Home
Team

The yard crew: three consultants, two boards, one file.

Independent consultants, master’s-level and doctoral clinicians and researchers, who have prepared Chamberlain IRB files since 2012. Not Chamberlain staff, not the boards, not the research: the crew that carries the paperwork from the first reading to both approvals in writing.

In short

Every Chamberlain project in the practice is read by all three consultants before either board opens it. Rebecca Lindqvist, DNP, APRN, settles the determination and the plan and carries the Chamberlain track to the written determination. Abigail Ferraro, MSN, RN, owns the documents both boards read line by line: consent, instruments, the data-security plan. Noelle Brandt, PhD, finds the site’s board of record, drafts the letters, and writes every reply to either board. You deal with one desk; the file crosses all three.

IRB application files prepared2,600+
preparing Chamberlain files since2012
average rating from the professionals we’ve served4.9 / 5
files readevery week

The three desks

Each consultant owns one part of the route and reads the whole of it. A file does not leave the practice for either board until all three have signed it off.

Rebecca Lindqvist, DNP, APRN

Lead consultant · the determination, the plan, the Chamberlain track

Rebecca opens every file. She reads the project against both tracks and settles the determination each board will make, quality improvement or research, before a page is drafted; the plan that follows names which boards you answer to, which to open first, and what each wants in its file. She has carried Chamberlain DNP project files through the school’s review since the practice began serving Chamberlain candidates, and reads every application the way a review coordinator will, answering the board’s questions before they are asked.

A doctorally prepared advanced practice nurse with a practice-based quality-improvement background, Rebecca is the desk you deal with: she runs the free application review, writes the read you receive, and signs the file off before it goes to either board.

The QI-or-research reading on each board, and the plan built from it
The Chamberlain application in its current format, through to the written determination
The free application review and the written read

Abigail Ferraro, MSN, RN

Consent, instruments, data-security · the documents both boards read line by line

Abigail owns the file itself. Consent and information sheets carrying every required element, in plain language, identical in both files; instruments aligned to the measures named in the application, so a board never finds a survey asking something the aims never promised; recruitment materials as they will actually be used; and a data-security plan that says the same thing on both boards, because identifiable patient data is the line most site boards will not read past.

A master’s-prepared nurse with a clinical-informatics background, Abigail builds the file from Rebecca’s plan and version-matches every document across the Chamberlain packet and the site’s. When a revision request comes back about a form, it comes to her, and the revised page goes back into both files.

Consent and information sheets, required elements complete, one version in both files
Instruments and recruitment materials aligned to the measures and the plan
The data-security plan, written to the stricter of the two boards’ reads

Noelle Brandt, PhD

Site boards, letters, board correspondence · the site track and every reply

Noelle owns the track you don’t control. She finds the site’s board of record, an IRB or a nursing-research council, by asking the research office the right question in writing; gets its submission calendar in writing; and drafts the site permission and facility support letters for your liaison’s signature, with data-use terms that match what you will actually touch. The site’s packet, in the site’s vocabulary, is hers.

A doctorally prepared research methodologist with a regulatory background, Noelle also writes every reply to either board: revision responses quoted and answered point by point, amendments, continuing review. From the first filing to both approvals in writing, board correspondence goes out through her desk, and you are copied on all of it.

The site’s board of record, its calendar in writing, its packet in its vocabulary
Site permission, facility support and data-use letters, drafted for signature
Every reply to either board: revision responses, amendments, continuing review

How a file crosses the three desks

One desk faces you; three read the file. The order is always the same, and nothing is filed until all three have read the whole of it against both boards.

Rebecca opens the file

The free application review and the written read. Then, on engagement, the determination on each board and the plan: boards, order, calendar, document list. Nothing is drafted before this is settled.

Abigail builds both files

Every document, built once and version-matched across the Chamberlain packet and the site’s packet, to the plan and to the stricter board’s read. You review and sign what only you can sign.

Noelle opens the site’s track and carries the correspondence

The board of record found, the calendar in writing, the letters drafted for signature. The site’s packet goes in first; the Chamberlain filing follows while the council works. Every reply to either board, until both approvals are in writing.

All three read before anything is filed

Each file is read against the other board’s file and against the board that will open it. A consent sheet that says research inside a file arguing quality improvement does not leave the practice.

The practice behind this site consults across enrollment, program choice, coursework and practicum, and has prepared IRB files almost since Chamberlain offered the DNP; the yard crew is the part of it that carries the IRB process. Read how it works for the whole route, or what it costs for how far down the line each package carries the file.

What the crew is, and is not

Plainly, because the boards read plainly.

We are

Independent consultants who handle the entire IRB process on both boards, end to end: the determination and the plan, every document, the submissions, every reply.
Master’s-level and doctoral clinicians and researchers who read files the way review coordinators do.
One desk to you, three desks on the file, every week.

We are not

Chamberlain University, its IRB, or any site’s board. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or operated by the university; the boards’ decisions are their own.
The research. The study, the data and the findings are yours; we do not collect data or author findings.
A promise of approval. What we promise is a complete, consistent file, carried until both boards have answered in writing.

Where to next

Put the file in front of all three.

The free application review is Rebecca’s written read of your project against both tracks: what each board will want, what is missing, and which door to knock on first. If one board is all you need, the review says so.

Book the free application review