C11/2005 Use of Researchers and Research Reports
DATE OF ISSUE: 12 April 2005
Use of Researchers and Research Reports
NOTE: This DI should be used in conjunction with Businessline - TRIM ref - 11259977E
Table of Contents
Purpose.....................................................................
Background...................................................................
Advice to Claimant..............................................................
Contracted researchers..........................................................
Selection of a researcher.........................................................
Privacy Act 1988
Request letters................................................................
Questions addressed to researcher.................................................
Information needed by researchers..................................................
Cited incidents................................................................
Information that cannot be given....................................................
Assisting the researcher..........................................................
What the report should contain.....................................................
Witness contacts...............................................................
What the report should not contain..................................................
Acceptance of the report.........................................................
Use of reports.................................................................
Right of Reply.................................................................
Filing the report................................................................
Payment of Invoices............................................................
Feedback to the researcher.......................................................
Reporting....................................................................
Purpose |
This Instruction replaces DI C12/2000 Researchers for Historical and Factual Information. It clarifies what information:
|
Background |
Staff dealing with claims for disability compensation or income support matters should first refer to existing resources within the Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA). Usually, the required information can be found using the following resources:
In cases where either internal resources cannot resolve the issues raised in a claim or where there is doubt on issues of fact, then outside resources (including a commissioned research report from a contracted researcher) can be used. These external reports should be requested judiciously rather than as a matter of routine. For example, they should not be requested just because a claim is for either post traumatic stress disorder or for qualifying service in a certain area. |
Advice to Claimant |
If a research report is needed, the claimant or the claimant's representative should be advised that a report is being commissioned to research part of the claim. |
Contracted researchers |
Only researchers or research organisations that have a contract with DVA can be asked to undertake research and provide reports. If required, DVA National Office can provide a list of contracted researchers and their Curriculum Vitae. In the researcher's contracts, the DVA staff member requesting a report is referred to as the Liaison Officer. The liaison officer should be familiar with the standard service agreement used by DVA. The liaison officer would normally be a claims assessor (for disability claims) or a single point of contact officer (for income support claims). In this Departmental Instruction, claims investigator is used as a generic description. |
Selection of a researcher |
Claims investigators may select any contracted researcher they believe is appropriate for their request. In every instance, the claim investigator should contact the researcher to confirm the researcher is available to undertake the project within the time required. |
Privacy Act 1988 |
All requests for reports are subject to the Privacy Act 1988 and the Privacy Principles. Privacy Principle 10 requires that only the information necessary for the contracted person to provide the service should be provided to them. Under no circumstances is the researcher to be provided with a medical or psychiatric report. The claims investigator must provide the researcher with only that part of any clinical history taken by a doctor, psychiatrist or other medical professional that relates to the claimed stressor, trauma, event or occurrence. Similarly, the researcher should not be provided with a copy of the veteran's contentions. Rather, the claims investigator needs to clearly identify those portions of the veteran's contentions that require clarification and request a report that specifically addresses the factual basis of these points only. Please note that if there is a breach of the Privacy Act 1988, the officer concerned may be held liable for any of their actions which led to the breach . |
Request letters |
Letters requesting information from researchers should:
Be specific in setting the researcher's task. There must be no doubt about what is being asked of the researcher. Do not make broad requests such as “Please investigate the attached contentions” and attach copies of various papers, or “Please provide information on (name of ship) in the Indian Ocean during the 1960's.” Do not include the veteran's perceptions or feelings at the time of described events. For example, “I was very frightened” or “I was overcome by the stench of the decomposing bodies”. Instead, ask the researcher questions such as “Were there decomposing bodies?” or, “Was there a noticeable smell from decomposing bodies?” Attachment A is an example of a poorly worded request for investigation of contentions. Attachment B illustrates the same request changed by using open questions and removing emotive language. |
Questions addressed to researcher |
The request letter should contain a list of questions to be addressed by the researcher. These questions can be of a general nature, such as “what were the duties of a driver?” or they can be specific requests for information on incidents the veteran may have referred to in the claim, such as “was there a shooting incident in a Sergeants' Mess Bar in Vietnam on Christmas Eve in 1967”. Do not request the researcher's personal opinion. For example, do not ask the researcher if he/she considers the claimant is telling the truth, or the likelihood that something occurred. |
Information needed by researchers |
Researchers have asked that if known the following information be provided in each case so that their investigations can be better focussed:
If DVA is aware that the person claims for particular service that is not supported by Defence Records, this should be specified.
Take care to ensure that the statements provided to the researcher reflect what the claimant has stated rather than reflecting the views of a second party. Where a veteran indicates any uncertainty of the details provided (eg. I think it was ..., It was probably ...), the researcher should be advised of these qualifications as it will affect the breadth of their research. |
Information needed by researchers (continued) |
|
Cited incidents |
If possible, the following information in relation to specific incidents claimed by a veteran should also be gathered and provided to the researcher.
