AAALAC International: Accreditation Overview
Transcription
AAALAC International: Accreditation Overview
AAALAC International: Accreditation Overview John F Bradfield, DVM, PhD, DACLAM Senior Director, AAALAC International Agenda History/ demographics Standards of accreditation Accreditation process History of AAALAC Animal Care Panel – 1950 1959 – ACP committee on ethical considerations in the care of laboratory animals Renamed the Professional Standards Committee 1960 - Animal Facilities Certification Board (establish standards of care) 1963 – renamed Animal Facilities Accreditation Board (AFAB - define condition to promote sound animal research) Accreditation by the Board – voluntary (Pilot tested - Indiana U Medical College, UCLA, UCSF, USC) An advisory Council (NAC) was appointed to assist the Board (ACP, ADA, AHA, AMA, AAMC, AAVMC, PMA) 1964 - Initiated the formation of a non-profit organization to administer the accreditation program History of AAALAC Incorporated in 1965 (American) NAC become the AAALAC BOT AFAB became the Council on Accreditation 1996 – Name change (International) AAALAC International • Board of Trustees • • • Council on Accreditation - 57 • • scientists, veterinarians (19 countries/ 22 states) Ad Hoc Consultants/Specialists - 368 • • 68 Member Organizations scientific, professional societies scientists, veterinarians, program specialists (27 countries/ 42 states) Executive Office Staff • • • Frederick, Maryland Pamplona, Spain Bangkok, Thailand 928 Institutions - 39 Countries 79% 8% 11% 1% Proportion of Accredited Units by Industry Sector Standards of Accreditation Standards of Accreditation Reference Resources General Biosafety Education Euthanasia Health Monitoring OHSP Research related Species specific Performance Standards Engineering standards dictate how a goal is achieved Performance standards allow for a variety of methods to reach a goal Precise, detailed, definition of the goal Criteria to determine that the goal is met (what to measure) How to evaluate that the goal is met (process or how to measure) Myth Program Components AAALAC accredits facilities Institutional Administration Animal Environment Fact OHSP AAALAC accredits IACUC Programs (all facets of the animal care use at the institution) and Veterinary Care • Organizational structure • Authority Physical Plant • • • • • • Responsibility Management Practices/ procedures Outcomes Safeguards Facilities Site Visit Process 3 Phases 1) Before the visit 2) The site visit 3) After the site visit The Program Description The program description may be the single most valuable portion of the site visit! Accurate Detailed Complete The Program Description 1) Introduction Mission Organizational Structure 2) Description All chapters of the Guide 3) Appendices Forms, Rosters, HVAC data, Protocols, etc The Program Description Submission deadlines April 1st (May – August site visits) August 1st (September – December visits) December 1st (January- April visits) Site Visit Planning - Logistics AAALAC Assign the Council member Set the date with the institution Select Co-visitors Institution All information is confidential Same team rarely returns to the same site Institution Make sure key personnel will be there – IO, IACUC members & chair, AV, occ health and safety, maintenance staff, etc. Site Visit Coordination Hotel reservations Travel logistics (local transportation?) Coordinate an efficient site visit schedule: entrance-briefing, PD review, facility tours, meet IACUC, document review, executive session, exitbriefing Gracious collegial, support is always appreciated What do ‘They’ Know? Have read the current Program Description Have reviewed the history of the institution Accreditation history Correspondence Annual Reports Have reviewed evaluations from previous site visits Phase 2 – The site visit Purpose of the Site Visit Gain a thorough understanding of your program of animal care and use Evaluate your program for conformity with AAALAC’s three Primary Standards as well as national regulations and Reference Resources Serve as Council’s eyes and ears Gather information Entrance Briefing Introductions Meet with institutional leaders (institutional support?) Explanation of: the accreditation process the proposed daily activities Program Review Review/clarify aspects Program Description Interact with administrative personnel (IO, OHSP, maintenance staff, security, operations management, etc) Request additional supporting information (e.g. SOP’s) Request protocols and other documents for later review during the site visit Meeting with the IACUC/OB Set aside some time to meet with the Committee Luncheon works well Describe accreditation process Discuss issues and talk with lay representatives Problem cases … Committee solutions