Skip site navigation
University of Maryland Division of Research
Who We Are Capabilities Partnerships Resources News
Analytical Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) Service & Research Center Biomolecular Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) Facility Biosciences Cores: Genomics, Imaging, and Flow Cytometry BioWorkshop Brain & Behavior Institute - Advanced Genomic Technologies Core CALCE Test Services and Failure Analysis Laboratory Center For Innovative Biomedical Resources (CIBR) Clarice Smith Performing Arts Center Daikin Energy Innovation Lab DLAR Imaging Core Exposome Small Molecule Core Facility Glenn L. Martin Wind Tunnel Herschel S. Horowitz Center for Health Literacy KIT-Maryland MEG Lab Maryland Fire and Rescue Institute (MFRI) Maryland NanoCenter Maryland Neuroimaging Center Mass Spectrometry Facility Michelle Smith Collaboratory for Visual Culture Neutral Buoyancy Research Facility (NBRF) Surface Analysis Center The Laboratory for Biological Ultrastructure The University of Maryland Center for Health Equity The University of Maryland Prevention Research Center X-ray Crystallographic Center (XCC)
Africa Through Language and Area Studies (ATLAS) Anti-Black Racism Initiative Effective and Equitable Weather Forecasting in a Changing Climate with Machine Learning Encuentros: A University-Community Partnership to Mitigate the Mental Health Crisis for Latino Immigrant Youth Fostering Inclusivity through Technology (FIT) Helping Our Bodies Clear Respiratory Infections The Maryland Safe Drinking WATER Study Modeling the Evolution of Avian Influenza Viruses Music Education for All Through Personalized AI and Digital Humanities Observing Wildfires Through UAVs and Fire Imaging Technologies Programmable Design of Sustainable, All-Natural Plastic Substitutes Racial and Social Justice Research-Practice Partnership Collaborative Remediation of Methane, Water, and Heat Waste Seizing Opportunities: Social Capital, Businesses, and Communities Using Machine Learning to Measure and Improve Equity in K-12 Mathematics Classrooms Water Emergency Team
Accurate, Equitable, and Transparent Genetic Ancestry Inference Advancing Environmental Justice By Evaluating Climate-Ready Urban Street Trees In Historically Redlined Neighborhoods AFTER: A Hospital Violence Intervention Program For Youth Victims of Gunshot Injury An Innovative Intervention to Help Asian American Families Cope with Racism and Mental Health Difficulties Bridging the Gaps in Satellite Observations of Earth Systems to Support Climate Monitoring and Prediction Climate Change and Political Conflict Climate Mitigation and Land-Use Digital Equity Mapping Research and Training Program Establishing a Role for Psilocybin in Frontal Lobe Function Fetal Mammary Stem Cell Programming and Hormone Dysfunction Forecasting Acute Malnutrition for Anticipatory Action Genetic and Lifestyle Risk Factors of Accelerated Brain Aging in Severe Mental Illness How Does Statistical Learning Interact with Socioeconomic Status to Shape Literacy Development? Human Rights Politics and Policies: Lessons from Latin America Increasing Sustainability, Accessibility, and Equity in Urban Mobility with A Self-driving E-Scooter Increasing Participation of Minorities and Women In STEM Through Sports Performance Analytics Research Market Design, Energy Storage, and Interconnection to the U.S. Power Grid On-board Energy Harvesting for Long-endurance Earth Observation UAVs Promoting Youth Mental Wellbeing in Rural Honduras by Engaging Teachers as Catalysts Relating Attitudes on Democracy to Attitudes on Race and Ethnicity An Innovative Approach to Remove Emerging Organic Contaminants from the Environment Role of Mitochondria Dynamics in Opioid Addiction Towards an Early Warning System for Increased Probability of Community Infection by SARS-Cov-2 Variants Understanding the Impact of Wind on Fire Dynamics in Mass-Timber Compartment Visualizing Urban Flooding Due To Climate Change
Search
Who We Are Capabilities Partnerships Resources News

Institutional Review Board ∙ irb@umd.edu ∙ 301-405-4212 ∙ 1204 Marie Mount Hall ∙ Hours: 8:30 AM - 4:30 PM

Quality Assurance Program

KUALI-IRB LAUNCH (1/5):

Kuali-IRB is LIVE for new projects and transitions! For more information, see the Transition to Kuali-IRB page.


