DSSF Decision Support Tools – Contractual. Usual Disclaimers The analyses represented in the following slides reflect current understanding of applicable.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
University Contracting The University of Arizona Office of Research and Contract Analysis (ORCA)
Advertisements

University Data Classification Table* Level 5Level 4 Information that would cause severe harm to individuals or the University if disclosed. Level 5 information.
IIT Office of General Counsel Education Program Non-Disclosure/Confidentiality Agreements.
1 RIT: Support Infrastructure, Policies and Procedures – Perceptions, Myths and Reality Varda Main Director Technology Licensing Office.
1 The HIPAA Privacy Rule and Research This presentation will probably involve audience discussion, which will create action items. Use PowerPoint to keep.
NATIONAL FORUM ON YOUTH VIOLENCE PREVENTION: HIPAA PRIVACY RULE CONSIDERATIONS November 1, 2011 Iliana L. Peters, JD, LLM HHS Office for Civil Rights.
Technology and Economic Development Intellectual Property Issues in Research Jim Baker Director Office of Technology and Economic Development
Health Insurance Portability Accountability Act of 1996 HIPAA for Researchers: IRB Related Issues HSC USC IRB.
Privacy and Information Security Essentials
Office of Research Oversight. Working Group Report Slide 2.
University of Miami1 HIPAA Survival Skills An Introduction to HIPAA and Research University of Miami Human Subjects Research Office October 31, 2006 Evelyne.
Office of Research Oversight. Challenges & Opportunities Related to “Collaborative” Research with Affiliates Challenges –Federal Records Retention Requirements.
FERPA and IRB: Implications for Testing Centers Judith W. Grant, Ph.D.,CIP NCTA Conference San Antonio, Texas August 6, 2009.
BC Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act
2/16/2010 The Family Educational Records and Privacy Act.
Intellectual Property in the Digital Age Series “Don’t I Own My Own Work?” Negotiating to Keep Your Copyright Intellectual Property in the Digital Age:
Introduction to Intellectual Property using the Federal Acquisitions Regulations (FAR) To talk about intellectual property in government contracting, we.
Informed Consent and HIPAA Tim Noe Coordinating Center.
Data Privacy: Third Parties, Vendors, & Nonprofits Baron Rodriguez (PTAC), Michael Hawes (DoED), & Mike Tassey (PTAC)
Introduction to confidentiality Diana Galpin Research and Innovation Services (R&IS)
FERPA 101 Student Records: Institutional Responsibility and Student Rights What Every University Employee Should Know Prepared by the Office of the Registrar.
Technology and Economic Development Confidentiality Issues in Research Jim Baker Director Office of Technology and Economic Development
Per Anders Eriksson
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)
Fraud, Waste & Abuse DEFICIT REDUCTION ACT OF 2005 Presented by: MARCH Vision Care, 2013.
Lawyer at the Brussels Bar Lecturer at the University of Strasbourg Assistant at the University of Brussels Data Protection & Electronic Communications.
1 Copyright & Other Legal Issues. 2 WHAT IS COPYRIGHT? Copyright is the form of protection provided by the laws of the United States to authors of “original.
1 VUMC Confidentiality Policy and HIPAA Implications for Clinical Research General Clinical Research Center Skills Workshop March 2, 2007 Gaye Smith Privacy.
Technology Transfer at Rice
Electronic Data Use Agreement Tool (e-DUA) Development December 9, 2010 Rebecca Hulea Alex Kanous.
Eric J. Pritchard One Liberty Place, 46 th Floor 1650 Market Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (215)
NIH Data Sharing Policy University of Nebraska Medical Center.
After completing this lesson, participants will be able to:  Identify ethical, legal, and policy issues for managing research data  Define copyrights,
Theme: classification & distribution of government control of FEA.
Computerized Networking of HIV Providers Workshop Data Security, Privacy and HIPAA: Focus on Privacy Joy L. Pritts, J.D. Assistant Research Professor Health.