Important for site visitors to develop a sense of Committee engagement Meet the Husbandry Staff Can set aside a prescribed time … Can have hallway meetings … Staff should be ‘familiar’ with the accreditation process Discuss their areas of activity Do be around and working Meeting the Research Staff PI laboratory visits Facility tours Facility Tours Facility walk-through (holding rooms, procedure areas, support space, sx, nx, etc) Health of animals Condition of facilities (sanitation, function) Emergency contacts and after hours vet support Contract and satellite facilities PI laboratory visits Review of Documentation USDA Inspection Reports, PHS Assurance in the U.S. Compliance Records Selected IACUC/OB Protocols (files) IACUC/OB meeting minutes Standing Operating Procedures (SOPs) Disaster Plan, Enrichment Program, etc. Executive Session Site Visitors’ time to prepare for Exit Briefing Discuss issues and prepare notes Commendations for unit Issues Mandatory items Suggestions for improvement (SFI’s) Preliminary recommendations to Council Exit Briefing Conducted by Council member Summary of program strengths and weaknesses Independent opinions of site visitors Exit Briefing Preliminary findings and impressions Opportunity to correct misinterpretations or errors Discuss issues that are not clear Discuss the post site visit communication (PSVC) Within 10 days when appropriate Verbal, not written (so take careful notes) Mandatory finding Serious deviation from the recommendations of the Guide, Ag Guide or ETS 123 (depending on the specifics of the institution) that must be corrected to achieve or continue accreditation. Suggestion for improvement A suggestion the Council believes will improve the program Although a recommendation, there is no obligation for institutions to make program changes based on suggestions for improvement Phase 3 – After the site visit Post Site Visit Activities Post site visit – Unit: Prepares post site visit communication (if applicable) Work out correcting deficiencies Wait for Council decision Post site visit – AAALAC: Prepares program evaluation Program evaluation goes out to reviewers Questions and comments are addressed Council meets and status decision is made Unit is notified by letter Post Site Visit Responses Unless you agree with findings, DO NOT make changes or spend money on fixes until final letter arrives - findings may change Final letter will include: Commendations Acknowledgement of any items already addressed through PSVC Any mandatory items and/or suggestions for improvement Potential Outcomes If already accredited: Continued Full Accreditation (CFA) CFA w/ condition Deferred Accreditation Probation Revoke Accreditation If a new application: Award Full Accreditation (AFA) AFA w/ condition Provisional Withhold Accreditation site visit - Summary Accurate, complete PD Well organized site visit schedule Don’t shut down Prepare staff – let them know that site visitors ask questions and take a lot of notes Self identify deficiencies, maintain readiness and avoid “management-by-AAALAC” Trends Findings – 2011 Guide Program Components - Findings Animal Environment 14% 10% OHS 10% 26% 18% 22% IACUC Veterinary Care Physical Plant Institutional Administration Animal Environment - Findings Behavioral/ Social Management Husbandry Sanitation Microenvironment Mandatory SFI Macroenvironment 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Occupational Health & Safety Findings Personnel protection Job risk/ safety assessment Personnel risk assessment Hazard usage Mandatory SFI Medical sevice 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% IACUC-Related Findings Protocol Review Considerations Policies Protocol review process Program Review/ Facilities Inspections Oversight/ PAM Mandatory SFI Committee Composition/ Participation 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Vet Care Findings Veterinary Medical Care Euthanasia Pain & distress Surgery & post op Preventive medicine/biosecurity Mandatory Transportation SFI Procurement 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Institutional Administration - Findings Documentation/Records Training Program Description Disaster plan Authority/Responsibility Annual Report Mandatory Organizational Structure SFI Commitment 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% Physical Plant Findings HVAC Construction/maintenance Satellites Special facilities Power Mandatory Design/ layout SFI Security 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% The Value of Accreditation? 12.4% Findings corrected by PSVC 87.6% Findings retained in the letter Thank You! AAALAC International 5283 Corporate Dr., Suite 203 Frederick, MD 21702 USA 301.696.9626 (ph) 301.926.9627 (fax) www.aaalac.org [email protected]