Mount Holyoke College 

Policy and procedures for the conduct of research involving human subjects

 

INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD MEMBERSHIP AND COMMITTEE PROCESS

 

Membership

The membership of Mount Holyoke College’s Institutional Review Board is appointed by the President in consultation with the Faculty Conference Committee.  In order to meet federal guidelines, the membership must include at least 5 members of varying backgrounds. There must be at least one member whose primary concerns are in scientific areas and at least one member whose primary concerns are in nonscientific areas. There must also be at least one external member who is not otherwise affiliated with the institution and who is not part of the immediate family of a person  who is affiliated with the institution.

A member will not participate in the Board's initial or continuing review of any project in which the member has a conflicting interest, except to provide information requested.

 

Current members are:

            Sean Decatur, Professor of Chemistry and Associate Dean of Faculty for Science

            Rev. Richard Bondi, External member, Pastor of St. Theresa's Church, South Hadley

            Will J. Millard, Professor of Psychology and Education (Fall 2006)

            Alison K. Donta, Director of Institutional Research (2005-2007)

            Joshua H. Roth, Associate Professor of Anthropology (2005-2007)

           

 

Summary of Committee Process (please see How to apply and How proposals are reviewed sections for further detail)

 

It is expected that all internal members be familiar with human subjects research from current or prior personal experience with such research.  Thus, appointments are made in consultation with departments whose faculty typically conduct research involving human subjects and with the Office of Sponsored Research. Beginning with the Fall, 2002 semester, all Institutional Review Board members must also complete the training in human subjects protection described below.

 

As an appointed Faculty Committee of the College, the Institutional Review Board maintains records of its meetings and decisions, available on request.  It sets its meeting dates for each semester of the academic year at the beginning of that semester.  During Fall 2006 the Board will meet on Wednesdays to consider proposals requiring Full Review. Proposals requiring Full Review must be received electronically by 9 a.m. on the previous Friday to be considered the following week.

 

 

Training: All researchers covered by this Policy whose research is funded by federal grants must complete training in human subjects protection prior to submission of a proposal to the Board. (Researchers funded by the National Institutes of Health should consult the Board Chair for specific requirements.) In addition, the Board may require such training of other researchers whose background and experience, based on information presented on the proposal review form, seems inadequate. Those researchers will be notified by the Chair when such training is required. A copy of the certification of completion for each investigator from one of the following online training modules must be submitted to the Chair when training is required:

 

Option A: The Office for Human Research Protections of the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services training is available online at here. Only Module 2 (Investigator Responsibilities and Informed Consent) is required.

 

Option B: The National Institutes of Health training module on Human Participant Protections Education for Research Teams is available online at here.

 

For either option, investigators register online, complete the module, and then print out a certification of completion. The training is free of charge when only the certificate of completion is requested.

 

 

Review of proposals:  The Institutional Review Board will consider proposals in two categories: Expedited Review or Full Review (defined in the How proposals are reviewed section).  In either case, submission of the proposal as an e-mail attachment to the Board is recommended for faster response. (If submitting by e-mail, note that any pages requiring a signature must be sent separately with original signature(s), but the remainder of the proposal will be distributed as soon as received.)  All submissions are acknowledged upon receipt. The Board reviews proposals as received, and during the academic year will render a decision as soon as possible, but at the most within five class days of receipt. If a researcher is concerned about turnaround time, please consult with the Board prior to or when submitting a proposal.

 

Decisions of the Board include: approval of proposal, request for more information prior to a vote, or non-approval. When additional information is requested, an ultimate decision will be rendered within five class days of receipt of that information. A decision of non-approval may be appealed to the Board, as detailed in the How proposals are reviewed section.

 

All approvals are for a specified period of time, normally one year.  Any changes to a proposal, including extending the time frame of the research, changes to informed consent procedures or forms, or other protocol details must be resubmitted to the Board for an Expedited Review.

 

Please see the How to apply section for further detail on how to prepare a proposal for review to the Institutional Review Board.

 

Click here to return to Main Page of Policy or Click here to go to next section (Who Must Apply)