Review to Strengthen Independent Medical Research Institutes: Response to the Discussion Paper

This submission responds to the discussion paper of the Australian Government’s Review to Strengthen Independent Medical Research Institutes (iMRIs), which examined their efficiency, collaboration, revenue diversification and role in translation. Research Australia notes that no evidence has been presented that iMRIs are less efficient than other research organisations, and cites a 2009 Allen Consulting Group report putting university indirect costs at 94.9% of competitive grant funding against a 2010 L.E.K. Consulting estimate of about 60% for medical research institutes. It proposes raising the Independent Research Institutes Infrastructure Support Scheme (IRIISS) from 20% to 30% of competitive grants, at a cost of about $20 million in 2015–16, and recommends longer-term, more stable government funding. Research Australia maintains that philanthropy and commercial income cannot replace government funding: business health and medical research expenditure was flat at about $1.2 billion in 2010–11, of which iMRIs captured less than 10%. Its recommendations include using the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission’s ‘report once, use often’ framework, a single large philanthropic fund for health and medical research, government funding of indirect costs for philanthropically funded research, a national register of research facilities and equipment, a fund to help organisations share back-office administration, and a more active role for the NHMRC in brokering collaboration. It also lists measures to support commercial and non-commercial translation, including clinician researcher roles, research in activity-based funding and better clinical trial infrastructure.