less than two, and work certificates or official letters shall be presented to the parties or relevant personnel.
The parties or relevant personnel shall truthfully answer the inquiries and assist the investigation, and present to the investigators such supporting materials as original records, observation notes, images and photos or experimental samples, and may not conceal information or provide false information. A written record shall be made of the inquiry or examination, and the parties and relevant personnel shall sign the record.
Article 22
Depending on the unit or the unit where the party is responsible for the investigation, it shall seriously carry out the investigation, form a complete investigation report and stamp the official seal of the unit, and report the relevant situation to the Natural Science Foundation on time.
During the investigation, the investigation unit shall interview the parties concerned and provide the following materials to NSFC:
(1) investigation results and handling opinions;
(2) relevant certification materials;
(3) statements of the parties;
(4) Transcripts of interviews signed by both parties and investigators;
(5) Other relevant materials.
Article 23 In the course of investigation, the investigators shall fully listen to the statements or arguments of the parties and verify the facts, reasons and evidence put forward by the parties. The facts, reasons or evidence presented by the parties shall be accepted if they are established. No individual or organization may influence the conduct of the investigation by improper means.
If it is found during the investigation that the conduct of the parties may affect public health and safety or lead to other serious consequences, the investigators shall report it immediately or transfer it to the relevant departments for handling according to procedures.
Article 24 Investigations of scientific misconduct cases shall be completed within six months from the date of acceptance.
For major and complex cases that cannot be completed within the time limit specified in the preceding paragraph, the investigation period may be extended with the approval of the principal person in charge of the Supervision Committee of the Natural Science Foundation or the person in charge of the Natural Science Foundation, and the extension period shall not exceed one year. For cases transferred by higher authorities and relevant departments, the delay of investigation shall be reported to the transferring authorities or departments.
If the investigation finds that the key information is insufficient, the investigation conditions are not available for the time being, or the person under investigation dies during the investigation, the investigation may be suspended or terminated upon approval by the principal person in charge of the Supervision Committee of the Natural Science Foundation or the person in charge of the Natural Science Foundation.
When conditions are met, the suspended investigation shall be started in a timely manner, and the suspended time shall not be included in the investigation time limit. The suspension or termination of an investigation into the death of a person under investigation does not affect the investigation into other persons under investigation involved in the case.
Chapter III management
Article 25 After the conclusion of the investigation, an investigation report shall be prepared, which shall state the following matters:
(1) the object and content of the investigation;
(2) the main facts, reasons and grounds;
(3) investigation conclusions and handling recommendations;
(4) Other contents that need to be explained.
Article 26 Before making a processing decision, the NSFC shall inform the parties in writing of the facts, reasons and basis of the proposed processing decision, and inform the parties that they have the right to state and defend in accordance with the law.
If a party fails to make a statement or defense, it shall be deemed to have waived the right to make a statement or defense. If a party makes a statement or defense, its views shall be fully heard.
Article 27 After the conclusion of the investigation, the NSFC shall review the investigation results and make the following decisions according to different circumstances:
(1) If there is indeed misconduct in scientific research, a decision on handling the case shall be made on the basis of the facts and the seriousness of the circumstances;
(2) If no scientific misconduct is found, the case shall be closed;
(3) Suspected violations of discipline and law shall be transferred to the relevant authorities for handling.
Article 28 The Natural Science Foundation shall make a written decision when making a decision. The decision shall state the following matters:
(1) the basic information of the parties;
(2) Facts and evidence of misconduct in scientific research;
(3) handling basis and measures;
(4) the means and duration of relief;
(5) The name and date of the unit that made the decision;
(6) Other contents that should be specified.
Article 29
After the Natural Science Foundation has made a decision, it shall promptly serve the decision on the parties concerned and inform the real-name whistleblower of the result of the decision.
If the result of the handling involves the contents that are not made public or confidential, the complainant shall keep them confidential. Those who leak, spread or improperly use relevant information shall bear corresponding responsibilities.
