Skip to main content

University Research: Controlling Inappropriate Access to Federally Funded Research Results

RCED-92-104 Published: May 04, 1992. Publicly Released: May 26, 1992.
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO surveyed the principal universities receiving technology development funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation (NSF) to obtain information about the extent to which: (1) universities license federally funded technology; (2) foreign companies participate in universities' industrial liaison programs; and (3) universities' policies and procedures prevent inappropriate access to research that could result from faculty or administrator conflicts of interest.

Recommendations

Recommendations for Executive Action

Agency Affected Recommendation Status
Department of Health and Human Services The Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Director, NSF, should require that their grantees have procedures in place to effectively manage potential conflicts of interest. Such procedures should, at a minimum, require disclosure of specified types of outside interests to appropriate university representatives by: (1) investigators and other key personnel as part of the grant award process and annually thereafter for the duration of the grant; and (2) technology licensing personnel and others involved in making licensing decisions for technologies developed in whole or in part with NIH or NSF funding.
Closed – Implemented
On July 11, 1995, HHS published its final regulation entitled "Objectivity in Research" (42 C.F.R. Part 50), that implements the recommendation. The HHS regulation establishes standards and procedures to be followed by institutions that apply for research funding to ensure that the design, conduct, or reporting of HHS-funded research will not be biased by any conflicting financial interest of those investigators responsible for the research. Investigators are required to disclose to an official designated by the institution a listing of significant financial interests (and those of his/her spouse and dependent children) that would reasonably appear to be affected by the research proposed for funding by HHS. Investigators also are required to annually update this listing.
National Science Foundation The Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Director, NSF, should require that their grantees have procedures in place to effectively manage potential conflicts of interest. Such procedures should, at a minimum, require disclosure of specified types of outside interests to appropriate university representatives by: (1) investigators and other key personnel as part of the grant award process and annually thereafter for the duration of the grant; and (2) technology licensing personnel and others involved in making licensing decisions for technologies developed in whole or in part with NIH or NSF funding.
Closed – Implemented
On June 28, 1994, NSF published a new Investigator Financial Disclosure Policy. NSF and HHS have used a similar approach for requiring institutions and investigators to disclose and manage actual or potential conflicts of interest. In particular, both NSF and HHS would require institutions and investigators to certify that they have complied with the institution's procedures for disclosing and managing conflicts of interest. In addition, both agencies require that, during the pendency of a funding award, the institutions will either solicit financial disclosures on an annual basis or require updates as investigators obtain new reportable financial interests.
National Institutes of Health NIH and NSF should review their funding recipients' policies and procedures to ensure that they adequately address conflict-of-interest issues.
Closed – Not Implemented
On July 11, 1995, HHS published its final regulation entitled "Objectivity in Research" (42 C.F.R. Part 50). This regulation implements the first part of the recommendation requiring the disclosure of significant financial interests. However, HHS decided that it would not review universities' policies for disclosing and managing potential conflicts of interest. Instead, a funding recipient must make its policies and procedures available for review if HHS requests access.
National Science Foundation NIH and NSF should review their funding recipients' policies and procedures to ensure that they adequately address conflict-of-interest issues.
Closed – Implemented
On June 28, 1994, NSF published a new Investigator Financial Disclosure Policy. The policy establishes procedures and defines terms, such as Significant Financial Interest, as a basis for ensuring that funding recipients adequately address conflict-of-interest issues. However, it does not require that NSF review its funding recipients' policies and procedures.
National Institutes of Health NIH and NSF should develop policies that address the extent to which U.S. and foreign industrial liaison program members can be given advance access to research the agencies have funded.
Closed – Not Implemented
On June 27, 1994, NIH published in the "Federal Register" a notice of its intent to publish a document that provides funding recipients with a number of issues and points to consider when they review proposed sponsored agreements with commercial organizations. NIH did not address industrial liaison programs or other types of interactions between funding recipients and industry in this document.
National Science Foundation NIH and NSF should develop policies that address the extent to which U.S. and foreign industrial liaison program members can be given advance access to research the agencies have funded.
Closed – Not Implemented
NSF recently issued its new Investigator Financial Disclosure Policy. This policy addresses NSF's primary concerns related to potential inappropriate access to research results. NSF does not intend to take any further actions at this time.

Full Report

Office of Public Affairs

Topics

College facultyColleges and universitiesConflict of interestsForeign corporationsGrant monitoringInformation disclosureLicense agreementsLicensesResearch grantsTechnology transfer