Evaluation of Professional Development Funds for Medical Officers
On 2 June 2026, the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) published the final report of the Evaluation of Professional Development Funds for Medical Officers (PDF 5.3 MB).
It follows a six-month evaluation of the policies and practices of the Department for Health and Wellbeing (the Department), the Southern Adelaide Local Health Network (SALHN) and the Women’s and Children’s Health Network (WCHN) in respect of the management of professional development funds for medical officers.
What is Professional Development?
Ongoing professional development for medical officers is critical to maintain high standards of patient care, support workforce capability, and ensure practitioners keep pace with evolving clinical knowledge and practice.
Medical officers (a term to describe a broad range of doctors) in South Australia’s public health system are eligible to be reimbursed for their professional development expenses, up to a cap as determined by the relevant Enterprise Agreement.
ICAC’s objective throughout the evaluation was to inspect the guardrails in place to minimise the risk of this funding being misused or vulnerable to corrupt conduct.
Findings
The evaluation highlighted the very broad use of professional development funds for medical officers in South Australia, and found that what is considered to be “professional development” is not clearly defined.
The evaluation also found that current review and approval processes rely heavily on the discretion and diligence of individuals, and highlighted improvements to ensure the proper use of public funds. The report makes eight recommendations to strengthen governance, improve oversight, and reduce corruption risks. The recommendations centre on clarifying what constitutes ‘professional development’, improving the claims approval process, and strengthening the review of claims.
Review and update the Department’s policies and procedures (including fact sheets and other relevant guidance material) to include a clear description of the purpose of professional development and set out the types of expenses considered appropriate for reimbursement.
Incorporate into the Department’s policies and procedures for professional development some agreed principles for the value and frequency of expenditure on information technology devices, and guidelines for what is considered reasonable travel and accommodation expenditure. Refer to the New South Wales and Victorian models as examples.
Review and update the Department’s policies, procedures and related guidance materials for professional development to ensure it is clearly set out that all claims must be submitted within six months from the date of the expense being incurred.
Review the functionality of the electronic reimbursement system, MOPDRS, to ensure that:
- the ‘justification’ field is mandatory and has character capacity to ensure sufficient information can be included
- receipts must be added for each expense item in a claim, and
- claims submitted more than six months after the date of the expense being incurred are flagged for the approver’s attention.
Review and improve the capability of the electronic reimbursement system, MOPDRS to detect duplicate claims.
Develop an audit program for local health networks to regularly review a sample of claims data for the purpose of identifying irregular patterns of reimbursements, repeated or multiple purchases and duplicate claims.
Review the systems used for recording professional development leave approvals and ensure the approval process requires verification that sufficient leave balances are available.
Review and update the Department’s policies and procedures to include expectations of direct line managers in approving professional development claims.
About the evaluation
In November 2025, Commissioner Emma Townsend announced that ICAC would evaluate of the practices, policies and procedures of the Department for Health and Wellbeing, SALHN and WCHN in relation to the management of professional development funds.
The evaluation took place over six months and involved the review and analysis of information from a broad range of sources.
You can see the evaluation Terms of Reference in Commissioner Townsend’s Public Statement.
Evaluations FAQs
A primary objective of the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 2012 (ICAC Act) is to prevent or minimise corruption in South Australian public administration. An evaluation of an agency’s practices, policies and procedures is an effective way of assisting the agency to minimise its risks of corruption.
Two local health networks were chosen to evaluate. This allowed for a large sample of information to be collected and reviewed, whilst still completing the evaluation in a timely manner. This is not to say that corruption is occurring, or has occurred in SALHN or WCHN with respect to the management of medical officers' professional development funds.
The purpose of an evaluation is to improve an agency’s systems to assist it in guarding against corruption. It involves the Independent Commission Against Corruption evaluating an agency’s practices, policies and procedures to assess whether they are suitably robust, and making recommendations for change where appropriate.
An evaluation is not an investigation or a ‘corruption probe’. An evaluation does not examine the specific conduct of any person.
If during the course of an evaluation conduct is identified that requires investigation, that conduct will be dealt with separately and in accordance with legislation.
The types of reimbursement claims that were brought to ICAC’s attention were found to be common and recurring across the five years of data that ICAC reviewed, and not limited to one or two individuals.
Furthermore, in the absence of transparent guidelines and processes it is difficult to hold individuals to account.
It was therefore determined, in conjunction with the Ombudsman, that ICAC would have more impact by addressing systemic problems with the management of Professional Development funds as a whole, as opposed to investigating individual claims.
Improving governance, transparency and oversight of Professional Development spending will help to ensure that public funds are used for their intended purpose, and maintain confidence in the medical profession.
Evaluations are often conducted by way of a public inquiry. In these cases, submissions may be invited from members of the public and information collected during the evaluation may be published.
Information gathered in the course of an evaluation can only be made public by the Commission. Section 54 of the ICAC Act prevents any other person from disclosing information that they have received knowing that it is connected to an evaluation unless the disclosure is authorised by the Commission.
