The primary issue is whether an investigator can continue to use animals in an approved protocol when the project has not yet produced suitable results. Anyone involved in experimental science knows that usable results are not easily obtained, and there is no regulative restraint on such continued use of animals, as long as there is proper oversight of the project. That oversight is in place here, from the IACUC and from the agency funding the research. Because McNulty is an experienced investigator with a previously productive record, it appears that the funding agency was satisfied with her accomplishments before approving this project. There is no distinct mandate for the IACUC to be involved in this situation, had the issues not been brought to them. However, the IACUC is required to carry out continuing review of her approved protocol, and this would be an appropriate occasion for them to review the activities in greater depth than an annual report provides. First, the IACUC should confirm that the project is still in compliance, that McNulty has followed the protocol as approved, that any substantial modifications have been approved, and that any new policies have been transmitted to the investigator. The Committee should also recognize that this situation is an opportunity to fulfill other IACUC roles and responsibilities, which include ensuring that personnel are appropriately trained, that animals have appropriate husbandry and use, and that there is proper interaction among the members of the animal research program.