Article 30 Measures to deal with researchers who commit scientific misconduct include:
(1) Warning;
(2) to order correction;
(3) to circulate criticism;
(4) Suspend the allocation of project funds;
(5) If the science fund project is in the process of application or review, the project application shall be revoked;
(6) If the science fund project is being implemented, terminate the original funded project and recover the balance of funds;
(7) If the science fund project is being implemented or has been concluded, the original funding decision shall be revoked and the funds already allocated shall be recovered;
(8) Cancel the qualification of applying for or participating in the application for science fund projects within a certain period of time.
Article 31 Measures to deal with reviewers who commit scientific misconduct include:
(1) Warning;
(2) to order correction;
(3) to circulate criticism;
(4) Cancel the qualification of evaluation experts within a certain period until life.
Article 32 Measures to deal with supporting institutions that commit scientific misconduct include:
(1) Warning;
(2) to order correction;
(3) to circulate criticism;
（4）Cancel the qualification of supporting units within a certain period.
Article 33 The following factors should be taken into account in dealing with scientific misconduct:
(1) the nature and circumstances of the scientific misconduct;
(2) the results and impact of scientific misconduct;
(3) the subjective vicious degree of scientific misconduct;
(4) the number of scientific misconduct committed;
(5) attitude of admitting mistakes and cooperating with investigations;
(6) the extent of the responsibility to be borne;
(7) Other factors to be considered.
Article 34 If the circumstances of scientific misconduct are minor and corrected in time, and the harmful consequences are relatively light, conversation reminders, criticism and education may be given.
Article 35 Under any of the following circumstances, the case shall be dealt with in a lighter or mitigated manner:
(1) taking the initiative to eliminate or mitigate the harmful consequences of scientific misconduct;
(2) coercing others to commit misconduct in scientific research;
(3) actively cooperate with the investigation and take the initiative to assume responsibility;
(4) other circumstances of leniency or mitigation.
Article 36 Under any of the following circumstances, the case shall be dealt with more seriously:
(1) forging, destroying or concealing evidence;
(2) preventing others from making complaints, reporting or providing evidence;
(3) interfering with or hindering investigation and verification;
(4) attacking or retaliating against the complainant;
(5) committing several kinds of misconduct in scientific research repeatedly or simultaneously;
(6) causing serious consequences or adverse effects;
(7) Other circumstances of heavier treatment.
Article 37 Where several kinds of scientific misconduct are involved at the same time, they shall be dealt with in combination. The range of consolidation shall not exceed the upper limit stipulated in the Regulations of the National Natural Science Foundation.
Article 38 If two or more persons jointly commit misconduct in scientific research, they shall distinguish primary responsibility, secondary responsibility and equal responsibility according to their respective roles, consequences and responsibilities, and shall be dealt with separately. If it is impossible to distinguish between primary and secondary responsibilities, they shall be treated as equal responsibilities together.
Article 39 The staff responsible for acceptance, investigation and handling shall strictly abide by the relevant rules on avoidance and confidentiality. If a party considers that the above-mentioned person has a direct interest in the handling of the case, he has the right to apply for withdrawal.
If the above-mentioned person has a close family relationship with the party, a relationship with the same legal entity, a relationship between teachers and students or a cooperative relationship, which may affect the fair handling, he shall take the initiative to apply for withdrawal. The NSFC may also directly make a withdrawal decision.
Without permission, the above personnel shall not disclose the undisclosed relevant supporting materials, the process or results of the investigation and treatment of information related to the treatment of scientific misconduct, and violate the confidentiality provisions, shall be dealt with in accordance with the relevant provisions.
The investigator of the supporting unit or the unit to which the party belongs may not be subject to the restrictions of the same legal entity stipulated in paragraph 2 of this article.
