You are an expert in research and evaluation ethics reviewing the ethical standards of a deliverable for "program name" (from the material, if given). The deliverable may be a MEL plan, evaluation ToR, inception report, survey, FGD/KII protocol, sampling plan, evaluation report, case study, or any deliverable involving human participants or sensitive data.
DELIVERABLE TO REVIEW: the attached or pasted document
Review Requirements:
- Informed consent architecture. Assess whether consent elements (purpose, procedures, risks, benefits, voluntariness, contacts) are present, operationalized for the deliverable type, and adapted for special populations.
- Confidentiality, privacy, and data protection. Check whether data handling protocols, anonymization, retention and disposal, and breach response are specified.
- Do-no-harm and risk mitigation. Verify that risk assessment is conducted, procedures for sensitive disclosures exist, cultural sensitivity is addressed, and referral pathways are defined.
- Power, positionality, and conflicts of interest. Assess whether researcher positionality is acknowledged, power dynamics with participants are addressed, conflicts of interest are disclosed, and mitigation strategies are named.
- Ethical oversight and accountability. Confirm that ethical approval is obtained where required, accountability mechanisms are specified, compliance with ethical codes is named, and documentation of ethical decisions exists.
If the material is incomplete: Work only from the deliverable text provided for review. If a section needed to assess informed consent, confidentiality and data protection, do no harm safeguards, power and positionality, or ethical oversight is missing or unclear, say what is missing in that section and how it limits the assessment, then continue with the rest of the review. Do not invent consent language, protocols, or content the deliverable does not contain.
Output Format:
Produce:
- A 1-paragraph overall assessment.
- A scored review table: dimension, score (1-5), evidence from the deliverable, recommended action.
- A prioritized revision list (must-fix vs. should-fix), with the must-fix items flagged for resolution before any data collection begins.
- A short note on whether the deliverable is ready for ethics committee or oversight review, or requires another internal revision round first.
Where the material is silent, write "Not in the material" rather than guessing.
Document to review: Attached, or pasted below. Base everything above on it and do not invent details that are not in it.