Committee Decision Making Processes (5)

5.1.    All decisions of AUTEC are by consensus. Where AUTEC cannot reach consensus, an application will be deferred for further discussion. Further information may be sought from the applicant.

5.2.     AUTEC may request the attendance of the applicant at a meeting where it would assist the decision-making process.

5.3.    AUTEC may delegate authority to approve as follows, subject to the endorsement of such approvals at the following meeting:

5.3.1.    The Chair or the Executive Secretary may exercise delegated authority to approve, or to approve subject to conditions, the following:

5.3.1.1.    minor amendments to previously approved applications where the amendments, in the view of the Chair or Executive Secretary, pose minimal risk;

5.3.1.2.    applications requesting only an extension of time for a previously approved project, where a time extension is necessary to complete the project, provided that the extension shall be for no more than one year;

5.3.1.3.    applications where amendments have been required as a condition of approval by AUTEC, or by the Chair and the Executive Secretary in accordance with section 5.3.2 below, and those amendments have been submitted for AUTEC’s consideration;

5.3.1.4.    amendments of previously approved projects involving only a change of supervisor;

5.3.2.    The Chair and the Executive Secretary together, forming a subcommittee of AUTEC, may exercise delegated authority to approve, or to approve subject to conditions, applications not previously considered by AUTEC, where:

5.3.2.1.    there are exceptional circumstances which mean that, in the opinion of the Chair and the Executive Secretary, it would be inequitable for the applicant to be required to apply to the next meeting of AUTEC; or

5.3.2.2.    the ethics approval for research being undertaken by AUT staff or students has been granted by a Health and Disability Ethics Committee in accordance with the Health Research Council's Guidance Notes on Research Ethics, or

5.3.2.3.    the application, in the opinion of the Chair and the Executive Secretary, poses no more than minimal ethical risk, and

5.3.2.3.1    all participants are able to give an informed consent, and are not vulnerable to the research or in a dependent situation e.g. people with learning difficulties, over-researched groups, people in care facilities, or patients highly dependent on medical care, and

5.3.2.3.2    there is no reasonable expectation of causing participants physical pain beyond mild discomfort, or such pain as is experienced by the participants on an every-day basis, or any emotional discomfort embarrassment, psychological or spiritual harm, and

5.3.2.3.3    there is no possibility of eliciting information about any participant’s involvement in illegal activities, or activities that represent a risk to themselves or others, and

5.3.2.3.4    there is no collection of human tissue, blood or other samples, or invasive or intrusive physical examination or testing, and

5.3.2.3.5    there is no administration of any drugs, medicines, supplements, placebo or non-food substances, and

5.3.2.3.6    there is no intervention of any form of exercise, or other physical regime that is different to the participants’ normal activities, and

5.3.2.3.7    there are no participants who are being asked to give information of a personal nature about their colleagues, employers, teachers, or coaches (or any other person who is in a power relationship with them), and the identity of participants or their organisation may be inferred, and

5.3.2.3.8    there is no situation which may put the researcher at risk of harm, and

5.3.2.3.9    there is no use of previously collected biological samples or identifiable personal information for which there was no explicit consent for the research outlined in the application, and

5.3.2.3.10    there are no matters of commercially sensitive information, and

5.3.2.3.11    there is no financial interest in the outcome of the research by any member(s) of the research team, and

5.3.2.3.12    there is no deception, partial disclosure or concealment, or any  covert observation in non-public places (including social media), and

5.3.2.3.13    there are no participants who are in a dependent or unequal relationship with any member(s) of the research team e.g. where the researcher is a lecturer/ teacher/ health care provider/ coach/ employer/ manager/ or relative etc. of any of the participants.

5.3.3.    Either the Chair or the Executive Secretary and an AUTEC Faculty Representative together, forming a subcommittee of AUTEC, may exercise delegated authority to approve, or to approve subject to conditions, applications not previously considered by AUTEC, where:

5.3.3.1    the application, in the opinion of either the Chair or the Executive Secretary and the AUTEC Faculty Representative, poses no more than minimal ethical risk, and

5.3.3.2    the application is only for the collection of anonymous (no identifying information is being collected), un-linked and non-sensitive survey/questionnaire data from adult participants.

5.4.    Advice and information may be sought from experts and professional advisors from time to time as AUTEC considers appropriate.

5.5.    Where AUTEC deems it necessary, applications may be sent to appropriate experts chosen by AUTEC for confidential comment and advice.

5.6.    Applicants will be advised formally of AUTEC’s decision once the Minutes are approved by the Chair and Executive Secretary. Where a supervisor is the applicant, the student concerned will also be advised.

For Information on Ethics Approval Procedures, refer to Appendix B.