Chapter IV Handling rules
Article 40 If the project applicant or participant commits any of the acts of plagiarism, plagiarism, forgery or tampering in the project application form or the scientific research results included in the project application form, the project application shall be revoked, the original funding project shall be terminated and the balance funds shall be recovered, or the original funding decision shall be revoked and the allocated funds shall be recovered according to the status of the project. In addition to the above measures, if the circumstances are relatively minor, the project application or participation in the application shall be cancelled for one to three years, and a warning or notice of criticism shall be given; If the circumstances are serious, the project application or participation in the application shall be cancelled for three to five years, and the applicant shall be given a notice of criticism; If the circumstances are serious, the project application or participation in the application shall be cancelled for five to seven years, and the applicant shall be criticized in a circular.
Article 41 If the project applicant or participant has any of the following behaviors during the project application process, the project application shall be revoked if the Science fund project is in the application or review process. In addition to the above measures, if the circumstances are relatively minor, a conversation reminder, criticism, education or warning shall be given; If the circumstances are serious, the original funded project shall be terminated and the balance funds recovered or the original funding decision shall be revoked and the allocated funds recovered, the project application or participation qualification shall be cancelled for one to three years, and a warning or notice of criticism shall be given; If the circumstances are serious, terminate the original funded project and recover the balance funds or revoke the original funding decision and recover the allocated funds, cancel the project application or participation in the application for three to five years, and give a notice of criticism:
(1) writing, entrusting to write, or buying and selling project applications;
(2) entrusting a third party to modify the project application;
(3) Providing false information, concealing relevant information or providing inaccurate information;
(4) impersonating the signatures of others or forging the names of participants;
(5) Unauthorized inclusion of others as project participants;
(6) illegal repeated applications;
(7) Other acts in violation of the project application standards.
Article 42 If the project applicant or participant has any of the following behaviors in the scientific research achievements such as papers included in the project application, the project application shall be revoked if the science fund project is in the process of application or review. In addition to the above measures, if the circumstances are relatively minor, a conversation reminder, criticism, education or warning shall be given; If the circumstances are serious, the original funded project shall be terminated and the balance funds recovered or the original funding decision shall be revoked and the allocated funds recovered, the project application or participation qualification shall be cancelled for one to three years, and a warning or notice of criticism shall be given; If the circumstances are serious, terminate the original funded project and recover the balance funds or revoke the original funding decision and recover the allocated funds, cancel the project application or participation in the application for three to five years, and give a notice of criticism:
(1) Multiple or repeated publication of one draft;
(2) those bought or sold or written on behalf of others;
(3) entrusting third-party institutions to submit articles;
(4) fabricating peer review experts and review opinions;
(5) Other acts that violate the norms of publication and citation of papers.
Article 43 If the project applicant or participant has any of the following behaviors in the scientific research achievements such as papers included in the project application, the project application shall be revoked if the science fund project is in the process of application or review. In addition to the above measures, if the circumstances are relatively minor, a conversation reminder, criticism, education or warning shall be given; If the circumstances are serious, the original funded project shall be terminated and the balance funds recovered or the original funding decision shall be revoked and the allocated funds recovered, the project application or participation qualification shall be cancelled for one to three years, and a warning or notice of criticism shall be given; If the circumstances are serious, terminate the original funded project and recover the balance funds or revoke the original funding decision and recover the allocated funds, cancel the project application or participation in the application for three to five years, and give a notice of criticism:
(1) using the signature of others without consent;
(2) fabricating other signatories;
(3) tampering with the author's ranking and contribution;
(4) signing without making substantive contributions;
(5) Excluding authors or units that have made substantial contributions;
(6) Unauthorized labeling of other people's science fund projects;
(7) marking fictitious science fund projects;
(8) marking the fund projects in the scientific research achievements that are not related to the science fund projects;
(9) other acts of improper signature or improper marking.
