USenate Revisits Financial Policy

What is the difference between a breach of University policy, a breach of federal law, and just bad manners?

A group composed predominantly of University faculty members gathered Friday at a public hearing to field questions and concerns from the public on the University’s new policy on financial conflicts of interest. The policy has been in the works for last 18 months.

The objective of the new policy, as stated at the meeting, is to bring more transparency to the relationships between researchers at the University and their commercial backers to avoid accusations of ethical misconduct. This year, two U.S. senators launched an investigation into the ethical conduct of 23 faculty members of the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons.

“Transparency needs to be the rule, and so long as we have transparency I don’t think that we will have a problem,” said Samuel Silverstein, a professor of physiology and cellular biophysics, a University Senator, and the chair of the Financial Conflicts of Interest Policy subcommittee set up by the Senate External Relations committee.

The new policy streamlines several rules currently in effect under appendices J, K, and L of the faculty handbook, with the goal of making definitions and procedures more explicit. Notably, it defines a “significant financial interest” as one above a $10,000 threshold.

The University must have regulations that comply with the conflict of interest policies of federal organizations like the National Institutes of Health, which provides funding to University researchers.

While the current policy is not as explicit as the new draft, it is still in compliance with federal law, according to Naomi Schrag, associate vice president for research compliance.

The new draft of the policy will not go into effect until the University Senate ratifies it, most likely at the November or December plenary meeting.

The new policy aims to more strictly define what is and is not a financial conflict of interest, and outlines the steps of reporting and preventing such conflicts. In general, conflicts of interest are not a problem if they are properly disclosed.

“We all have conflicts of interest—the key to this policy is to be sure that those conflicts are disclosed or managed when that is necessary,” said Henry Spotnitz, a University senator and professor of surgery at the Columbia Medical School.

The majority of conflicts of interest arise from commercial entities giving money to researchers at Columbia to conduct research, or providing technology to a researcher at the University. It is not a conflict of interest to conduct research while also consulting for a company, so long as the company does not pay for the research.

“A pure consultancy relationship where a firm does not pay money to you to conduct research would be okay,” said Sharyn O’Halloran, a professor at the School of International and Public Affairs and chair of the External Relations and Research Policy committee of the University Senate, which is overseeing the review of the new draft.

Those who worked on drafting the policy emphasized its “entrepreneurial” focus and the importance of recognizing the contributions commercial interests make to University research.

The point “is not to discourage entrepreneurship,” O’Halloran said.

The meeting steered clear of discussion of the recent U.S. Senate inquiry into the reporting of outside income for 23 faculty members at the medical school. The subcommittee in charge of this issue began work on the new policy a year ago, months before the inquiry broke.

“This policy was not influenced by any particular case,” Silverstein said.

However, the question of the Senate inquiry remains unanswered. Two U.S. Senators, Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Herb Kohl (D-Mich.), sent a letter to President Lee Bollinger on October 16 asking for information on the financial reporting of these 23 senators, and requested a reply by October 30. It is unclear whether the University replied, and Senator Grassley’s office did not return phone calls or e-mail inquiries on the issue.

At Friday’s hearing, Silverstein emphasized the importance of preserving the reputation of researchers until explicit proof of misconduct surfaces.

“The accusation of misconduct in science for a scientist can be as damaging as the actual fact of a find. The same can be true in conflict of interest,” Silverstein said. “Nothing is more important than your reputation to your career in academics, with students, and as a representative of this university.”

Spotnitz noted that conflicts of interest, while against University policy, are not actually illegal.

“In spite of recent publicity, conflict of interest is not a crime,” he said.

shane.ferro@columbiaspectator.com