Which statement about the relationship between an institution and its IRB(s) is true?

In the context of the relationship between an institution and its Institutional Review Board (IRB), the statement regarding officials being able to override IRB approvals is indeed true. This recognizes that while the IRB is responsible for the ethical review of research proposals, institutional officials ultimately hold the authority to decide whether research can proceed. This creates a balance between ethical oversight and institutional governance, ensuring that the institution can enforce its own standards, values, or policies that may extend beyond the scope of ethical considerations addressed by the IRB.

While the IRB's role is to protect the welfare of research participants and ensure compliance with ethical guidelines, the final decision to allow a study to proceed can rest with institutional leadership. This authority doesn't diminish the importance or role of the IRB; instead, it highlights the institutional commitment to responsibility and compliance with all laws and ethical standards.

The other options present misunderstandings of the IRB's functions or the institutional relationship with it. The IRB does not have a direct reporting obligation to federal agencies but rather operates under the regulations set forth by them. The idea that IRB approvals cannot be changed is inaccurate because an IRB can rescind or suspend its approval based on new concerns that arise. Similarly, institutional officials certainly have the capacity