Article 44 If the project applicant or participant has any of the following behaviors in the review related to the project, the project application shall be revoked if the Science fund project is in the process of application or review. In addition to the above measures, if the circumstances are relatively minor, a conversation reminder, criticism, education or warning shall be given; If the circumstances are serious, the original funded project shall be terminated and the balance funds recovered or the original funding decision shall be revoked and the allocated funds recovered, the project application or participation qualification shall be cancelled for one to three years, and a warning or notice of criticism shall be given; If the circumstances are serious, terminate the original funded project and recover the balance funds or revoke the original funding decision and recover the allocated funds, cancel the project application or participation in the application for three to five years, and give a notice of criticism:
(1) asking for help, lobbying or greeting;
(2) Illegally obtaining relevant review information;
(3) bribing evaluation experts or staff members of the Natural Science Foundation;
(4) Other acts that affect the independence, objectivity and impartiality of the review work.
Article 45 If the project leader or participant commits any of the following acts during the implementation of the project, he shall be given a warning, suspend the allocation of funds and be ordered to make corrections; If no correction is made within the time limit, the original funded project shall be terminated and the remaining funds recovered, or the original funding decision shall be revoked and the funds already allocated shall be recovered; If the circumstances are serious, terminate the original funded project and recover the balance of funds or revoke the original funding decision and recover the allocated funds, cancel the project application or participation in the application for three to five years, and give a notice of criticism; If the circumstances are serious, terminate the original funded project and recover the balance funds or revoke the original funding decision and recover the allocated funds, cancel the project application or participation in the application for five to seven years, and give a notice of criticism:
(1) Arbitrarily changing the research direction or lowering the application target;
(2) failing to submit project concluding reports or research results reports and other materials in accordance with regulations;
(3) submitting falsified reports or original records or other materials;
(4) misappropriating, abusing or misappropriating project funds;
(5) violating state regulations on scientific research ethics;
(6) Other acts of failing to perform research duties in accordance with regulations.
Article 46 If the project leader or participant has one of the acts prescribed in Article 40, Article 41, Article 42 or Article 43 of these Measures in the project concluding report and other materials, he shall be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of Article 40, Article 41, Article 42 or Article 43 respectively.
Article 47 If the project leader or participant has one of the acts prescribed in Article 40, Article 42 or Article 43 of these Measures in marking the scientific research achievements such as the papers funded by the Fund, he shall be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of Article 40, Article 42 or Article 43 respectively.
Article 48 If a researcher commits any act of plagiarism, plagiarism or fraud in other scientific and technological activities, the NSFC may, in accordance with the relevant provisions of these Measures, prohibit him or her from applying for science fund projects within a certain period of time according to the seriousness of the case.
Article 49 If the project applicant, person in charge or participant is responsible for or participates in the science fund project due to the implementation of the scientific research misconduct stipulated in these Measures, the Natural Science Foundation Committee may suggest that the unit to which the actor belongs revoke the corresponding honors and benefits obtained because of the responsibility for or participation in the science fund project.
Article 50 If the review expert has any of the following acts in the process of project review, the qualification of the review expert shall be cancelled for two to five years, given a warning and ordered to make corrections; If the circumstances are relatively serious, the qualification of evaluation experts shall be revoked for five to seven years, and a warning or notice of criticism shall be given and correction shall be ordered; If the circumstances are serious, they will no longer be employed as review experts and will be notified for criticism:
(1) Violation of confidentiality or withdrawal provisions;
(2) retaliating against, framing or intentionally damaging the applicant's reputation;
(3) being evaluated by others;
(4) conducting unfair evaluation for reasons such as accepting requests;
(5) seeking illegitimate benefits by taking advantage of work convenience;
(6) Other acts in violation of the review code of conduct.
If there is misconduct in science and technology activities as prescribed in articles 40 to 47 of these Measures, the Natural Science Foundation may cancel the qualification of evaluation experts for a certain number of years, and the qualification period of the canceled evaluation experts is not less than the qualification period of the canceled application, until it is no longer hired as evaluation experts.
