The 2018 Animal Research Survey Report by the Council on Governmental Relations (COGR) assesses the administrative requirements imposed by research institutions on animal research, with a focus on efforts to reduce unnecessary institutional burden. COGR, representing 188 major research institutions, surveyed its members to evaluate adoption of practices aimed at streamlining oversight by Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUCs), as recommended by national reports and regulatory bodies. The survey, completed by nearly half of COGR’s membership, revealed significant variability in institutional policies, with some institutions embracing federal flexibilities to minimize burden—such as using designated member review, adopting the Veterinary Verification and Consultation (VVC) process, expanding administrative approval authority, and standardizing aspects of protocol submission and training. The majority have implemented measures to streamline activities unrelated to animal welfare, clarify documentation, and facilitate protocol updates, while also enabling flexibility in areas like post-operative observation times and inclusion of multiple species or funding sources in protocols.
However, the report also identifies substantial reticence to depart from strict or uniform standards, particularly in areas with perceived ambiguity or potential compliance risk. Many institutions maintain annual protocol renewals, detailed pain and distress classifications, literature searches, and exact animal number requirements, often extending regulatory or agency-mandated practices to all species and protocols for the sake of uniformity, perceived animal welfare, or to avoid confusion and non-compliance. Barriers to implementing reduced administrative burden include uncertainty about regulatory expectations, concerns regarding animal welfare, institutional culture, inflexible IT systems, and isolated negative experiences with compliance that prompt more restrictive policies. The report concludes that clear guidance and harmonized regulations from federal agencies, explicit distinctions between requirements and best practices, and robust internal dialogue involving all stakeholders are essential to facilitating further reduction of administrative overhead, thus supporting faculty and institutional efficiency without compromising animal welfare.
