Working with Other Institutions

If you have questions about the Single IRB Process, contact Misty White:   misty.white@colorado.edu. Before beginning this process, we strongly encourage investigators to contact us and discuss the steps necessary for Single IRB oversight to occur.

Why single IRB? Types of collaborations Reviewing IRB / Relying IRB Information for Principal Investigators (PI) Information for outside IRBs
Why single IRB?

Single IRB Review is an arrangement in which one institution's IRB provides review, approval and oversight for the Human Research activities of investigators engaged in research at multiple institutions. This is intended to streamline the IRB review process, preventing duplication of effort required if each institution’s investigators were required to submit research for review separately. 

The Revised Common Rule includes a (Single IRB) requirement for all . This requirement applies to federally funded or supported non-exempt human subjects research that involves multiple institutions.

The for Single IRB applies to NIH funded non-exempt human research involving multiple US sites conducting the same protocol. It applies to all competing grant applications for due dates on or after January 25, 2018. The NIH policy differs from the Common Rule requirement in that there are NIH requirements that must be addressed in the grant or contract applications that do not apply to studies under the broader Common Rule requirement.

To reduce administrative burden, the Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder IRB has extended the Single IRB option to any non-exempt human subjects research, provided the cooperation of the outside relying/reviewing institution.

Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder does not enter into reliance agreements for . When collaborating with other institutions engaged in research that meets the definition of Exempt research, each collaborating site must obtain an exempt determination from its own IRB.

Cooperative/collaborative

This type of research involves two or more US research sites where each site is conducting a different part of a research protocol under the supervision of a lead Principal Investigator.

Example: A Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder investigator enrolls participants and collects data at Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder and sends data to a collaborator at another institution for analysis (or vice versa).

Multi-site

This type of research involves the same research procedures being conducted at two or more institutions overseen by a Principal Investigator at each site. Multi-site studies usually have a lead site/lead PI that oversees the administrative functions of the project in addition to conducting the same research procedures as the other participating sites.

Example: Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder is one of several sites that recruit, enroll, and collect data from participants using the same protocol.

The Reviewing IRB, or IRB of Record, is the IRB that assumes regulatory oversight responsibilities for the research.

This includes:

  • Initial review and approval
  • Amendments
  • Continuing reviews
  • Reportable events

The Relying IRB cedes review to, or relies on, the IRB of Record. The Relying IRB is responsible for local issues such as investigator training, conflicts of interest, etc.

Principal Investigator Responsibilities

When Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder is the Reviewing IRB, the Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder PI is the primary person of contact for the study for the IRB and the relying site PIs. All communication from the Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder IRB will be disseminated to the relying site PIs by the Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder PI. The Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder PI responsibilities include (but are not limited to):

  • Communicating with relying site PIs regarding any site-specific language that must be included in study documents
  • Preparing and submitting the Initial Application, Continuing Review/Check-ins, study-wide Amendments, Reportable Event, and Final Report to the Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder IRB
  • Providing documentation of IRB determinations to relying site PIs
  • Providing IRB-approved study documents to relying site PIs

When Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder is the Relying IRB, the Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder PI responsibilities include (but are not limited to):

  • Submitting the Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder Initial Application (required documents listed below)
  • Submitting documentation of study-wide Amendment determinations made by the Reviewing IRB
  • Submitting any Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder-specific Amendments (e.g., updating Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder staff, CITI training records, COI information, etc.)

When Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder is the Relying IRB, IRB staff will assist with the following:

  • Obtaining signatures for IRB Authorization Agreements
  • Providing local context to the Reviewing IRB regarding state laws and institutional requirements, investigator training/qualifications, and any conflicts of interest information pertinent to the study
  • Incorporating site-specific language for consent forms. This document can be downloaded and used to assess the consent form as well: Non-Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder Consent Information (link to new document)

If Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder is the Reviewing IRB ...

Use this list to gather information the IRB needs to review the research.

