Institutional Review Board
When do I need Utah Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Institutional Review Board (IRB) review?
The DHHS Institutional Review Board
- Conducts reviews of human subjects research under 45 CFR 46 in which DHHS is considered engaged.
- Conducts ethical consultations of projects that are not human subjects research under 45 CFR 46 and are not subject to oversight by OHRP. This includes:
- Releases of restricted datasets that are not part of human subjects research in which DHHS is engaged, and are not covered by an alternate IRB, existing MOA, and is permitted under state law.
- Activities, policies, agreements, laws, for which a DHHS employee requests an ethical consultation.
- When required by DHHS data stewards, law, or statute for external reviewers.
Other relevant information/Forms
Misconduct Investigation Policy
DHHS guidance research data and the HIPAA privacy rule
Annual review, amendment, termination form
Current DHHS Institutional Review Board Members
The Federal Wide Assurance (FW) for DHHS is FWA000024843. All federal grants need to use this number.
For any questions regarding your IRB request, please contact:
DHHS Institutional Review Board vision statement: Public health practice and research solidly based on the highest ethical standards.
DHHS Institutional Review Board mission statement: Promote ethical research to advance the Utah Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) efforts to improve the health of Utah residents, provide ethical consultation or IRB review for state and local health department programs, act as a forum for discussion of ethical issues arising in the practice of public health and educate staff of state and local health departments on issues of participant confidentiality; participant privacy; protection against harm; security of records and identifiable information; right of subjects to withdraw without negative consequences; appropriate methodologies and project design when needed; the expectation of sample power where appropriate; informed consent and participant reading literacy; differentiation of research from public health authority, quality improvement and program evaluation; and overall risk analysis of costs to benefits.