|
Information that cannot be given |
The researcher cannot be informed of the purpose or nature of the claim, the diagnosis being investigated, the name or profession of any medical services provider or any medical or claims history. |
Assisting the researcher |
The claims investigator should assist the researcher as much as possible to ensure that the research report is timely and contains the information required to assist in their investigation of the veteran's claims. This assistance could include things such as speaking to the researcher soon after they have been asked to undertake research to check whether they could assist the researcher's task in any way, or to clarify the request if necessary. The claims investigator should actively encourage the researcher to contact them at any time to obtain further guidance and instruction. For example, if the researcher becomes aware of the existence of potential witnesses to an incident, but has been tasked only to look at official records, they should contact the claims investigator for further instruction. |
What the report should contain |
Research reports are available to the claimant and their representative. The reports as well as the DVA request for those reports are available to the VRB, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and to the Federal Court. Therefore, it is important that the report, as well as the request, is of a high quality and can withstand critical examination. The report should be factual and non-judgemental and contain references to the materials that were used in the research. The researcher should report the evidence based on the materials researched, and may comment on whether an event did or did not occur or whether there may be a possibility of such an event not being recorded. |
Witness contacts |
The researcher should report all contacts made with other persons as part of the research and the substance of the discussions as they relate to the questions posed. The researcher should clearly identify those contacts and whether the information was provided verbally or in writing. Where verbal, the researcher should note whether the record of conversation or the words attributed to the person in the report have been agreed or cleared by them. |
What the report should not contain |
The report must not contain any comment on what might constitute an illness, or satisfy a factor in the Statement of Principles or a term such as “stressor”. The task of reaching conclusions of that nature is reserved solely for the decision-maker having regard to the diagnostic criteria and the relevant Statement of Principles. The report must not contain or imply any opinions of the researcher on the veteran, the truthfulness of the veteran, the value of his or her service, the reasons for his or her actions or the reasons for making the claim. For example, in the statement “the veteran was a COOK ” the fact that the word “cook” is capitalised could be interpreted as a demeaning emphasis, especially where the same word, or any other word, is not capitalised in the remainder of the report. Although the researcher may well deduce what the claim is about, that conclusion must not be part of the report. |
Acceptance of the report |
Before accepting a research report the claims investigator should satisfy themselves of the integrity of the report. They should read the report as soon as possible after it is received, and before accepting the report, the claims investigator should ensure that:
If the report does not meet these requirements, the researcher should be asked to amend their report. |
Use of reports |
A decision-maker may refer to the findings of the researcher to assist in their determination. However, a decision-maker must not simply adopt the researcher's opinion on whether the events did or did not occur without a proper examination of the basis for that opinion. The decision-maker, in deciding whether the events that a claimant relies on occurred or not, and whether the claimant was present or not, must consider the whole of the material available to them. |
Right of Reply |
Veterans have a right of reply to research reports before an adverse decision is made. This is covered in detail in Departmental Instruction C02/2004 Right of Reply for Veterans in Relation to Research Reports. Veterans may also request their own research reports (at their own expense) to support their claims. |
Filing the report |
Only the report by the researcher should be put on the veteran's file. Invoices, preliminary reports and correspondence with the researcher must be placed on a general file for that researcher or on another general file. This material should not appear on the veteran's file. |
Payment of Invoices |
The Department's contractual obligation is that it must make payment within thirty days of accepting the report. |
Feedback to the researcher |
If possible, advise the researcher when the case has been finalised, for example when the claim has been determined and the appeal process exhausted. This enables the researcher to put away notes and other material relating to their report. Do not advise the researcher of the outcome of the case. |
Reporting |
It is possible, and indeed likely, that questions will be asked by the Repatriation Commission, the Minister, or by a Member of Parliament or Parliamentary Committee. Each State must be able to report on all researchers used, their cost and the number of reports sought. |
CAROLYN SPIERS
BRANCH HEAD
VETERANS' COMPENSATION
12 April 2005
Attachment A
Poorly Worded Request
I am investigating a claim for this veteran. In support of his claim he has reported the following:
...witnessed an aircraft crash in February 1988 near port Macquarie in which two men were killed...discovered pieces of burnt flesh as large as a golf ball which were attracting flies. He saw the remains of a watch near one of the balls of flesh.
In April 1988...arrived at the site of an aircraft crash at Williamstown half an hour after the crash. There was a fire and two men were killed...thought he initially could see one of the men still moving. He subsequently saw two badly burnt bodies and he said 'the stench of burning flesh was horrible'...saw the bodies being removed from aircraft and he saw flesh fall from the bodies.
... seems to have been an Airfield Defence Guard in 1988. Are you able to confirm the extent of ... 's involvement in the aftermath of these two accidents?
Attachment B
Revised Request
I refer to the Services Agreement you have with the Commonwealth Department of Veterans' Affairs and the Repatriation Commission and request that you undertake the following research.
The research concerns two incidents that Mr X has reported that he witnessed while serving as an Airfield Defence Guard. I am seeking clarification on specific details about these incidents, namely:
Incident 1
- Was there an aircraft crash near Port Macquarie in February 1988?
- Were there any deaths or causalities caused by this accident?
- Were there human remains present at the site of the crash?
- Did members of the Airfield Defence Guard witness or attend this incident?
- Did Mr X witness or attend this incident?
- What was the extent of Mr X's involvement?
Incident 2
- Was there an aircraft crash at Williamstown in April 1988?
- Were there any deaths or causalities caused by this accident?
- Was there a fire at the crash site?
- Did anyone survive the initial crash but die of injuries relating to the accident at a later point in time?
- Where there any reports of a noticeable smell from burnt bodies at the crash site?
- Did members of the Airfield Defence Guard witness or attend this incident?
- Did Mr X witness or attend this incident?
- What was the extent of Mr X's involvement?
Source URL: https://clik.dva.gov.au/compensation-and-support-reference-library/departmental-instructions/2005/c112005-use-researchers-and-research-reports