Re: Animal Expenditures on PHS Grants Paplauskas,Leonard 28 Mar 1996 07:46 EST
Doug, At UCHC our IACUC approves a discreet # of animals for each protocol. This data is maintained by the IACUC staff in a db shared with the animal facility. The animal facility orders all animals. Reqs must reference the approved IACUC protocol. Then the animal facility staff maintain a db on # animals used against each protocol, again on the same shared db. This works pretty well, except in the case of protocols where in-house breeding occurs, e.g., transgenics. Then it becomes an exercise in tracking cage card data and interaction with PIs to determine how many animals have been bred. Fortunately, we don't have a lot of breeding colonies, yet. The amount of $ in the grant for animals, and the numbers in the grant application take a secondary position to the # approved by our IACUC. Len Paplauskas Asst. VP for Research UCONN H.C. ---------- From: Research Administration Discuss To: Multiple recipients of list RES Subject: Animal Expenditures on PHS Grants Date: Wednesday, March 27, 1996 2:02PM I know this question has been asked of this group more than once, but I do not remember seeing an answer. Is there a listserv that deals with IACUC issues in much the same way as the Medical College of Wisconsin listserv deals with IRB issues? If so, I would appreciate the address. Since I do not know of an IACUC list, I'll post my question to this list - it is also a grants management question. How do other institutions oversee/control expenditures from PHS grants for animal acquisition and daily care? Do you hold the P.I. on a grant to the purchase of the animal species described in Section (f) of the proposal? Do you hold the P.I. on a grant to the purchase of animals ONLY for the specific procedures described in section (f) and approved by study section? Do you even attempt to "match-up" IACUC protocols with particular grants to be certain that money spent from the grant for animals is within the scope of the award (as described in the proposal)? If so, How is it monitored? Who is responsible? The P.I.? Grants management? The Animal Facility? Some Combination of these? PHS Grants Policy Statement (in Section 8 under the heading "Prior Approval Authorities Retained by PHS for Research Grants") states that prior approval is required for 1) substitution of one animal model for another and 2) any change from the approved use of animals. This is similarly stated in the instructions for PHS 2590, the continuation application form. That is, "if significant changes regarding the use of animals are now proposed, [describe the changes]". In this latter case, examples of significant changes given are: a) substituting one animal model for another or b) changing from noninvasive to invasive procedures. I assume that the term "animal model" loosely translates to "species", but when does a change "animal use" reach the level of significance requiring prior approval? I would assume that a change from acute experiments in which the animals do not survive to experiments which require survival surgery would represent a "significant change from the approved use of animals", but it is unclear just where PHS draws that line. How are other institutions handling this responsibility? If you would prefer to reply to me directly, I will be glad to compile the responses (without identifiers) and post the results to this list. Thanks to all. Doug Wilkerson, Ph.D. VOICE: (419) 381-4252 Assoc. V.P. for Research FAX: (419) 381-4262 Professor of Pharmacology e-mail: xxxxxx@GEMINI.MCO.EDU Medical College of Ohio 3000 Arlington Ave. Toledo, OH 43614