ETHICS REVIEW COMMITTEE
RESEARCH ETHICS COMMITTEE
Promoting ethical, responsible, and globally aligned research practices at Notre Dame of Dadiangas University.
Protecting Human Participants
National Ethical Standards
Transparent ERC Decisions
Mission
To ensure that all research participants are protected through an intensive and efficient review process in accordance with the National Ethical Guidelines (2022).
Vision
The NDDU-ERC envisions that all research involving human participants is conducted upholding the Marist core values and the highest ethical standards.
History
The conceptualization of the Notre Dame of Dadiangas University Ethics Review Committee (NDDU-ERC) dates back to September 3, 2012, when Dr. Edgardo D. Claudio (Vice President for Administration), Dr. Ma. Monina M. Duqueza (Executive Assistant for Academics), Dr. Norma F. Segocio (Vice President for Academics), Dr. Ma. Victoria L. Sunglao (Graduate School Dean), and Dr. Mary Mae M. Cheung (Research Director) recognized the need for an independent, competent, and timely review body to safeguard the dignity, rights, safety, and well-being of actual or potential research participants. They envisioned a committee that would be distinct from the technical review committee, and multidisciplinary, as well as multi-sectoral in composition.
Overview
The establishment of the Ethics Review Committee (ERC) at Notre Dame of Dadiangas University (NDDU) is deeply anchored in the institution's mission, vision, and core values. As a Catholic educational institution, NDDU's commitment to integrate faith and life resonates with the ERC's role in upholding ethical standards in research that respect human dignity and promote the common good. In fulfilling its mission as an institution of quality education, the University ensures that the Research reviewed embodies academic excellence, integrity, and social responsibility principles essential to the formation of competent and ethical professionals. Guided by the Marist core values of simplicity, family spirit, and preference for the least favored, the ERC promotes fairness, compassion, and inclusivity in its review processes. Furthermore, the values of love of work and integrity of creation inspire the committee to perform its duties with diligence, and to advocate for responsible and sustainable conduct of research. The ERC serves as a tangible expression of NDDU's vision to form Christian leaders and community-oriented citizens who can contribute to building a just, peaceful, and progressive nation through ethically sound scholarly work.
Through an Administrative Issuance, dated October 1, 2025, Notre Dame of Dadiangas University (NDDU) initiated the operation of its Ethics Review Committee (ERC) to institutionalize the culture of ethical research within the University. This issuance mandates that all research activities conducted by faculty members, students, and external collaborators involving human participants must undergo ethical review and approval by the ERC before implementation, and no research of such nature shall commence without the issuance of an official Ethics Clearance. The ERC operates as an autonomous unit with full independence in its decision-making process to ensure impartiality, integrity, and adherence to national and international ethical standards.
ERC Organizational Structure
The committee comprises highly specialized professionals across multiple academic disciplines and external sectors to maintain objectivity, independence, and comprehensive domain coverage.
Dr. Jessica S. Guevarra
Designation: Chair
Responsibility: Oversight of ethics processes, protocol final sign-offs, and committee alignment.
Aileen Mae B. Coronado, MIT, MBA
Designation: Vice Chair
Responsibility: Presides over review sessions in the Chair's absence; technical protocol advisor.
Juvy Grace B. Alvarado, RMT, MSMT
Designation: Member Secretary
Responsibility: Document archiving, screening submissions, agenda preparation, and minutes recording.
Full Committee Roster Directory
18 Board Members Registered| Name | Designation |
|---|---|
| Dr. Jessica S. Guevarra | Chair |
| Aileen Mae B. Coronado, MIT, MBA | Vice Chair |
| Juvy Grace B. Alvarado, RMT, MSMT | Member Secretary |
| John Alfrey D. Pueblo, RMT, MSMT | Regular Scientist Member |
| Dr. Leonora L. Mingo | Regular Scientist Member |
| Kristel L. del Castillo, MA | Regular Scientist Member |
| Dr. Jimmy R. Guerrero | Regular Scientist Member |
| Crismae S. Pilar, RL, MLIS | Alternate Scientist Member |
| Hanie May D. Sabado, CPA, MBA | Alternate Scientist Member |
| Jason T. Junsay, MA | Alternate Scientist Member |
| Jean T. Boclaras, MS-Mktg. | Alternate Scientist Member |
| Engr. John Charles L. Buccat | Regular Non-Scientist Member |
| Angelyn O. Haban | Regular Non-Scientist Member |
| Rosalynn A. Alapag | Alternate Non-Scientist Member |
| Marie Jovy B. Navaja | Alternate Non-Scientist Member |
| Junrey B. Villa | Regular Non-affiliated Scientist Member |
| Daphne Shayne A. Celstial | Alternate Non-Affiliated Scientist Member |
| Negilda G. Crismundo | Alternate Non-affiliated and Non-scientist Member |
Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)
The NDDU-ERC conducts its review processes strictly following its manual of Standard Operating Procedures to ensure maximum consistency, quality, and PHREB compliance.