WORKING WITH SPO AND IAO Lynne HollyerNoam Pines Associate Director Research Administrator Industry Alliances OfficeSponsored Projects Office
Advanced HIPAA Issues for Biotech and Life Sciences Companies: Mark E. Schreiber Palmer & Dodge LLP 111 Huntington Avenue Boston, MA
HIPAA and Research Basics for IRB Tim Atkinson Director, Research and Sponsored Programs Director, Institutional Review Board Research Privacy Officer.
HIPAA – How Will the Regulations Impact Research?.
MTA Sharing Research Materials in Academia AKA: Everything you could want to know about Materials Transfer Agreements.
FERPA 101 Student Records: Institutional Responsibility and Student Rights What Every University Employee Should Know Prepared by the Office of Academic.
Privacy Officer Core Responsibilities for Human Research Protection Stephania H. Griffin, RHIA, CIPP/G VHA Privacy Officer.
HIPAA SURVIVAL SKILLS: An Update University of Miami1 Marisabel Davalos, M.S.Ed., CIP Associate Director of Educational Initiatives November, 2008.
FleetBoston Financial HIPAA Privacy Compliance Agnes Bundy Scanlan Managing Director and Chief Privacy Officer FleetBoston Financial.
Privacy vs. Confidentiality.  IRB review of privacy and confidentiality protections is required under the Common Rule and the FDA regulations, as well.
License, Contract, Memoranda, Oh My! Kevin L. Smith Duke University Libraries Office for Copyright and Scholarly Communications.
Data Governance 101. Agenda  Purpose  Presentation (Elijah J. Bell) Data Governance Data Policy Security Privacy Contracts  FERPA—The Law  Q & A.
A Road Map to Research at Jefferson: HIPAA Privacy and Security Rules for Researchers Presented By: Privacy Officer/Office of Legal Counsel October 2015.
© 2004 The IPR-Helpdesk is a project of the European Commission DG Enterprise, co-financed within the fifth framework programme of the European Community.
HIPAA and Human Subjects Research IRB Member CE May 2014 Slideshow by Sean Horkheimer.
Law & Policy of Relevance to the Management of Plant Genetic Resources Implementing the Treaty Session 1: Presentation 3 The International Treaty.
1 Overview of the Report Holly H. Birdsall, MD, PhD Acting Deputy Chief of Research & Development Officer, ORD.
Government Contract Law – Post Award Shraddha Upadhyaya Contract Law Division U.S. Department of Commerce Office of General Counsel GSA Training Conference.
HIPAA Overview Why do we need a federal rule on privacy? Privacy is a fundamental right Privacy can be defined as the ability of the individual to determine.
VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION SLIDE 0 New Requirements for VA ORD Investigators: Implementation of Data Management and Access Plans.
Human Subjects Update E. Wethington, Chair, UCHS.
Creative Commons terms and definitions By Chelsey Maton.
Review of Research-Related Agreements Between Academic Institutions and Other Entities. Manoja Ratnayake Lecamwasam, PhD Intellectual Property and Innovation.
Disclaimer This presentation is intended only for use by Tulane University faculty, staff, and students. No copy or use of this presentation should occur.
Final HIPAA Privacy Rule: The Research Provisions Julie Kaneshiro DHHS Office for Human Research Protections Phone: Fax:
Intellectual Property And Data Rights Issues Domestic & Global Perspectives Bayh-Dole act -- rights in data Henry N. Wixon Chief Counsel National Institute.
HIPAA Training Workshop #3 Individual Rights Kaye L. Rankin Rankin Healthcare Consultants, Inc.
Objectives 1. Define and describe each of the Agreement types being discussed today; 2. Highlight specific questions to ask when determining the administrative.
Slides Template for Module 5
Export Controls – Export Provisions in Research Agreements
The HIPAA Privacy Rule and Research
2003 Immunization Registry Conference
Export Controls – Export Provisions in Research Agreements
Export Control Considerations When Planning Conferences and Meetings
Presentation transcript:

