Table 2.

Example metrics and assessments to evaluate common IACUC functions

IACUC function	Function component	Metric	Assessment	Committee type evaluated	Reference
Protocol Review	Participation	Member participation during protocol reviews	Incidence or frequency of feedback by individual or member category (chair, scientist, nonscientist, veterinarian, nonaffiliated)	IRB	Candilis, P.J., and colleagues 20129
				IACUC	Silverman J., and colleagues 201551
		Quality of member participation during protocol reviews	Transcribe and code discussion topics presented during review	IACUC	Houde L., and colleagues 200323
				IACUC	Silverman J., and colleagues 201551
			Audit protocol review comments based on protocol form sections	IACUC	Dresser R. 198913
	Process	IACUC member satisfaction with review process	Survey or interview IACUC members	IACUC	Silverman J., and colleagues 201248
		Researcher satisfaction with review process	Survey researchers	IACUC	Norton J.N., and colleagues 201736
			Days under each phase/type of review process	IRB	Varley P.R., and colleagues 201660
		IACUC member views on the committee's ethical framework	Survey IACUC members	IACUC	Houde L., and colleagues 200924
	Duration	Factors affecting duration of protocol review process	Study characteristics impacting review time	IRB	Caligiuri M., and colleagues 20178
			Impact of regulatory support personnel on review time	IRB	Desai, P., and colleagues 201712
			Time to approve based on funding source, procedure invasiveness	IRB	Hall D.E., and colleagues 201520
	Outcomes	Protocol review outcomes	Protocol review outcomes, type of protocols, category of invasiveness	IACUC	Houde L., and colleagues 200323
			Frequency of protocols approved without revisions, protocols requiring revisions, protocols rejected	IRB	Abdel-Aal, W. and colleagues 20134
	Volume	Number of protocols reviewed	Total number of protocols reviewed per meeting, per year	AEC	Schuppli C.A. and Fraser D. 200746
		Reviewer workload	Frequency each member or member category is assigned designated or primary reviewer	AEC	Schuppli C.A. and Fraser D. 200746
	Concurrent Factors	Protocol review time occupied with ancillary review	Incidence and duration reviews are held for ancillary purposes (for example, radiation safety review, biosafety review, scientific review)	IRB	Caligiuri M., and colleagues 20178
	Continuing Reviews	Lapse in performing continuing reviews	Incidence or frequency of completed continuing reviews compared with lapses in continuing reviews	IACUC	Tsan M.F., and colleagues 201654
		Workload associated with continuing review	% protocols undergoing continuing review/year	IRB	VandenBosch T.M and Maio T.M. 201158
		Outcomes of continuing reviews	Incidence and frequency of noncompliance findings during routine continuing review	IACUC	Vanderford D.A., and colleagues 201559
Semiannual Inspections	Inspection Process	IACUC member satisfaction with inspection process	Survey or interview IACUC members	IACUC	Borkowski G., and colleagues 19977
		Researcher satisfaction with program oversight	Survey animal-user population	IACUC	Norton J.N., and colleagues 201736
Program Review	Program Review Process	IACUC member satisfaction with program oversight	Survey or interview IACUC members	IACUC	Borkowski G., and colleagues 19977
			Solicit feedback from core campus services	IACUC	McEntee H.I. and Sandgren E.P. 200732
	Training Process	IACUC member satisfaction with continuing education	Survey IACUC members	IRB	Feldman J.A. and Rebholz C.M. 200916
		Researcher compliance with training expectations	Number of personnel without initial training, lapse in continuing training	IRB	Tsan M.F., and colleagues 201355
		Researcher satisfaction of training programs	Survey animal use population	IACUC	Ingham K.M., and colleagues 200028
	Outcomes	Deficiencies	Number of policies and procedural issues discussed	IBC	Dutton D.B. and Hochheimer J.L. 198215
	Regulatory Burden	Perception of burden among IACUC processes	Survey animal-user population	IACUC	Norton J.N., and colleagues 201736
Investigate Concerns	Methods to report concerns	Methods in place to report concerns	Survey IACUC members	IACUC	Borkowski G., and colleagues 19977
	Investigation Process	Volume	Number and reason for protocol suspensions/terminations	IRB	Tsan M.F., and colleagues 201355
	IACUC Administration	Personnel workload	Number of protocols per IACUC Administrator FTE	IRB	Caligiuri M., and colleagues 20178
Quality Improvement	Success of Interventions	Researcher perception of interventions made by IACUC	Resurvey animal-user population	IACUC	Ingham, K.M. 200327

While some assessment tools listed here have been used in studies directly evaluating IACUC functions, additional tools which have been used to evaluate similar functions of IRBs and IBCs are also included.