18-200 University Policy on the Protection of Human Subjects in Research

18-200 University Policy on the Protection of Human Subjects in Research

The revised Presidential Policy on the Protection of Human Subjects in Research was issued on November 6, 2020.

18-210 Basic Policy

UC is committed to the ethical principles for the protection of human subjects in research set forth in the Belmont Report of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research and protections provided in 45 CFR Part 46 (also known as the “Common Rule”) UC recognizes and accepts responsibility, which it shares with its investigators and other researchers, for conducting human subjects research in a manner that fulfills these ethical principles and protections.

18-220 Applicability of Governmental Regulations and Policies to Human Subjects Research

In order to safeguard the rights and welfare of human subjects in research, UC follows the ethical principles of the Belmont Report and adheres to all applicable federal or state law or regulations, and University policies and guidelines governing the participation and protection of human subjects in research. Coupled with this responsibility, each University of California location, which includes all 10 campuses and the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, holds a current Federalwide Assurance filed with the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Human Research Protection (OHRP) for the protection of human subjects. This assurance applies to all research with human subjects in which the University is engaged and that is funded or supported by a federal agency that has adopted the Common Rule, regardless of the site of the activity.

The University’s commitment to protecting human subjects applies to all human subjects research in which it is engaged, regardless of funding source or the institution that provided the IRB review. When engaged in research that is not subject to the Common Rule (because, e.g., the research is not federally funded), each UC location may replace specific Common Rule requirements with commensurate protections for human subjects so long as the University follows the ethical principles referenced above and that those commensurate protections are consistent with other applicable federal or state laws.

All University of California faculty and staff who are conducting research involving human subjects within the course and scope of their University duties, as well as University of California students who are conducting research involving human subjects within the course and scope of their University studies, regardless of whether the research is funded and regardless of the source of funding, must submit human subject research protocols to the IRB for approval or follow campus policies and/or procedures for obtaining an exempt determination prior to commencing research.

18-230 UC Policies and Guidance related to Human Subject Research Protection

UC policies and guidance documents related to human subjects research protections can be found on the RPAC website.

18-240 Other Institutional Requirements

18-241 Cooperative Research and Single IRB Review

When the University contracts or subcontracts research to a cooperating institution, the University as a grantee or prime contractor is committed to and remains responsible for safeguarding the rights and welfare of human subjects. The University may use joint review, seek reliance upon the review of the qualified IRB at the cooperating institution, or undertake other appropriate arrangements.

Federally-funded cooperative human subjects research are required to utilize a single IRB of Record (sIRB), unless more than single IRB review is required by law or any Federal department or agency supporting or conducting the research determines and documents that the use of a single IRB is not appropriate for the particular context. For NIH-funded multi-site research, the study team must designate the sIRB as part of the grant application at the time of proposal submission. For research sponsored by other Federal agencies, the lead institution may propose the sIRB, but the funding agency officially will designate which institution will act as the sIRB. IRB fees should be budgeted according to campus practices.

18-242 Records Retention, Inspection and Copying

a. Records Retention

The University keeps and maintains systems of records and documentation (i.e., minutes, correspondence, approved consent documents, et al) of IRB activities. IRB records must, per UC’s Records Retention Schedule (see Section 0012B5*), be retained for at least 10 years after completion of the research, unless otherwise specified in the award agreement.
The 10-year retention period for all IRB administrative records reflects a policy decision adopted in the UC Records Retention Schedule. Previous guidance specified that all categories of IRB administrative records were to be kept for 3 years, except for records relating to: 1) children as research subjects (which were to be kept for 7 years after the child reaches the age of maturity), and 2) research pertaining to in vitro studies or pregnant women (which were to be kept for 25 years). The separate retention periods for research pertaining to children and in vitro/pregnant women were not based on any statutory or regulatory requirement. UC replaced those separate retention periods with the current uniform 10-year retention period (which, it should be noted, exceeds the minimum 3-year retention period specified in 45 CFR 46.115 and 21 CFR 56.115).
b. Inspection and Copying

The University keeps and maintains systems of records and documentation (i.e., minutes, correspondence, approved consent documents, et al) of IRB activities. IRB records must, per UC’s Records Retention Schedule (see Section 0012B5*), be retained for at least 10 years after completion of the research, unless otherwise specified in the award agreement.
The 10-year retention period for all IRB administrative records reflects a policy decision adopted in the UC Records Retention Schedule. Previous guidance specified that all categories of IRB administrative records were to be kept for 3 years, except for records relating to: 1) children as research subjects (which were to be kept for 7 years after the child reaches the age of maturity), and 2) research pertaining to in vitro studies or pregnant women (which were to be kept for 25 years). The separate retention periods for research pertaining to children and in vitro/pregnant women were not based on any statutory or regulatory requirement. UC replaced those separate retention periods with the current uniform 10-year retention period (which, it should be noted, exceeds the minimum 3-year retention period specified in 45 CFR 46.115 and 21 CFR 56.115).

18-243 Grant Congruency Reviews

Prior to 2018, the Common Rule explicitly required that IRBs complete a review of Federally-funded proposals that involved human subjects research in order to ensure that the proposed research is consistent with any relevant protocol(s) submitted to, or previously approved by, the IRB. Federal regulations no longer require the IRB to review grant applications to ensure congruency.

However, grant congruency remains an institutional responsibility when required by funding agencies. Each campus must determine which office remains responsible for completing a grant vs. IRB protocol review to assess the congruency between funding proposals and IRB protocols.