A workplace investigation report sets out what was investigated and how, summarises the evidence and each party’s response, analyses that evidence, and makes a finding on each allegation, usually substantiated, partly substantiated or not substantiated, with reasons. The decision-maker relies on it to decide what to do next, so it must be clear, balanced and accurate.

What are the usual sections?

Authority and scope. Who commissioned the investigation, the terms of reference, and what was and was not in scope.
Background. The people involved (de-identified where appropriate), their roles and how the complaint arose.
Allegations. Each allegation, stated precisely, as put to the respondent.
Method. Who was interviewed, what documents were reviewed, and the standard of proof applied.
Procedural fairness. How and when the respondent was given the allegations and evidence, and their opportunity to respond.
Evidence. A fair summary of the relevant evidence for and against each allegation.
Analysis. How conflicting accounts were weighed, including consistency, corroboration and plausibility.
Findings. A finding on each allegation with reasons, on the balance of probabilities.
Recommendations. Only if the terms of reference ask for them, for example on process or culture improvements.
Attachments. Records of interview, documents and the terms of reference, as agreed.

Queensland’s Public Sector Commission guide similarly expects a report to set out the authority, scope, complaint, evidence, and whether each allegation is capable of substantiation on the balance of probabilities.

How are findings expressed?

Findings are usually expressed as substantiated, partly substantiated or not substantiated. “Not substantiated” does not mean the complainant lied; it means there was not enough evidence to be reasonably satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that the conduct occurred. For serious allegations, the evidence must be strong enough to reach that level of satisfaction (the Briginshaw principle).

What should a report not do?

decide the disciplinary outcome; that is the employer’s decision
make findings on matters that were never put to the respondent
include speculation, opinion unsupported by evidence, or inflammatory language
go beyond the terms of reference without authority.

How should the decision-maker use the report?

Read the report and the evidence it relies on, not just a summary of it. In Hatch v WesTrac Pty Ltd [2020] FWC 5729 the decision-maker relied on what colleagues told him about an investigation, some of which was inaccurate, and the dismissal was found unfair. If dismissal is being considered, tell the employee the proposed reason and give them an opportunity to respond before deciding.

Who gets to see the report?

Reports contain sensitive personal information. Decide at the start who will receive the report and in what form (for example, an outcome letter to the parties rather than the full report), and store it securely. Talk to your lawyer before the investigation starts if you want to consider legal professional privilege.

How BION Partners can help

BION Partners provides an impartial and thorough assessment of the available evidence to determine whether allegations are substantiated. If your team writes its own reports, the BION Audit reviews your documentation and reporting for rigour and consistency.

General information only. This page explains the law in general terms and is not legal advice. For advice about your situation, speak with a lawyer.

Sources

Checked 22 October 2026. Laws and guidance change; check the source before relying on it.

What goes in a workplace investigation report?