Joint REB Review Between WLU and UW Presented by Paul Barnard (WLU) Research Compliance & Policy Officer

Previous Practice Research projects requiring review from both UW and WLU would be reviewed by one institution first; then sent to the other institution for review (i.e., consecutive review UW -> WLU) Result was a lengthy review process - each project was essentially fully reviewed twice (minimum of ~4 weeks to obtain approval) This process at times produced conflicting review requirements frustrating researchers and requiring back & forth discussions between REB staff at both universities to resolve….

Why was a Joint Review Process Considered? Increasing collaboration between researchers at both schools (only 1 block apart) was producing more projects requiring REB review from both universities Consecutive review process was increasingly viewed as an inefficient use of researchers, reviewers and REB administrators time (at both universities) TCPS allows for a joint review mechanism to be established Address criticism that REBs are not innovative, flexible or capable of adapting to applicant needs UW approached WLU to explore the feasibility of establishing a joint review…

Trial Process: Will it Work? UW and WLU agreed to a trial period to see how a joint review would work and to assess researcher reaction / feedback. Over a 1 year period, ~6 applications (all minimal risk) underwent simultaneous review by both REBs. The PI received one set of reviewer comments. PI revisions were reviewed and assessed by REB staff at both universities. Each REB continued to issue separate REB approvals to each project. Simultaneous review worked well between both REBs Applicants appreciated receiving one set of comments and the faster / streamlined review process No significant problems were identified during the trial period – both universities agreed to formalize the joint review.

Joint Review: Setting it up Formalized agreement was drafted by staff / legal counsel at both universities outlining terms and conditions of the joint review Address technical issues (WLU uses ROMEO to manage the REB; UW custom built IT system) Brief REBs at both universities and obtain their approval to proceed with signing the agreement Agree / formalize language in the joint approval certificate tc. Define responsibilities for coordinating the joint review (e.g., the university at which the PI is located coordinates the review process and issues the joint approval letter) Coordinated memo to researchers at both universities explaining the new joint review process

Today Joint review formally in place since May 1, 2014 (14 reviews completed to date) Working very well Has a high degree of awareness among researchers who appreciate the streamlined review

Success Factors: Why it Works REB staff at both universities have common approaches / practices to applying TCPS; no significant differences to complicate reviews Application process is fast and straightforward for PIs = high degree of user acceptance Prior to the joint review there was already a close working relationship and familiarity between REB staff at both universities

Questions? Contact Paul Barnard