When we think about ethics for academia, it is helpful to recognize that both the larger society and academic society demonstrate increasing growth and change. As our culture gains in complexity and diversity (in ethnic, educational, religious terms, etc.), the numbers and kinds of ethically sensitive issues multiply. For the purpose of this article, based on long standing definitions, ethical decision making may simply be defined as that which concerns moral conduct and generally leads to positive outcomes for culture as a whole. This is in contrast to unethical decision making which generally does not foster positive outcomes for community. As externally funded academic projects and programs grow in numbers and complexity, there is a consequent role for civically oriented guidance and training in ethical issues-if not also for more programmatic, ethical oversight mechanisms for grant funded research. First, let us look at some areas of ethical contention.Disclosure and Non-disclosure: BasicsDisclosure and non-disclosure clauses are ethically sensitive aspects of grants. Disclosure generally deals with open public sharing of pertinent interests; non-disclosure more often deals with individual or corporate privacy. They often come into play with collaborations between academia and the business world or even government sponsorship that is increasingly common, with academic science research in medicine and biotechnology getting much of the press. On the surface it makes sense: everyone learns from the research and the funding agent may be able to apply the research to new product development.As an example of required disclosure, some states, like New York, stipu- late that all state employees put the interests of the public foremost. This enables citizen's assurance through fair and ethical transactions. Personal or business conflicts of interest between academic staff at state institutions who directly interact with external funding agencies are not allowed. The filing of financial disclosure statements is required of academics seeking external funding, while the degree of a faculty member's involvement determines the specific nature of filing requirements (New York State, 2006).On the other hand, at least in other states, non-disclosure agreements are often brought to the table by corporations or venture capitalists. Whether or not there are laws or standards to disclose conflicts of interest for public scrutiny, there does seem to be a willingness among academic officials engaged in externally funded research to sign non-disclosure clauses. One key question for ethical review is to ask whether or not these non-disclosure clauses are in the public interest. Which stakeholder groups benefit or are harmed with nondisclosure? Do non-disclosure clauses place questionable confining constraints on the faculty and graduate students conducting research? What if the faculty or graduate student develops troubling questions about preliminary research conclusions and consults a departmental librarian, a faculty member, or administrator, none of whom are directly involved in the grant project? What are the implications of non-disclosure clauses for the academic department, the university as a whole, the corporation, and society in such circumstances?In the case of Tufts University (and other institutions) there are in fact public disclosure statements in place, however general in nature (Tufts, 2006). The Tufts' Web site reads:Sponsoring companies ... have no direct access to any of the Tufts Center's proprietary databases. Whereas sponsoring companies, regulators, academics, and others outside of Tufts CSDD may suggest topics for investigation, the research agenda of Tufts CSDD is set by the group's director and its research staff.Without knowing precise reasons for the wording of the Tuft's text about which parties can or cannot determine the investigative agenda, ethically related questions may nevertheless be asked. …