Checklist Monitoring Animal Experiments
Purpose of monitoring
The purpose is to assess whether: 1) animal experiments are conducted in compliance with the Dutch Experiments on Animals
Act (Wet op de dierproeven, Wod), and 2) internal procedures - which are designed to ensure that working processes are in
compliance with legal requirements – are followed properly.
Method of monitoring
By addressing the following questions staff members of a research department will check every 3 months whether the
organization and administration regarding the conduct of an animal experiment are transparent, complete and compliant with the
Experiments on Animals Act.
Date:
Monitoring conducted by:
Building/Room number:
Subject
N/A
Yes
No
Remarks
GENERAL
1.
DEC number:
2.
Expiry date DEC approval:
3.
Is the working protocol (WP) present?
4.
WP number:
5.
End date WP:
6.
Name of responsible researcher mentioned in the WP (art9):
7.
Is the procedures list(handelingenlijst, HL) present?
8.
Is the corresponding welfare logbook (welzijnsdagboek, WZDB) present?
9.
Is the room logbook/logbook for daily care present?
WELFARE
10. Has the WZDB been signed off by a competent person (art9/12) listed in the WP?
11.
Have welfare observations been signed off in the WZDB with a maximum interval of 7
days?
12. Does the frequency of welfare observations match the frequency mentioned in the WP?
13. Are the notes in the WZDB clear, self-evident and legible?
Has the daily check on animals and the animal room been signed off by a competent
person (art9/art12) in the room logbook?
Has this working protocol been assessed every 3 months, using the Checklist Monitoring
15.
Animal Experiments?
14.
16. Are any cages marked with an attention label?
17. If so, does the WZDB contain corresponding explanatory notes?
18.
And has email correspondence between animal caretaker and researcher
concerning this issue(s) been added to the study file?
HOUSING
19. Does the present housing match the description in the WP?
Checklist monitoring
pagina 1
versie16 december 2013
Subject
N/A
Yes
No
Remarks
20. Are the experimental animals identifiable (cage labels, numbers, names)?
21. Are the experimental animals provided with sufficient food and water?
22.
Does the environmental enrichment in situ correspond with the environmental
enrichment described in the WP?
23. Are any animals housed individually?
24.
If so, can the reason for individual housing be traced in the WP, the WZDB
and/or the form ‘Welzijnsdagboek solitaire huisvesting’?
CONDUCT OF ANIMAL EXPERIMENT
25.
Have conducted procedures been dated and signed off in the HL by a certified
person (art9/12) mentioned in the WP?
26. Do the procedures which are signed off in the HL correspond with the WP (table 6b)?
27. Is it possible to determine the stage of the experiment for each animal in study?
OTHER
If mice/rats are used: are animals older than 1 year?*
28. * Due to an enhanced risk of discomfort, this is a point of concern to the inspectors of the
Dutch Food and Product Safety Authority (NVWA).
If so, is an explanation for the necessity of the use of animals older than 1 year
29.
available in the study file?
REMARKS AND GENERAL IMPRESSION
Question no.
Checklist monitoring
Remarks
pagina 2
versie16 december 2013