Selection and Appointment of ERC Members
Defines the guidelines and procedures for recruiting, appointing, and renewing ERC committee members.
Designation of ERC Officers
Operational mandates regarding roles of the Chair, Vice Chair, and Secretariat.
Appointment of Independent Consultants
Rules for seeking external expertise in specialized medical or cultural domains.
Expedited Review
SOP criteria and execution rules for studies with minimal participant risk parameters.
Full Review
Procedures for high-risk protocol evaluation involving monthly full board sessions.
Management of Initial Submissions
Detailed process for initial logging, format check, and dossier distribution.
Exemption from Review
Evaluating non-human participant or low-risk educational survey exemptions.
Management of Resubmissions
Tracking the corrections step when investigators resubmit revised protocols.
Review of Progress Report
Evaluating standard periodic reports from ongoing approved studies.
Review of Amendments
Validating updates, cohort revisions, or design changes in approved protocols.
Management of Protocol Deviation and Violations Report
Managing violations of the protocol structure during the course of fieldwork.
Review of RNE Reports
Review of Research Non-Compliance and Adverse Event metrics inside protocols.
Management of an Application for Continuing Review
Re-certifying clearances that have exceeded their standard 1-year approval lifecycle.
Review of the Final Report
Standard checklist for closing files after the research phase ends cleanly.
Review of Early Termination Reports
Review processes when investigators stop studies due to safety or administrative limits.
Management of Appeals
Protocol procedures for addressing investigator feedback when study approval is denied.
Conduct of Site Visits
Standard checklist for committee physical inspections of clinical/survey environments.
Preparing for a Meeting
Arranging board venue, technical screens, and confirming attendance quorums.
Preparing the Meeting Agenda
Creating systematic agendas to allocate review time properly to submitted files.
Conduct Meetings
Parliamentary guidelines, conflict of interest declarations, and voting processes.
Preparation of the Minutes of Meetings
Standards for recording board arguments, votes, and directives accurately.
Communicating ERC Decisions
Procedures for official notification delivery of approvals or requested amendments.
Management of Incoming/Outgoing Communications
Logbook rules for indexing public inquiries and institutional notices.
Management of Active Files (Administrative and Study Files)
File classification systems to secure ongoing protocol folders physically and digitally.
Archiving
Safe storage parameters for completed study records, keeping them for 3-5 years.
Management of Access to Confidential Files
Security clearance parameters restricting unauthorized reading of trial files.
Management of Queries/Complaints
Operational directives for addressing concerns from survey subjects or investigators.
Writing and Revising SOPs
Directives outlining regular evaluation and update methods for the SOP manual.
Downloadable Application Forms
Please download, fill out, and compile these official templates before submitting your research application packet to the NDDU-ERC Secretariat office.
ERC_F012 – Ethics Review Application Form
Standardized initial application dossier form for researchers requesting protocol review.
ERC_F010 – Protocol Assessment Checklist
Checklist to guide researchers in formatting and aligning submission components.
ERC_F044 – ICF Template
Official Informed Consent Form template designed for adult study participants.
ERC_F046 – Assent Form Template
Standardized ethical template designed for minors and legally vulnerable participants.
AI Disclosure Form
Mandatory form for reporting artificial intelligence tool usage in research designs.
ERC_F005-B – Conflict of Interest Agreement
Required disclosure contract for all researchers declaring actual or potential conflicts.
ERC_F045 – Ethics Memorandum of Agreement
MoA template formalizing the ethical commitments between investigators and NDDU-ERC.
ERC_F048 – MoA on Research Ethics and Authorship
Comprehensive agreement template settling authorship and ethical work distributions.
ERC_F049 – Ethics Compliance Form
Mandatory clearance checklist verified and signed by PIs before starting fields.
ERC_F015 – Ethics Review Resubmission Form
Protocol corrections tracker used when returning amended files for board review.
ERC_F017 – Progress Report Form
Required standard progress sheet submitted for ongoing, long-term approved trials.
ERC_F018 – Continuing Review Form
Review form tracking investigator operations ahead of ethics certification expiration.
ERC_F019 – Amendment Request Form
Form used to document any structural modifications to approved scientific designs.
ERC_F020 – Protocol Deviation/Violation Form
Mandatory form for reportings errors or procedural slips encountered during fields.