Overview

The Quality Assurance (QA) Program was established to promote and maintain ethical research conduct. The primary mission of the QA Program is to evaluate and improve human research protections through education, training, and monitoring. Quality Assurance staff work with investigators, research staff, and the IRB to ensure research is compliant with regulations, guidance, institutional policies, and best practices for human research protections.


Quality Assurance Activities

The QA Program is responsible for reviewing activities associated with human research protections. These responsibilities include:

  • Routine, on-site and virtual Quality Assurance Reviews.
  • Assistance with IRB submissions, reporting, and recordkeeping.
  • Random, internal reviews of approved IRB protocols.
  • IRB member evaluations.
  • Participant and community outreach initiatives.
  • Development of QA tools and training.
  • Random reviews of IRB meeting minutes and reviewer checklists.
  • Monitoring of Reliance Agreements and IRB approval letters.
  • Compliance follow-up of IRB protocols. 
     

Quality Assurance FAQs:

What types of Quality Assurance Reviews could occur?

A routine (not-for-case) QA Review is an assessment or examination of a research-related practice or procedure with the possibility (or intention) of instituting change if necessary. Routine QA Reviews of study activities and study documentation are performed on-site as a service to investigators, with feedback provided regarding practices associated with the conduct of the study.

A for-cause (directed) QA Review is an assessment of research or investigators that is initiated at the request of the IRB or the Institutional Official to obtain (or verify) information necessary to ensure compliance with regulations and institutional requirements. A for-cause QA Review is generally based on a concern, complaint, or an allegation that was brought to the attention of the IRB and is used to inform decisions about the conduct of human subjects research and/or human subjects protection.

How are IRB protocols selected for routine Quality Assurance Reviews?

Studies are randomly identified for routine on-site QA Reviews from the list of all open protocols in the IRB database. Any study involving human subjects may be selected for a routine QA Review. Exceptions to random selection include studies that have received QA Reviews or for-cause reviews within the same calendar year as well as studies closing prior to scheduled review.

How are individuals notified when their IRB protocol is selected for a routine Quality Assurance Review?

The research team (Principal Investigator, Co-investigators, and/or individuals listed on the protocol) will receive an email notification from the QA staff indicating that a particular IRB protocol has been selected for a QA Review. The QA staff will arrange a mutually agreeable appointment for an on-site or virtual review, typically within 2-4 weeks of notification.

How is it determined which protocols receive a virtual review versus an on-site review?

QA Reviews can take place on-site or virtually. After reviewing the protocol records, QA staff will determine whether an on-site or virtual visit is most appropriate.

What does a Quality Assurance Review entail?

The QA Review will involve an internal records review, a brief interview with a few members of the research team, and a possible on-site visit.

If selected for an on-site visit, it will consist of two parts: (1) An on-site records review of all protocol documentation and (2) a tour of the research facility. 

What will be reviewed during the Quality Assurance Review?

QA staff will ask that specific IRB-related records are available for review. Examples include:

  • IRB-approved documents, including initial, continuing, and amendment reviews.
  • IRB-related correspondence, including IRB approval letters.
  • Informed consent documents.
  • Screening/enrollment lists used to identify potential participants.
  • Sponsor correspondence.
  • Reports of unanticipated problems and adverse events.
  • Drug and device accountability records.

What will the Quality Assurance Reviewers ask during the interview?

The QA staff may ask questions regarding the research team, protocol procedures, recruitment, the consent process, record keeping, adverse events, or other questions specific to the protocol.

How long do the Quality Assurance Reviews typically take to complete?

QA Reviews typically last no more than one hour. If additional time is required, QA staff will notify the investigators as soon as possible.

How are findings communicated upon completion of the Quality Assurance Review?

QA staff will provide the research team with a written report via email, no later than one week following the audit.  The Principal Investigator is expected to review the report and return a signed copy within 10 business days.

Who will receive the results of the Quality Assurance Review?

The results of the QA Review will be shared with all members of the research team.  The results will also be reviewed by the IRB Chair and the IRB Committee at the monthly Full Board Meeting. 

What can an investigator do to prepare for a Quality Assurance Review?

To prepare for a QA Review, ensure that all IRB-related materials are well-organized and readily available for the QA staff. You can use the checklists below as a guide:

Also, please be sure to check the CITI Human Subject Research records for all team members to ensure that all training records are up-to-date.

What if problems are identified when preparing for a Quality Assurance Review?

If problems are identified, please contact the IRB Office immediately.

Depending on the severity of the issue, a deviation report and/or problem report may be required.