Canada’s Panel on Responsible Conduct of Research (PRCR) is consulting on proposed revisions to the tri-agency framework for responsible conduct of research, the joint misconduct-handling policy of CIHR, NSERC and SSHRC. The engagement window runs from 17 February to 17 April 2026, and covers removing institutional statute-of-limitations barriers on allegations, adding equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) objectives, and naming research security as grounds for exceptional measures.
The Tri-Agency Framework for Responsible Conduct of Research is a joint policy of Canada’s three federal research funding agencies — the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) — that sets out the responsibilities of researchers, institutions, and the agencies themselves for preventing, reporting, investigating and resolving breaches of research integrity attached to Agency funding.
This consultation is separate from — and should not be confused with — the Tri-Agency Research Data Management Policy, which governs data management plans and is administered under its own review cycle. The current exercise concerns only the RCR Framework: the rules for handling misconduct allegations, not the requirements for managing research data.
- What is the RCR Framework, and who does it bind?
- What is changing in the 2026 proposed update?
- How does this differ from the Tri-Agency Data Management Policy?
- Who can comment, and how do you submit feedback?
- Common questions about the Tri-Agency RCR Framework
- What this means for institutions and researchers
- What happens after the consultation closes
What is the RCR Framework, and who does it bind?
The RCR Framework binds every researcher, student, and administrator working under CIHR, NSERC, or SSHRC funding, plus the institutions that receive and administer that funding on their behalf. It sets minimum standards that institutional research-integrity policies must meet, while leaving the investigative process itself to the institution.
The document now under review is the 3rd edition of the Framework, published in 2021. Under its own governance rules, the Framework is reviewed at least every five years, and the current consultation is the scheduled review that follows that mandate — not a response to a single scandal or incident.
What is changing in the 2026 proposed update?
The proposed revisions touch objectives, investigative procedure, and institutional accountability rather than rewriting the Framework wholesale. Five changes stand out as substantive rather than editorial.
- No institutional statute of limitations. New wording explicitly bars institutions from imposing a time limit on when they will accept an allegation of a policy breach.
- EDI added to the Framework’s objectives. Article on Objectives is proposed to add a duty to “promote fairness, equity, diversity, and inclusion in the conduct of research and in the process for addressing allegations of policy breaches.”
- Research security named as exceptional-measures grounds. The Agencies’ list of risks justifying immediate special measures — alongside financial, health and safety risks — is proposed to explicitly include research security.
- Two-part inquiry process clarified. The revision separates (i) assessing whether an allegation is admissible from (ii) determining whether a finding can be made without a full investigation, and clarifies who holds that authority.
- Institutional policy alignment. A new article is proposed to require institutional RCR policies to track the most current version of the Tri-Agency Framework, not a superseded edition.
The Agencies frame the update against a changing research environment: “In 2026, the Agencies are reinforcing their continued commitment to protecting and safeguarding the security of research and promoting the responsible conduct of research, especially as emerging tools and systems, such as artificial intelligence (AI), present new opportunities and challenges for the research enterprise,” according to the PRCR consultation notice.
| Area | 2021 Framework (3rd edition) | 2026 proposed revision |
|---|---|---|
| Allegation timing | No explicit bar on institutional time limits | Institutions may not impose a statute of limitations on allegations |
| Objectives | Accuracy, responsible use of funds, research quality | Adds explicit EDI objective for research conduct and case handling |
| Exceptional measures | Financial, health, safety risk grounds | Adds research security as a named risk ground |
| Inquiry process | Single described step | Split into two defined stages with clarified authority |
| Institutional policy currency | General expectation of compliance | New article requiring alignment with the current Framework edition |
How does this differ from the Tri-Agency Data Management Policy?
The RCR Framework and the Tri-Agency Research Data Management Policy are adjacent but distinct instruments, and the 2026 consultation applies only to the former. The Framework itself lists the Research Data Management Policy and the Tri-Agency Open Access Policy on Publications as separate compliance obligations that institutions and researchers must also meet — they are referenced, not folded in.
Coverage that treats this consultation as a data-policy update risks misleading research offices about which compliance document is actually being revised. Institutional research-integrity officers should track this RCR consultation independently of any parallel data-management or open-access policy review cycle.
Who can comment, and how do you submit feedback?
The PRCR is accepting written comments from anyone in the research community, not only institutional officials. Submissions go to [email protected] and should include the following details so the Panel can assess the reach of the engagement exercise:
- Name and province or territory
- Affiliation (university, hospital, college, community organisation, or other)
- Capacity in which comments are submitted (research integrity officer/RCR contact, researcher, student, administrator, or representative of a group)
- Main discipline, where applicable
All comments received, including identifiable information, are published on the PRCR website in the language submitted once the engagement period closes — unless the submitter states at the start of their comment that they do not want it posted.
Common questions about the Tri-Agency RCR Framework
What is the Tri-Agency Framework on Responsible Conduct of Research?
It is a joint policy of Canada’s three federal research funding agencies — CIHR, NSERC and SSHRC — that describes the responsibilities of researchers, institutions and the Agencies for applying for and managing Agency funds, conducting research, and handling allegations of policy breaches.
What is the responsible conduct of research?
Responsible conduct of research means upholding honesty, rigour and accountability throughout a project’s lifecycle, from applying for funding through to disseminating results. Under the Tri-Agency Framework it also means complying with Agency policies and cooperating fully with any inquiry or investigation into an alleged breach.
What are the principles of responsible research conduct?
Core principles include honesty, rigour and transparency in developing, conducting and reporting research. The Tri-Agency Framework’s own objectives add accurate use of public funds and, under the proposed 2026 revision, an explicit commitment to fairness, equity, diversity and inclusion.
What is the Tri-Agency?
“Tri-Agency” refers to the three Canadian federal research funding bodies — CIHR, NSERC and SSHRC — that jointly issue funding policies, including the RCR Framework, the Research Data Management Policy, and the Open Access Policy on Publications, and that require funded institutions to comply with all three.
What this means for institutions and researchers
If adopted, removing statute-of-limitations barriers means institutions could no longer dismiss an old allegation on timing grounds alone, which raises the practical burden on research-integrity offices to retain records and respond to historical claims. The explicit EDI objective gives complainants and respondents a textual basis to raise equity concerns during an inquiry or investigation, which institutional policies will need to accommodate procedurally, not just aspirationally.
Naming research security as exceptional-measures grounds aligns the Framework with Canada’s wider National Security Guidelines for Research Partnerships and the Policy on Sensitive Technology Research and Affiliations of Concern, giving Agencies clearer authority to act quickly where a breach also touches security-sensitive research. Institutions that have not yet mapped their RCR policy against the current 2021 edition should treat the proposed alignment article as a signal to do so now, ahead of any finalised update.
What happens after the consultation closes
The engagement window closes on 17 April 2026. After that date, the PRCR reviews submissions received, publishes them (subject to opt-outs), and determines which proposed revisions proceed into a finalised update — consistent with the Panel’s standing mandate to review the Framework at least every five years. Institutions, research-integrity officers, and funded researchers with a stake in how allegations are timed, resourced or escalated have a limited window to shape that outcome directly rather than react to it after the fact.
Research administrators tracking this alongside other funder compliance obligations may also find it useful to review research administration compliance requirements and consult research integrity terminology for related definitions.