Annual Report 2015–2016

ADVERTISING AND MARKET RESEARCH
During 2015–16, NHMRC did not incur any costs relating to market research, polling or direct mail, or
conducting any advertising or marketing campaigns.
COMPLAINTS
NHMRC has a complaints process for people who are dissatisfied with NHMRC decisions or
actions. Generally complaints are resolved within the area of the Office of NHMRC responsible for the
function, with an independent complaints team providing an oversight and escalation role.
In 2015–16, NHMRC received 76 complaints about NHMRC’s funding or grant processes.
PART 3 operating environment
Table 22 Numbers of complaints received by NHMRC 2015–16
Types of complaints
Complaints
received
Matters on
hand
Complaints
finalised
Project Grants funding scheme 27 0 27
Program and Partnership funding schemes 11 0 11
People support funding schemes 38 0 38
Complaints to the Commissioner of Complaints 11 4 7
NHMRC Commissioner of Complaints
Professor Don Chalmers is the NHMRC Commissioner of Complaints. A biography of Professor Chalmers is
available in Appendix 8.
Annual Report of NHMRC Commissioner of Complaints for 2015–2016
The report is provided pursuant to section 68 of the NHMRC Act. It covers the 12 months from 1 July 2015
to 30 June 2016. During this time I investigated and finalised five complaints and decided not to investigate
one complaint as it did not pertain to a reviewable action and was therefore not within my remit to
investigate. Investigations in relation to four new complaints were ongoing at 30 June 2016.
As Commissioner, my role in brief is to investigate complaints relating to a reviewable action as described
in Section 58 of the NHMRC Act. A reviewable action is an action taken by the CEO or delegate relating to
recommendations to the Minister regarding expenditure on public health and medical research and training,
or an action taken by the Research Committee in relation to an application for funding made on or after 24
June 1993. I am required to investigate the procedures for natural justice, fairness, good faith and absence
of conflicts of interest in NHMRC’s processes in reaching a decision. I am not entitled to examine the merits
of the reasoning behind the reviewable action or substitute my view for that of NHMRC, the Research
Committee or peer reviewers.
After finalising the investigation of a complaint, I am obliged under section 66 of the Act to report to the CEO
where I conclude that an action as affected by one or more grounds of complaint listed in section 58. Under
section 67 of the Act, I have the discretion to make a recommendation in relation to the outcome of my
investigation into a complaint about a reviewable action. This could include recommendations to reconsider
actions; rectify, mitigate or alter the effects of an action; or revoke or vary a decision.
102
Annual Report of the National Health and Medical Research Council 2015–2016