The IRB review schedule for regular and expedited applications, Continuing Review/Amendment requests, and requests for exemptions follows the academic semester schedule. In most cases, review of applications starts the first week of each semester and ends on the last day of classes, and is conducted in the order received. For applications submitted during a semester, the IRB review and approval process typically takes two to three weeks to complete from the time that the application comes out of routing (What does this mean?), although some applications do require additional time.
Please note that in all cases, it is in your best interest to submit applications as far in advance as possible. If your graduation is dependent on research that requires an IRB approval during the current session, ideally your application should be submitted at the beginning of the semester, and no later than one month prior to the start date of your research.
What can delay the review process?
- Failure to complete the required CITI Training; for more information, please review the CITI Training section of this website.
- Lack of adherence to IRB submission instructions; please review the How to Apply section of this website.
- Submitting an application between academic semesters.
- Your application requires full board review and approval; the full board typically meets every two to three weeks during Fall and Spring semesters and once per summer session during the Summer.
- An IRB reviewer may request modifications to no-more-than-minimal-risk studies.
- Updates to the application which are requested by the IRB restart the routing and approval chain timeline, effective as of the date of submission of the updated application.
|IRB Application Approval Chain|
|If you are submitting a:||Your approval chain is:|
|Regular Initial IRB Application||
|Thesis/Dissertation IRB Application||
|Classroom Activity IRB Application||
Upon the submission of the application the form must always route through this list and retrieve approval from each designated reviewer. As Sharla Miles is designated twice at differing points, she must also approve the form twice at those points in the timeline.
If any approver on this list finds that data within the submitted form must be updated prior to approval being granted, it would stop routing through the chain and would be returned to the PI. Reviewers have the option of sending the PI a note that reflects the requested changes. The PI will then need to resubmit the form once they have made those changes.