CHIPER Reconsiderations and Appeals

The Tri-council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans (TCPS 2) provides for the reconsideration and appeal of a decision taken by a research ethics board.  Accordingly, this guidance sets out the procedures for the reconsideration and appeal of CHIPER decisions.

Reconsideration of CHIPER Decisions

In the event that a research project is not approved by a CHIPER board, the researcher may request that the CHIPER board reconsider its decision.  Requests for reconsideration must be submitted in writing within thirty (30) days after the board’s decision is communicated to the researcher. The researcher’s request for reconsideration must be submitted by email to the applicable CHIPER Chair at CHIPER@researchmb.ca, and must include the reasons for the request for reconsideration (i.e., procedural or substantive grounds).

All efforts will be made by the CHIPER board (through its Chair or designate) to achieve a mutually agreed upon protocol with the researcher, that is both scientifically and ethically acceptable.

If the CHIPER Chair and researcher are unable to reach agreement, the CHIPER Chair will reconvene the CHIPER board to review the project at its next full board meeting. The researcher will be given five (5) business days’ notice of the CHIPER board meeting, and the researcher will have an opportunity to provide additional information to, and answer questions from, the CHIPER board.

If agreement is not reached and the project is still deemed to be unsatisfactory, the CHIPER board (through its Chair or designate) shall uphold its decision to disapprove the application, and communicate this in writing to the researcher. Such communication shall be sent within ten (10) business days of the board’s reconsideration meeting.

Appeal of CHIPER Decisions

Researchers must have exhausted the reconsideration process before submitting an appeal. The appeal process is not intended simply to provide the means for a “second opinion.” Rather, the request for an appeal must indicate the reasons for the appeal.  The onus is on the researcher to indicate the alleged breaches in the CHIPER board’s review process (procedural grounds), including any breaches of the procedures supported by the Tri-council Policy Statement: Research Involving Human Subjects (TCPS2).  If the reason for the appeal is based on the substance of the project about which the researcher and  CHIPER did not agree, this must be fully documented.

The Provincial RITHIM Committee (PRC) has established the Standing Committee on Appeals to address requests for appeals.  Please see the PRC Policy on Appeals of CHIPER Decisions for additional details.  Appeal requests can be addressed to the RITHIM Director at RITHIM@researchmb.ca.