ERC_F021 – Negative Event Report Form
Evaluates adverse incidents, medical events, or participants grievances.
ERC_F022 – Continuing Review Application
Official submission sheet requesting extension of an active ethics clearance.
ERC_F023 – Final Report Form
Standard reporting sheet for archiving and closing finalized research records safely.
ERC_F025 – Early Termination Report Form
Filing document for stopping research prematurely due to logistical or safety developments.
ERC_F028 – Site Visit Report Form
Standard template monitoring actual participant interview sites or clinic suites.
ERC_F037 – Request for Confidential File Access
Formal application to review securely stored patient data or archival board files.
ERC_F040 – Query/Complaint Form
Filing sheet used by research participants or administrators reporting discrepancies.
Protocol Review Lifecycle
Review flows systematically from technical clearance to post-approval tracking. Check step details by exploring the lifecycle map below:
Submission & Screening
The investigator submits a complete protocol packet to the Secretariat. Submissions are screened within 5 working days for completeness and formatted according to Form 1.1 checklist criteria.
Classification
The ERC Chair classifies the level of risk to research subjects:
Review & Decision
The designated reviewer(s) or full board evaluate scientific validity and participant safety metrics. Decisions are released as either: Approved, Minor Revisions, Major Revisions, or Disapproved.
Post-Approval Monitoring
Approved research is monitored annually. Researchers must submit progress reports (SOP 8) or immediate reports of deviations/unanticipated events (SOP 10).
Approved Protocols
| Protocol ID | Title | Principal Investigator | Review Category | Approval Date | Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NDDU-ERC-2026-004 | Social Support Networks and Coping Mechanisms Among Senior Citizens in General Santos City | Prof. Evelyn T. Alcantara | Expedited | Jan 12, 2026 | |
| NDDU-ERC-2025-102 | Psychological Capital, Job Burnout, and Intention to Leave Among Private School Teachers | Dr. Rodrigo M. Villafuerte | Exempt | Nov 04, 2025 | |
| NDDU-ERC-2025-089 | Evaluating Clinical Efficacy of Indigenous Plant Extract Formulation for Dermal Healing | Janice K. Dela Cruz, RN | Full Board | Sep 19, 2025 | |
| NDDU-ERC-2025-074 | AI-Assisted Educational Frameworks: Ethical Safeguards in Higher Education Pedagogical Structures | Mark Chester P. Ignacio | Exempt | Jul 31, 2025 |
National & International References
Every study conducted at Notre Dame of Dadiangas University must adhere with global and regional regulatory standards, including the core guidelines referenced below:
| No. | Document Title | Action |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Belmont Report (Summary) | |
| 2 | Belmont Report (Volume 1) | |
| 3 | Belmont Report (Volume 2) | |
| 4 | Declaration of Helsinki 2024 | |
| 5 | International Ethical Guidelines for Health-Related Research Involving Humans | |
| 6 | National Ethical Guidelines for Research Involving Human Participants 2022 | |
| 7 | Data Privacy Act (RA 10173) |
Queries / Feedback
Do you have a general question, clarification regarding guidelines, or a concern about a current active study protocol? Send our office a prompt notification.
Frequently Asked Questions
Quickly find solutions to standard research administration roadblocks:
Review Charges & Support Information
The committee structure utilizes systematic and balanced resources to execute impartial and thorough protocol evaluations.
Review Charge Structure
Note on Financial Integrity
Under no circumstances do reviewers directly receive payments or incentives from investigators. The Notre Dame of Dadiangas University ERC operates with independent institutional funding to ensure reviews remain impartial, ethical, and completely isolated from financial or political influence.
For inquiries regarding external study review applications, please contact: erc-finance@nddu.edu.ph
The Rights of Research Participants
The NDDU-ERC prioritizes participant safety and autonomy above all else. Under standard international covenants, every participant has the following inviolable rights:
Right to Informed Consent
Participants must be clearly informed of the study's scope, risks, potential benefits, and investigator details using plain, understandable language before agreeing to join.
Right to Voluntary Withdrawal
Participants can leave a study at any phase, for any reason, without facing penalties, discrimination, or loss of any pre-existing benefits.
Right to Confidentiality
Data must be anonymized or aggregated. Personal identifiers must not be exposed to unauthorized parties, adhering strictly to the Data Privacy Act of 2012.
Right to Protection from Harm
Researchers must plan measures to minimize physical, psychological, social, and economic risks, and provide support mechanisms if any harm occurs.
PROTOCOL DETAILS
Note: This protocol is currently actively registered in our internal records. The clearance authorizes the investigator to proceed with human subject data collection as specified in the validated research design.