Trauma-informed research Research that holds up — to scrutiny and to people.

It is scoped and fixed rather than run on an hourly rate, and the fixed price is what a Commonwealth pricing schedule needs. A national prevalence study — sampling frame, instrument co-design, sovereign platform, recruitment, a staffed 1800 line, analysis and a twelve-piece visual suite — was delivered on a fixed fee inside its published ceiling. Smaller audience-segmentation studies for marketing work are a fraction of that. The first conversation gives you a real number.

A population-scale study is usually six to nine months end to end: two weeks on the frame, four on instrument co-design with lived-experience advisors, then platform build, ethics where required, field period, analysis and reporting. Audience research feeding a marketing engagement runs in weeks rather than months. We give you the phase dates before you commit, and we do not shorten the co-design phase to hit a date.

No. Research is scoped as a defined programme with defined deliverables, and the deliverables are yours as they are produced — the dataset, the codebook and the analysis scripts, not just the report. Where a study runs in phases, each phase can be reviewed before the next is authorised.

You do. The dataset, the codebook, the analysis scripts and the report are handed over, and the survey platform is sole-tenant, so your data was never pooled with anybody else's. Retention and destruction are agreed before the field opens and evidenced afterwards, because that is what respondents were told when they consented.

You hear it from us in the weekly report while there is still time to act, not in the final findings. Live dashboards show stratum fill and drop-off daily, and recruitment is re-pointed at the strata that are lagging. If a sub-group cannot be filled to a defensible level, we report that as a limitation rather than quietly weighting around it.

A weekly written report plus live dashboards you can open yourself: stratum fill, completion rate, where people are dropping out, and any qualitative flags that need attention. After analysis you get a technical report, a twelve-piece infographic suite, interactive dashboards and a plain-English summary written for people who will never read the methodology.

Lived-experience advisors co-design the instrument. Skip-logic warns before a distressing branch and lets people leave from any screen without losing what they have already given. Support is one tap away throughout, and the 1800 line is staffed by trauma-informed operators under weekly supervision by a registered psychologist, with escalation pathways agreed with the established national services before the field opens.

On a sole-tenant survey platform we build and host on AWS Sydney — AES-256 at rest, TLS 1.3 in transit, an Australia-only data path and no offshore sub-processing. On a sensitive study this is not a procurement detail: where the data sits changes who is willing to answer honestly, and it is one of the first questions an ethics committee asks.

PCL-5, K10, C-SSRS and AUDIT-C are the validated measures we reach for most often, alongside ABS-comparable items where a national benchmark matters. Each is chosen because it was validated on a comparable population, not because it is familiar. Where nothing validated exists for a construct we say so and design a bespoke item set with its limitations stated.

WCAG 2.2 AA is the baseline, built in from the first screen and then independently audited rather than self-declared. Auslan translation is available through accredited providers, and where the population is multilingual we field in multiple languages. An inaccessible survey does not just exclude people — it biases the result, which makes it a methodological problem as well as an ethical one.

Yes, and the two feed each other. Quantitative and qualitative segmentation studies run for our marketing clients use the same sampling discipline as the government work, at a scale that suits a commercial budget. The output goes straight into audience strategy rather than sitting in a deck — which is the whole reason we run research in-house.

We prepare ethics submissions where a study needs one and design to the committee's requirements from the start rather than retrofitting to them. Clinical governance sits with a registered psychologist who supervises the support operation weekly. We do not present ourselves as the approving body — that is the committee's role, and the study is designed to be approvable by one.