DSSF Decision Support Tools – Contractual

Usual Disclaimers The analyses represented in the following slides reflect current understanding of applicable federal laws and regulations, but do not reflect more restrictive state laws or institutional policies and are no substitute for legal advice from your own institutional attorneys.

caBIG™ Data Sharing and Security Framework (DSSF) Image: DSSF in the form of a flowchart. At the top would be the Data/Images/Specimens. This is followed by four vertical strands representing the four areas of sensitivity in four domains (Human Research, Privacy, Contractual, and Proprietary). Following each domain there is an example of the types of questions/issues that would pertain to that particular domain. Within each domain area, the Framework then identifies one of three levels of sensitivity which are color-coded: low (green), moderate (yellow) and high (orange). That being stated, each domain is as follows: 1.Domain: Economic/Proprietary/IP Value (Need for Protection from Institution or PI Perspective. Examples: Is the data subject to a restrictive license? Is it related to an invention report you have or intend to file with your institution? Results: None/Low (Green), Medium (Yellow) High (Orange) 2.Domain: Privacy/Confidentiality/Security Considerations (Legal/Regulatory). Examples: Do federal or state law or your institution’s policies prohibit or restrict disclosure? Results: Low (Green)-De-Identified/Anonymized Data Set, Medium (Yellow)- Coded/Limited Data Set, High (Orange)-Identifiable Data 3.Domain: IRB/Institutional Restrictions (Human Subjects Considerations-Ethical). Examples: Do your institutions or IRB’s policies or the applicable informed consent documents explicitly or implicitly restrict or permit disclosure (e.g. “no commercial use”)? Results: Low (Green)- Explicit Permission for Registry Participation, Medium (Yellow)-policy limitations, High (Orange)- explicit consent limitations/restrictions 4.Domain: Sponsor Restrictions (Grant or Contract Terms and Conditions). Examples: Do terms and conditions in any sponsored agreements prohibit or restrict disclosure outside institution or the caGRID? Results: Low (Green): No restrictions, Medium (Yellow)- Delays or Other Moderate Restrictions, High (Orange)-Classified Research/Major Restrictions. The next section of the image shows the three possible sensitivity outcomes (Low/ Green, Medium/Yellow, High/Orange) and the corresponding data sharing mechanism to employ. 1.Assessment: Low (green). Criteria: if all of the following are present; no IP value, low sensitivity data, no IRB restrictions, no sponsor restrictions. Data Sharing Mechanism: general website terms of use 2.Assessment: Medium (yellow) Criteria: if any of the following is present; moderate IP value, moderate sensitivity data (e.g. LDS), limited institutional or IRB policy restrictions, moderate sponsor restrictions. Data sharing mechanism: standardized click- through terms and conditions. 3.Assessment: High (orange). Criteria: if any of the following are present; high IP value, high sensitivity data (e.g. PHI), significant IRB/consent restrictions, major sponsor restrictions. Data sharing mechanism: standardized click-though terms and conditions or individually negotiated bi-lateral or multi-lateral agreement

Target Audience Study Investigators and Research Teams Sponsored Programs Offices Institutional Legal Counsel

Sponsor Requirements Do the terms and conditions in any funding grants or contracts (from the government or private sources), or other agreements, prohibit or restrict disclosure? Questions/Issues: Do the terms of any agreements with sponsors governing the original data collection or creation delay or otherwise limit, restrict, or prohibit disclosure? Do the terms of any agreements with original data sources delay or otherwise limit, restrict, or prohibit disclosure?

“Low Sensitivity Data” Funding or other related agreements contain no restrictions or require only attribution The institution and investigator are not bound by any agreements that restrict the right to share data with others including those outside the institution The institution or investigator is bound by an agreement requiring only attribution of the source of the data to be disseminated

“Moderate Sensitivity Data” Funding or other agreement includes any of the following types of provisions: Imposes restrictions on data sharing for a limited period of time (e.g., sharing only after publication by sponsor, or only after project participants have an exclusive time period to review the data or only after a related patient application has been filed) Allows data sharing only with non-profit entities or other defined groups Allows data sharing only for non-commercial or other restricted purposes Allows use but not dissemination of data derived from data provided by the disclosing institution or investigator, or funded by the applicable sponsor

“High Sensitivity Data” Funding or other agreement: Allows transfer only with consent of sponsor or other specified party Allows transfer only under defined security conditions Requires the receiving or funded entity to disclose, license, or assign results derived from the data to the sponsor or another specified party Otherwise restricts receiving institutions’ ability to retransfer data

Pulling it all Together … Image: IP Restrictions, Privacy/Confidentiality Restrictions, IRB/Ethical Restrictions and Sponsor Restrictions are represented as separate but connectable puzzle pieces that make up a whole.

Other DSIC Tools Data Sharing and Security Framework (DSSF) Decision Support Tools Human Research Considerations Privacy Considerations Proprietary Considerations Model Informed Consent, Consent and Authorization Elements Decision Support Tool & Associated Materials

Contacting the Knowledge Center Contact us via our Forums General forums DSIC Tools-specific forums