THe lawyer for a Florida university has asked school officials to revoke a doctorate of public administration degree awarded last year to James W. Baldwin,director of the D.C. Human Rights Office, because "very substantial" portions of one of Baldwin's course papers were plagiarized.
Hershel Shanks, the Washington lawyer for Nova University in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., said in an 11-page paper Bladwin submitted to the school as part of a course requirement were "virtually identical" to a 13-page text prepared for Blawin by a professor at Trinity College here.
Shanks said Baldwin paid Richard B.Zamoff, an associate professor of sociology at Trinity, $375 in cash to prepare a statistical analysis of the various ways the city's Human Rights Office conciliates complaints of employment discrimination.
Bladwin added a unnumbered summary page in the front and a conclusion on the end of Zamoff's paper and then submitted it to the university as the first of two "job-related analytical reports" required for the degree, Shanks said.
Bladwin gave no credit to Zamoff for the work, Shanks said.
"Because Baldwin's (paper) is in such large part Zamoff's work, it is clear that Bladwin has not completed the requirements for the degree," Shanks said.
Shanks said in an interview that it is now up to school officials in Florida to determine whether the degree should be taken away.
Samuel Humes, director of graduate programs at Nova, declined comment yesterday on Shanks' report. The president of the university, Abraham S. Fischler, was unavailable for comment.
Baldwin, who refused to comment on findings, said he had neither seen the report nor been interviewed by Shanks in its preparation. Balwwin's attorney, William Burleson, was unavailable for comment.
Zomoff told The Post earlier his month that Baldwin's paper was "virtually identical" to his own, yet Baldwin had failed to credit him.
A former employee of Bladwin also told The Post that Baldwin used him on about half a dozen occasions to prepare homework assignments required for the course. One course paper had been typed for Baldwin by office employees during regular business hours, sources told The Post.
Baldwin has acknowledged that some city empolyees had been used in the course work, saying. "The work was definitely beneficial to the District government. Why not (use) government facilities?"
In an interview with the Washington Star, Bladwin also acknowledged that Zamoff's work made up substantial portions of his paper, but Baldwin said he Felt it had not been inappropriate not to credit Zamoff.
Shanks challenged that position in his report to school offiicals. "No qualified doctoral student - based on his past record. Baldwin was clearly a qualified doctoral stucent - could in good faith believe that it was permissible to submit in partial fulfillment of a doctoral degree a report composed almost exclusively of a statistical analysis performed by someone else." Shanks said.
"Even if we assume that Baldwin supposed that it was permissible to use the Zamoff report in the manner he did." Shanks said, "surely a qualified doctoral candidate can be expected to acknowledge at least by appropriate footnote Zamoff's substantial contribution to the end product.
"It is difficult for me to believe tha this omission was either accidental or made in the belief that it was unnecessary to acknowledge Zamoff's contribution, given the very substantial nature of that contribution."
Shanks said he was told by Zamoff that Zamoff knew the work was being done in pursuit of Baldwin's degree but believed the work would be used as "part of a much larger piece of work."
Zamoff told Shanks, according to the report, that Baldwin had given him thousands of sheets from the files of the Human Rights Office and asked Zamoff to analyze them."Baldwin supplied Zamoff with some tally sheets and asked Zamoff, in effect, to tell him what the numbers meant," Shanks reported.
Zamoff analyzed the rally sheets, which were records of employment discrimination cases handled by the office in which conciliation of disputes had been achieved. The analysis showed that the departmenthad been most effective when staff lawyers were used to conciliated rather than investigators, the director or deputy director.
Shanks said in the report that he has tried on several ovvasions to arrange an interview with Baldwin, both directly and through Baldwin, both directly and through Baldwin's attorney, but the earliest interview date he could get was March 9.
Shanks said he thought that date was too far in the future and went ahead with the report. If baldwin or ahead with the report. If Baldwin or his lawyer provides additional information late, "I will supplement and&or modify this report based on the additional material," Shanks said.
Mayor Walter E. Washnngton siad through a spokesman yesterday that he would have no comment on the report. The mayor appointed Baldwin to be director of the agency, which enforces the city's antidiscrimination laws, six years ago.
When the allegations were first reported in the newspaper early this month, the mayor asked his closest political confidant, city administrator Julian R. Dugas, to examine the accusations.
Dugas said through a spokesman Feb. 7 that his first step would be to get a report from Baldwin on what had taken place. Dugas has done no further work on the matter,aa spokesman said yesterday.
The D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics has launched its own investigation, which, in part, is trying to determine if Baldwin violated city regulations by using government resources in conjunction with his private academic work. A report is due to the board next week.