Award for Excellence in Human Research Protection
Judges Credentialing/Selection Criteria
Definitions & notes
- Credentialing criteria refer to the qualifications and experiences of individuals to be judges. The Judges Credentialing Committee (JCC) assesses applications based on these criteria.
- Selection criteria refer to guidelines for forming panels of judges (from among credentialed judges) to evaluate Award applications.
- Separate panels are established to evaluate applications for each category of Award. Multiple panels may be established for the same category of Award if the volume of applications warrants.
- All judges who evaluate applications for an Award must complete a Declaration of Interest Form (DIF) pertaining to each application that they judge.
- In each Award category, judges assess the applicant’s contributions to human research protection, select applicants who have demonstrated excellence, and select the year’s best contribution, if any, to human research protection to receive the Annual Award.
Documented evidence that the applicant:
- Is actively engaged in the research enterprise in a role relevant to the protection of human subjects of research, e.g., working to assure and/or improve human research protection, and/or the integrity or quality of biomedical and/or behavioral (including psychological) research involving human subjects
- Has at least 5 continuous years experience, or at least 10 years total experience, in the research enterprise in a role relevant to the protection of human subjects
- Possesses thorough knowledge of current federal requirements for protecting human subjects and assuring the integrity of research, including HIPAA, has undergone applicable training regarding these subjects, and, preferably, has experience with Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) or equivalent committees and/or with other human subject protection functions
- Has sufficient specific qualifications and experiences necessary to evaluate applications for one or more of the categories of Award, e.g., for innovation award judging panel, made or contributed to innovation in human research protection
- Does not have, or has had in the past 5 years, any event that might weaken the applicant’s suitability to be a judge
- Once credentialed, professional performance as a judge (e.g., prompt and appropriate completion of evaluation of Award applications) permits recredentialing.
Each panel should consist of 5 credentialed judges, selected to represent relevant diversity with respect to the research enterprise, including, for example:
- Type of organization (e.g., sponsor, research institution, government/regulatory agency, consumer advocacy organization)
- Role (e.g., investigator, IRB member, ethicist, HRP professional)
- Professional background
- Region of the country.
To become judge