IRB review and approval is required when an institution is engaged in non-exempt human subjects research. In general, an institution is considered to be engaged if its agents or employees are involved in research that includes any of the following:

  1. Institutions that receive an award through a grant, contract, or cooperative agreement directly from HHS for the non-exempt human subjects research (i.e., awardee institutions), even where all activities involving human subjects are carried out by employees or agents of another institution.
  2. Institutions whose employees or agents intervene for research purposes with any human subjects of the research by performing invasive or noninvasive procedures.
  3. Institutions whose employees or agents intervene for research purposes with any human subject of the research by manipulating the environment.
  4. Institutions whose employees or agents interact for research purposes with any human subject of the research.
  5. Institutions whose employees or agents obtain the informed consent of human subjects for the research.
  6. Institutions whose employees or agents obtain for research purposes identifiable private information or identifiable biological specimens from any source for the research. It is important to note that, in general, institutions whose employees or agents obtain identifiable private information or identifiable specimens for non-exempt human subjects research are considered engaged in the research, even if the institution’s employees or agents do not directly interact or intervene with human subjects. In general, obtaining identifiable private information or identifiable specimens includes, but is not limited to:
    1. observing or recording private behavior;
    2. using, studying, or analyzing for research purposes identifiable private information or identifiable specimens provided by another institution; and
    3. using, studying, or analyzing for research purposes identifiable private information or identifiable specimens already in the possession of the investigators.

The Office for Human Research Protections guidance document provides examples of engagement, exceptions to engagement, and activities for which an institution would not be considered engaged. If an institution is not engaged in the research, IRB oversight is not required.

Determine the type of collaboration using the descriptions on the second tab of this webpage. 

For cooperative/collaborative research, gather:

  • for each engaged institution
  • Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder Protocol with other institution’s activities clearly described per the instructions in the
  • Any other supporting documents necessary for the conduct of the research at each site

For multi-site research, gather:

  • for each engaged institution
  • Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder Protocol with each institution’s activities clearly described per the instructions in the
  • Consent Form(s) and any other supporting documents with site-specific language included as necessary for outside institutions

More information about creating submissions for the IRB can be found on the IRB website:

If Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder is the Relying IRB ...

Use this list to gather information the IRB needs to review the research.

IRB review and approval is required when an institution is engaged in non-exempt human subjects research. In general, an institution is considered to be engaged if its agents or employees are involved in research that include any of the following:

  1. Institutions that receive an award through a grant, contract, or cooperative agreement directly from HHS for the non-exempt human subjects research (i.e. awardee institutions), even where all activities involving human subjects are carried out by employees or agents of another institution.
  2. Institutions whose employees or agents intervene for research purposes with any human subjects of the research by performing invasive or noninvasive procedures.
  3. Institutions whose employees or agents intervene for research purposes with any human subject of the research by manipulating the environment.
  4. Institutions whose employees or agents interact for research purposes with any human subject of the research.
  5. Institutions whose employees or agents obtain the informed consent of human subjects for the research.
  6. Institutions whose employees or agents obtain for research purposes identifiable private information or identifiable biological specimens from any source for the research. It is important to note that, in general, institutions whose employees or agents obtain identifiable private information or identifiable specimens for non-exempt human subjects research are considered engaged in the research, even if the institution’s employees or agents do not directly interact or intervene with human subjects. In general, obtaining identifiable private information or identifiable specimens includes, but is not limited to:
    1. observing or recording private behavior;
    2. using, studying, or analyzing for research purposes identifiable private information or identifiable specimens provided by another institution; and
    3. using, studying, or analyzing for research purposes identifiable private information or identifiable specimens already in the possession of the investigators.

The Office for Human Research Protections guidance document provides examples of engagement, exceptions to engagement, and activities for which an institution would not be considered engaged. If an institution is not engaged in the research, IRB oversight is not required.

Determine the type of collaboration using the descriptions on the second tab of this webpage. 

For cooperative/collaborative research, gather:

  • IRB Authorization Agreement
  • Protocol document approved by the Reviewing IRB with Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder activities clearly described
  • Reviewing IRB Approval letter

For multi-site research, gather:

  • IRB Authorization Agreement
  • Protocol document approved by the Reviewing IRB with Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder activities clearly described
  • with Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder specific language included

NOTE: If an Approved Protocol document or IRB Approval letter are not available, please contact the Single IRB Coordinator, Misty White:   misty.white@colorado.edu.

More information about creating submissions for the IRB can be found on the IRB website:

Single IRB Coordinator: Misty White   misty.white@colorado.edu

Â鶹Ãâ·Ñ°æÏÂÔØBoulder is a SMART IRB affiliated institution

Research and expertise across CU Boulder.

   

Our 12 research institutes conduct more than half of
the sponsored research at CU Boulder.

More than 75 research centers span the campus,
covering a broad range of topics.

A carefully integrated cyberinfrastructure supports CU Boulder research.