Upon completion of its investigation, the Investigation Committee will prepare a written report consisting of the following three parts:
- A summary of the substance of the documents, the testimony, and the other forms of evidence which the Investigation Committee relied upon in reaching its conclusion.
- A statement of the Committee’s findings of fact and the conclusions it has drawn from those facts.
- The Committee’s recommendation, if any, as to what actions the Dean should undertake.
The report of the Investigation Committee will be adopted upon the majority vote of the members of the committee.
The dean will permit the respondent to inspect the committee’s summary of documents, testimony and other evidence in the report and its findings of fact and conclusions, and to indicate in writing what clarification or corrections, if any, he or she believes are appropriate. The dean, solely at his or her discretion, may allow a similar opportunity to the complainant. The dean, after receiving the comments on the report, may ask the Investigation Committee to supplement its report. The dean also may request the committee to advise him or her on steps which should be taken to restore the reputation of the respondent if the investigation does not substantiate the charges.
The dean will accept the findings of fact and conclusions of the report, as supplemented, of the Investigation Committee and will determine in light of the report, what actions, including disciplinary action, he or she will take or recommend to the provost and president be taken or initiated in accordance with University procedures. The dean will notify the respondent of his or her decision in writing.
The dean also will notify any funding, regulatory or other agencies as required by law or regulation of the outcome of the investigation and the action that will be taken or initiated and will submit such reports as may be required. The dean and/or provost may determine at their discretion to notify others determined to have a legitimate interest in the outcome of the proceedings, including, for example and without limitation, the current employer of the respondent, if the respondent is not at Yale; co-authors of the respondent in a manuscript subject to an allegation of academic misconduct; the complainant; the home department at Yale of the respondent; and the publisher of a manuscript that was subject to an allegation of academic misconduct.
In the event that the investigation concludes that the charges are not substantiated, the dean will determine what measures reasonably can and should be taken to help restore the reputation of the respondent, and will see that they are taken. If the investigation concludes that the charges were made in bad faith, the complainant will be subject to disciplinary action, in accordance with applicable procedures.