Ohio State Agrees to $2.1 Million Settlement Over Undisclosed China Ties in Federal Research Grants

Key Takeaways

• Ohio State Agrees to $2.1 Million Settlement: Ohio State University will pay $2.1 million to resolve civil allegations that it failed to disclose employees’ affiliations with and support from China in connection with federally funded research.
• Internal Disclosures Allegedly Did Not Reach Federal Agencies: Faculty Activity Reports dating to 2014 identified affiliations with Chinese universities and state-run research organizations, but the government alleges Ohio State did not disclose that information to NASA or NSF.
• Thousand Talents Disclosure Was Delayed Four Years: Ohio State learned in 2019 that a principal investigator on NASA grants participated in China’s Thousand Talents Program but did not notify NASA or NSF until 2023, according to the Justice Department.
• Federal Grant Compliance Is a Controls Issue: The allegations highlight the importance of ensuring information collected through faculty reporting, conflicts reviews and research administration reaches those responsible for federal grant disclosures.
• Research Security Remains a Federal Priority: DOJ, NASA OIG and NSF OIG framed accurate foreign-support disclosures as important to protecting federal research funding, scientific work and U.S. research interests.

Deep Dive

Ohio State University has agreed to pay $2.1 million to resolve allegations that it failed to disclose employees’ ties to and financial support from the People’s Republic of China while seeking federal research funding, the Justice Department announced Monday.

The settlement concerns grants awarded by NASA and the National Science Foundation that provided funding to Ohio State between November 2012 and August 2023. Federal officials allege the university failed to report certain researchers’ affiliations and collaborations with Chinese universities and state-run research organizations, as well as funding they received from China, despite disclosure requirements attached to the grants.

In one instance, according to the Justice Department, Ohio State learned in 2019 that a principal investigator working on NASA grants was participating in China’s Thousand Talents Program but did not notify NASA or NSF until 2023.

The government described Thousand Talents as a program established by China to recruit people with knowledge of or access to foreign technology and intellectual property. Federal investigators also identified other Ohio State employees working on the grants who had affiliations or collaborations with Chinese entities or received funding from China.

The allegations reach further back. Since 2014, annual Faculty Activity Reports submitted to Ohio State had identified affiliations with Chinese universities and state-run research organizations, according to the Justice Department. The government alleges that information was not disclosed to NASA or NSF.

NASA and NSF required Ohio State, as part of the funding application process, to disclose foreign government support received by principal investigators and co-principal investigators named in grant applications. Federal law has also prohibited the use of NASA grant funds for certain collaborations with China, Chinese universities and Chinese-owned companies since 2011.

“American universities that benefit from the federal government’s support for scientific research and advancement must fully disclose all foreign funding in their grant applications,” Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate of the Justice Department’s Civil Division said in announcing the settlement.

Shumate said the disclosure requirements are intended to protect research security and federally funded scientific work.

NASA’s Office of Inspector General cast the case in national-security terms. Robert Steinau, a senior official at NASA OIG, said the settlement and an accompanying compliance agreement send a message that institutions cannot conceal foreign ties that could put U.S. research at risk.

The NSF Office of Inspector General emphasized another vulnerability exposed by the allegations: federal agencies depend heavily on universities to tell them about researchers’ outside commitments and sources of support.

NSF invests billions of dollars in research each year, with a substantial portion going to colleges and universities. Acting Inspector General Megan E. Wallace said failures to disclose foreign support can undermine the integrity of the grant process and threaten both taxpayer dollars and U.S. research interests.

For universities, that dependence turns what might appear to be an administrative disclosure requirement into a broader compliance problem. The allegations against Ohio State are notable because some of the relevant information, according to the government, was already inside the university. Faculty Activity Reports had recorded certain affiliations. Ohio State had learned about the NASA principal investigator’s Thousand Talents participation. The alleged failure came afterward, when information known internally did not reach the federal agencies funding the research.

That is where research compliance becomes a question of institutional controls rather than forms. Universities with large research portfolios can have faculty reporting systems, conflict-of-interest reviews, research administrators and grant-compliance teams all collecting different pieces of the same picture. Those mechanisms offer little protection if information that triggers a federal disclosure obligation remains confined to one part of the institution.

The four-year period involving the Thousand Talents participant illustrates the problem particularly clearly. According to the government, Ohio State knew of the affiliation in 2019. NASA and NSF were not notified until 2023.

Federal scrutiny of foreign involvement in U.S.-funded scientific research has made those internal handoffs increasingly consequential. The Ohio State settlement shows the government is looking not only at what individual researchers disclosed to their universities, but also at whether universities acted on what they knew.

The GRC Report is your premier destination for the latest in governance, risk, and compliance news. As your reliable source for comprehensive coverage, we ensure you stay informed and ready to navigate the dynamic landscape of GRC. Beyond being a news source, the GRC Report represents a thriving community of professionals who, like you, are dedicated to GRC excellence. Explore our insightful articles and breaking news, and actively participate in the conversation to enhance your GRC journey.