University Libraries Logo University Archives of Virginia Tech

Virginia Tech
Governance Minutes Archive

October 11, 1989

                                    Minutes

                            COMMISSION ON RESEARCH

                               October 11, 1989

                            President's Board Room

                                   3:30 p.m.

 

 

  MEMBERS PRESENT:  L. J. Arnold, F. M. Asche, D. M. Denbow, V. R. Fu, P. L.

                    Knox, J. C. Lee, C. McDaniel (for G. E. Bunce), J.

                    Randolph, R. S. Russell, E. R. Stout, W. L. Stutzman

 

  MEMBERS ABSENT:   W. L. Flowers, E. G. Henneke, G. R. Hooper, W. G. Huber,

                    M. Potts, M. G. Squires, H. H. Stoevener, L. A. Swiger

 

  INVITED GUESTS:   M. D. Shelton

 

 

 

  1.  Dr. Stout announced our Director of Sponsored Programs, Dorothy

      Richardson, died on September 29th.  The EEO/AA Office has been con-

      tacted.  Whether the search can be resumed at the point Dorothy was

      hired or whether we have to initiate a new search remains to be seen.

      Dr.  Stout is Acting Director of Sponsored Programs.

 

  2.  The Commonwealth Center in Interdisciplinary Mathematics has been re-

      commended by the State Council.

 

  3.  Adoption of Agenda with suggested addition by Dr. Arnold of certif-

      ication of human subjects.  Agenda was approved.

 

  4.  Approval of Minutes of September 13 with correction of Virginia "Prin-

      ciples" Assessment Center to Virginia "Principals" Assessment Center.

 

  5.  Interdisciplinary Research Committee.  The Chairman suggested that the

      Committee be composed of 2 college faculty representatives, 1 Faculty

      Senate representative, 1 department/division representative, and 1 cen-

      ter director.  Dr. Arnold wanted standard statement of purpose.  Dr.

      Stout stated that by next committee meeting he would have statement of

      purpose and suggested membership.  Dr. Randolph suggested the Commis-

      sion might consider a committee dealing with core research.  Dr.

      Randolph agreed to bring back recommendation concerning core research

      committee.

 

  6.  NIH final rule on misconduct in science was published in the Federal

      Register in late September.  Presidential Policy Memorandum #102 fac-

      ulty ethics - whether present statement covers us as far as NIH we

      don't know.  Kay Heidbreder, Assistant Legal Counsel, is checking into

      it and hopefully will be able to provide us with an opinion next meet-

      ing.  Dr. Stout stated he was confident that our statement was inade-

      quate in one respect that in our statement there is nothing about

      reporting procedures to sponsors.  NIH wants a mechanism to deal with

      it and a mechanism to report back to them.  Dr. Arnold suggested the

      Commission draft a policy for the Faculty Senate or Commission on Fac-

      ulty Affairs.  Policy starts November 8 pertaining to grants and not

      contracts.  If our policy in place is determined to be inadequate, Dr.

      Stout will write a cover letter stating we have a policy, we've been

      advised it is inadequate and we're working on it.

 

  7.  Certification - procurement integrity.  Once procurement announcement

      is published, then no one at institution can have any contact with any-

      one at the agency who has anything to do with that program.  The uni-

      versity has to certify that procurement regulations have been followed.

      Only applies to Department of Defense procurements including research

      contracts.

 

 

  8.  Dr. Stout reviewed the handouts sent - commentary from the Chronicle of

      Higher Education, October 4, and Trends in the South.

 

  9.  DHHS certification of Institutional Review Boards for Research Involv-

      ing Human Subjects:  Dr.  Arnold asked:  What's necessary to be certi-

      fied and what does it mean to be certified and if it saves us time

      shouldn't we go ahead and get certification?  Dr. Stout responded:

      Many institutions, especially medical schools have "broad assurance"

      from NIH.  Such institutions are assigned an "assurance number".  When

      a proposal is sent to a Federal agency that involves the use of human

      subjects, a form (HHS 596) must accompany it.  One section of the form

      is "HHS Assurance Status".  If an approved assurance of compliance is

      on file with DHHS which covers the activity in the proposal, the assur-

      ance number is entered.  Alternatively, the "single assurance" box is

      checked.  Any proposal that has the "human subjects" question checked

      on the back of the Proposal Internal Approval Form is sent to the

      Chairman of the IRB (Dr. Stout).  He then writes to the P.I. requesting

      that approval of the research protocol, consent forms, etc. be secured

      from the department.  Dr. Stout may give expedited approval on behalf

      of the IRB or call a meeting of the IRB to review and approve the re-

      search.  Dr. Stout then sends an amended HHS 596 to the sponsor.  Dr.

      Stout has contacted the Office of Protection of Research Risks (OPRR)

      at NIH and has been advised that without a medical school seeking broad

      assurance certification is not warranted.

 

  10. Meeting adjourned at 4:35PM.

 

 

  ERS/php

 

Current Virginia Tech Governance Minutes Archive

Return to Virginia Tech Governance Minutes Archive


VT History | Digital Library and Archives | Special Collections | University Archives


Send questions or comments to:

Tamara Kennelly, University Archivist
University Libraries
Virginia Tech
P.O. Box 90001
Blacksburg, VA, 24062-9001

URL: http://spec.lib.vt.edu/minutes/cor/1989/October+11++1989.html
Last modified on: Tuesday, 25-Sep-2001 13:57:24 EDT