The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research is dedicated to upholding the highest standards of research integrity and scientific rigor. As a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization and public charity, we take the following steps to assure that all MJFF-funded research adheres to strict ethical guidelines and transparent practices.
Grant Funding and Peer-review Process
All investigator-initiated grants awarded by our Foundation undergo a rigorous peer-review process. Continued funding is contingent upon the achievement of predefined milestones. Data associated with milestones are assessed by internal and external scientists. The Foundation also requires submission of standard ethical approvals and related documentation for all funded projects. These processes strive to ensure that only ethically conducted and highly promising research receives support.
Research Conduct and Transparency
Recipients of funding from The Michael J. Fox Foundation are required to adhere to our open access publication policy. This policy mandates that all research results be broadly disseminated and accessible to the global research community for replication and further study. By enforcing these standards, we aim to foster an environment of transparency and accountability in the scientific community.
Addressing Research Misconduct
When issues of research misconduct arise, they typically are investigated by a researcher’s home institution. In such cases, the Foundation cooperates fully as requested and requires that results of the investigation be disclosed to us in a timely manner in case further action is required on our part. We remain committed to supporting ethical research practices and ensuring that our funded projects contribute to the advancement of Parkinson’s disease research.
Conflict of Interest
To ensure fairness, MJFF has instituted formal conflict-of-interest policies to ensure that our scientific staff and external reviewers evaluate grant applications impartially. If a reviewer has any personal or financial interest in a proposal, they are excluded from reviewing it. This includes situations where the reviewer is involved in the project, has a financial stake, or has any other personal or professional relationship that could affect their objectivity. Reviewers with such conflicts do not participate in discussions or scoring of the proposal, and they see the review results only after the process is complete.
Continual Improvement
We continually review and improve our policies and procedures to safeguard the integrity of the research we fund. Our goal is to maintain the trust of the Parkinson’s community and to support research that holds the potential to improve the lives of those affected by the disease.