See PDF
8/15/11
Dr. Francis Collins
National Institutes of Health
9000 Rockville Pike
Bethesda, Maryland 20892
Director, Daniel R. Levinson
Office of the Inspector General, HHS
330 Independence Ave, Room 5250
Washington DC
Dr. Collins, Mr. Levinson,
I am contacting you today regarding an incident of serious non-compliance
with the NIHGPS at Harvard Medical School, a substantial recipient of NIH
grants.
As you know, the National Institutes of Health Grants Policy Statement says:
“Charges to NIH grant awards for the conduct of live vertebrate animal
activities during periods of time that the terms and conditions of the grant
award are not upheld are not allowable. Specific situations under which charges
are not allowable are:
1. The conduct of animal activities in the absence of a valid Animal Welfare
Assurance on file with OLAW.
2. The conduct of animal activities in the absence of a valid IACUC approval
of the activity. Absence of IACUC approval includes failure to obtain IACUC
approval, expiration, or suspension of IACUC approval.
. . . In cases where charges have been made for unauthorized animal
activities, appropriate adjustments must be made to the grant to remove those
charges.”
In a USDA inspection report for Harvard Medical School dated 7/19/11
(attached), the facility is cited for a violation of section:
“2.31 Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) (c) IACUC
functions. With respect to activities involving animals, the IACUC, as an agent
of the research facility shall: (7) Review and approve, require modifications in
(to secure approval), or withhold approval of proposed significant changes
regarding the care and use of animals in ongoing activities:
“At the end of June 2011, it was discovered during the research facility’s
post-approval monitoring program (PAM) that there has been more than one
instance when procedures were performed on study animals that were not described
in the IACUC approved proposal for animal use.”
It is clear that the staff of Harvard Medical School were in violation not
only of the Animal Welfare Act for performing unapproved and therefore illegal
surgical procedures on animals, but that this has happened repeatedly at the
Harvard Medical School.
Therefore, since multiple unapproved surgical procedures have been performed
by Harvard Medical School staff, this facility (Harvard Medical School) was/is
in violation of the above quoted section of the NIHGPS as listed above, and the
NIHGPS also states that:
“In cases where charges have been made for unauthorized animal activities,
appropriate adjustments must be made to the grant to remove those charges.”
Therefore, I must insist that the National Institutes of Health, in
conjunction with the Office of the Inspector General, immediately launch an
investigation of all primate projects that involve surgical procedures at the
New England Primate Research Center to discern an overall quantity of unapproved
surgical procedures, and that following this determination, a refunding of
relevant grant amounts be required of Harvard Medical School.
I am sure that the National Institutes of Health and the Office of the
Inspector General are both very concerned with insuring that grantees follow all
parts of the NIHGPS and that insuring that serious offenders be required to
return illegally used NIH funding.
I hereby request a copy of all documents regarding this investigation under
the federal Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. sec. 552. at the completion of
this process.
Sincerely,
Michael A. Budkie, A.H.T.,
Executive Director, SAEN
Rats, mice, birds, amphibians and other animals have been excluded from
coverage by the Animal Welfare Act. Therefore research facility reports
do not include these animals. As a result of this situation, a blank
report, or one with few animals listed, does not mean that a facility
has not performed experiments on non-reportable animals. A blank form
does mean that the facility in question has not used covered animals
(primates, dogs, cats, rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, pigs, sheep,
goats, etc.). Rats and mice alone are believed to comprise over 90% of
the animals used in experimentation. Therefore the majority of animals
used at research facilities are not even counted.
We welcome your comments and questions