Article 51 If the project applicant, person in charge, participant or review expert is dealt with accordingly due to the implementation of the scientific research misconduct provided for in these Measures, the Natural Science Foundation may, based on the circumstances, consequences and other circumstances of the scientific research misconduct, suggest that the unit to which the perpetrator belongs give the corresponding Party discipline and administrative sanctions.
Article 52 For those who are not within the jurisdiction of the Natural Science Foundation, the Natural Science Foundation may instruct the relevant supporting units to deal with them.
Article 53 If the supporting unit commits any of the following acts, it shall be given a warning and ordered to make corrections; Those who fail to make corrections within the time limit shall be disqualified from the supporting unit for one to three years and given a warning or notice of criticism; If the circumstances are serious, the qualification of the supporting unit shall be cancelled for three to five years, and the unit shall be notified and criticized:
(1) neglecting the responsibility for management of scientific research misconduct by project applicants, principals or participants;
(2) conniving, concealing or assisting relevant personnel in committing misconduct in scientific research;
(3) Changing the person in charge of the project without authorization;
(4) Organizing or condoning staff to participate in soliciting lobbying, greeting or illegally obtaining relevant review information;
(5) Illegally misappropriating, withholding or withholding project funds;
(6) failing to perform the responsibility of guaranteeing the research conditions of the science fund project;
(7) failing to perform the duties of reviewing scientific research ethics or scientific and technological safety;
(8) failing to cooperate in the supervision and inspection of the implementation of science fund projects;
(9) failing to perform the duties of investigating and handling misconduct in scientific research;
(10) Other acts that fail to perform their duties in the management of scientific fund funding.
Relying on the unit to carry out the scientific research misconduct stipulated in the preceding paragraph, the Natural Science Foundation shall be recorded in the credit file.
Article 54 The relevant treatment measures for the supporting units shall be implemented by the Natural Science Foundation; The handling measures such as conversation reminder, criticism and education given to the project applicant, person in charge, participant or review expert shall be implemented by the unit to which the perpetrator belongs.
Article 55 The NSFC shall, in accordance with relevant regulations, apply the handling measures of terminating the original funded projects and recovering the balance funds or revoking the original funding decision and recovering the allocated funds.
Article 56
The NSFC shall establish a mechanism for transferring problem clues, and transfer the problem clues that are not within the jurisdiction of the NSFC to relevant departments or institutions for handling.
Project applicants, responsible persons, participants, review experts or NSFC staff (including part-time, part-time and mobile staff) committed scientific research misconduct suspected of violating discipline and law, transferred to the relevant discipline inspection and supervision organization for handling.
Chapter V Appeals and review
Article 57 If the party concerned is not satisfied with the decision, it may, within 15 days after receiving the decision, submit a written application for review to the NSFC.
NSFC shall make a decision on whether to accept the application within 15 working days from the date of receiving it. If it decides not to review, it shall notify the applicant and inform him of the reasons for the non-review; If the decision to review is made, the decision shall be made within 90 working days from the date of acceptance. The review shall be conducted in accordance with the investigation and handling procedures provided for in these Measures, and the review shall not affect the execution of the handling decision.
Article 58 If the party concerned is not satisfied with the result of the review, it may file a written appeal to the higher competent department of the NSFC.
Chapter VI Supplementary Provisions
Article 59 If the parties or units involved in a case of scientific misconduct are under the management of the military, the NSFC may transfer the case to the relevant military departments, and the military will investigate and handle the case according to its regulations.
Article 60 The Natural Science Foundation shall be responsible for the interpretation of these measures.
Article 61 These Measures shall come into force as of January 1, 2021. On March 16, 2005, the Measures of the Supervisory Committee of the National Natural Science Foundation of China for Handling Misconduct in the Work Funded by the Science Fund (for Trial Implementation) was repealed at the same time.
