The Health Research Council does not hold:
• ADHD-specific assessment criteria
• Internal gap analysis comparing ADHD to other conditions
• Analysis describing inequities in ADHD research or outcomes
Full Official Information Act response: fyi.org.nz/request/3307...
ADHD is not treated as a distinct research area.
Researchers assign a primary health issue. The most common primary category in ADHD-relevant proposals was “mental health” (1 funded, 13 unfunded).
Reporting occurs at broader health issue levels.
Between 2015–2025:
• 4 funded applications were identified as relevant to ADHD (via agreed search terms and review).
• 46 ADHD-relevant applications were unsuccessful.
Details of unsuccessful proposals were withheld under s9(2)(b).
Square beige graphic with bold black headline text reading: “ADHD-Related Research Applications (2015–2025): 4 Funded. 46 Unsuccessful.” A small line at the bottom reads: “OIA #22 Health Research Council (NZ).”
An Official Information Act response from the Health Research Council clarifies how ADHD-related research was identified and funded between 1 Jan 2015 and 1 Dec 2025. Summary below.
Full response letter and released documents here: fyi.org.nz/request/3308...
#ADHD #DisabilityRights #Aotearoa
It further confirmed that it has not undertaken a systemic review or thematic investigation specifically relating to ADHD during the period requested, and has not had work programmes specifically dedicated to ADHD.
ADHD is addressed within broader disability work rather than a distinct framework.
The Commission confirmed that ADHD is recognised under the disability ground of the Human Rights Act 1993.
It also confirmed that it does not maintain a separate internal classification for ADHD. ADHD-related matters are recorded under the broader prohibited ground of disability.
The Commission conducted a keyword search of its database between 1 Jan 2015 and 31 Dec 2025.
It identified:
• 223 enquiries or complaints referencing ADHD-related terms
• 122 complaints alleging unlawful discrimination
• 116 where both a prohibited ground and area of life were identifiable
Human Rights Commission OIA response on ADHD (2015–2025).
ADHD-related discrimination complaints span education, employment, government activity and housing.
Taken together, the response indicates that while ADHD is referenced within awareness and training materials, it is not included in workforce data collection systems or specifically referenced within current HR policy frameworks.
Health NZ advised that new Workplace Diversity & Inclusion, Reasonable Accommodation, and Flexible Working policies are currently in development.
The response identified internal guidance and awareness materials, including a 2023 Neurodiversity in the Workplace – A Manager’s Guide, ADHD-related e-learning modules, and Diversity Hub resources. These sit within broader diversity and inclusion initiatives.
Health NZ also confirmed that its workforce registration and payroll datasets do not include information related to ADHD, neurodiversity, disability, or mental health. This means ADHD is not separately captured within workforce data systems.
Health NZ confirmed that its current Workplace Diversity & Inclusion, Reasonable Accommodation, and Flexible Working policies do not specifically reference ADHD. ADHD is covered under broader disability and neurodiversity frameworks.
An Official Information Act response from Health New Zealand | Te Whatu Ora has clarified how ADHD is recognised within the national health workforce.
In follow-up correspondence, the Council indicated that it is open to receiving suggestions and feedback and offered to arrange further discussion with staff working in the Inclusive Education space.
Here is the link to the OIA request and response: fyi.org.nz/request/3309...
The 2026 Standards refer to diverse learner needs, including those associated with neurodivergence, and a draft Inclusive Teaching Practice Guide has been developed. The framework is not focused on the needs of specific disability groups and does not separate groups of learners with different needs.
The Council further confirmed that it holds no specific information relating to preparing teachers to support learners with ADHD.
The Council noted that inclusive practice is addressed within the Standards for the Teaching Profession.
It also confirmed that the Council does not deliver Professional Learning and Development (PLD), and that no PLD has been funded, commissioned, or formally endorsed by the Council since 2015 that includes specific ADHD awareness or classroom practice.
An Official Information Act response from the Teaching Council of Aotearoa New Zealand has clarified how ADHD is recognised within teacher education and professional standards.
The Council confirmed that ADHD is not explicitly mentioned in Initial Teacher Education (ITE) Programme Requirements.
The 2026 Standards refer to diverse learner needs, including those associated with neurodivergence, and a draft Inclusive Teaching Practice Guide has been developed. The framework is not focused on the needs of specific disability groups and does not separate groups of learners with different needs.
The Council further confirmed that it holds no specific information relating to preparing teachers to support learners with ADHD.
The Council noted that inclusive practice is addressed within the Standards for the Teaching Profession.
It also confirmed that the Council does not deliver Professional Learning and Development (PLD), and that no PLD has been funded, commissioned, or formally endorsed by the Council since 2015 that includes specific ADHD awareness or classroom practice.
Taken together, these responses show how inclusion can be named in policy work without being implemented in a way that makes specific communities, including people with ADHD, visible or trackable.
Response letter and documents available via FYI link:
fyi.org.nz/request/3331...
A follow up OIA on the “sense of inclusion” KPI used in the Strong Public Media business case confirmed that inclusion was referenced, but no measurement framework, demographic scope, or monitoring approach was ever established.
However, it said it could not confirm this without undertaking substantial collation and research, and the request was refused on that basis.
An OIA response from Manatū Taonga helps clarify how inclusion is treated in public media policy.
In an earlier request about ADHD visibility in cultural and public storytelling work, the Ministry advised that it did not believe it held much information explicitly referencing ADHD, if any.
ADHD Inquiry petition closed on 30 Jan 2026.
Validated count: 1,828 signatures.
Next phase: continuing to review OIA responses to help support the call for an inquiry.
Here is a direct link to the petition:
petitions.parliament.nz/42b5c524-f57...
Parliamentary inquiries exist to examine complex, cross-sector issues affecting the public.
Ongoing systemic harm to people with ADHD warrants examination at that level.
Petition closes tomorrow, 30 January.
#disabilityequity
