Mental health in Aotearoa is in urgent need of solutions. Rising anxiety and depression are affecting too many, especially our young people. But there is hope: research, early intervention, and better support can change lives.
We’re calling on our community to stand with us. Together, we can raise $50,000 by World Mental Health Day 10 October to fund vital research – and we need your help to make our first appeal a success.
Donate today at whaufoundation.org.nz/appeal
We are pleased to announce a special scholarship in our 2025 granting round for a Māori Lived Experience researcher.
Applicants can apply for funds to support research in an area of mental health of their choosing. The scholarship amount is for project costs of up to $10,000.
For information on how to apply visit https://whaufoundation.org.nz/apply
Our How to Leave a Legacy Pack has been created to guide you through the options available for leaving a lasting impact with Whau Foundation.
The pack explains two meaningful ways to contribute:
By sharing this resource, we hope to make it easier for you to explore these choices and shape the legacy you want to leave.
You can read more at Leave a Legacy of Hope
Could you share a summary of your research and what inspired you to pursue it?
I’ve been involved in digital mental health research long before it became the buzzword it is today. Back when internet access still meant dial-up, I was already exploring how technology could support young people’s wellbeing. I did my Master’s on the early internet and its impact on how high schools spend their free time, then went on to develop a digital mini-game as part of my PhD—a bold move, but I had a supervisor (Professor Sally Merry) who supported big ideas. The turning point came when the Oakley Foundation funded that work. Without that support, there would have been no trial, no momentum. That project directly led to the creation of SPARX, which was picked up and funded by the Ministry of Health. It’s now a nationally available service, and it has grown in ways I could not have imagined—translated, adapted, and studied around the world. To think it all started with a small PhD project supported by Oakley is still quite humbling.
How did the Foundation support your research?
The Oakley (now Whau) Foundation gave me a $30,000 grant between 2004 and 2007, which at the time felt absolutely enormous – and it was. They also funded the final six months of my PhD stipend, which was pivotal. That final stretch of a doctorate can be gruelling, and their support allowed me to focus, finish, and ultimately deliver something that had real-world impact. Without that backing, I honestly don’t know if I would have made it across the finish line.
Were there any unique or surprising findings?
One of the most valuable parts of the early project was collaborating with a young web designer—himself a recent graduate. I learned so much from that partnership, and I was genuinely delighted with the outcome. It gave me a functioning prototype I could take into schools to run my first randomised controlled study. This was back in the days of CD-ROMs, and young people had to come into a designated room to use the tool—but they did, and they gave me some incredibly rich feedback. They wanted more play, less text, and fewer instructions. That insight was pivotal in shaping SPARX and other digital tools we went on to develop. I was also able to collect meaningful clinical data, which led to one of my very first publications—an unexpected bonus at the time!
What impact did receiving support from the Foundation have on your career or future research opportunities?
In a word: transformational. The Oakley Foundation’s support didn’t just get me through my PhD—it set the stage for everything that followed. SPARX became a cornerstone project for digital mental health in Aotearoa and internationally, and I have since been involved in developing other tools like Headstrong, which I now lead with support from Te Whatu Ora. Their early investment gave me the launchpad for a career I am truly passionate about.
How has this project contributed to the field, or impacted the wider community (nationally and internationally)?
The reach of SPARX has been both national and global. It’s used by young people in New Zealand every day and has been studied or adapted in countries like Japan, Canada, and the UK. It has helped raise the profile of digital mental health in New Zealand and demonstrated that research from here can genuinely lead global innovation. I also think it’s contributed to changing how people perceive digital interventions—from “interesting” to “essential.”
How would you describe the significance of support from Whau Mental Health Research Foundation for researchers in mental health?
It cannot be overstated. Seeding funds like those from Whau give early-stage researchers the chance to test ideas, build prototypes, or generate preliminary data—all essential for securing larger grants down the track. For PhD students and early-career researchers, that kind of support can be make-or-break. It offers not just financial backing but a vote of confidence, which matters immensely when you are just getting started.
Have there been any specific end users or groups who have directly benefited from your research findings?
Yes- thousands of young people who have used SPARX as a first step in managing their mental health. But it’s also gone beyond individual users. Our work has contributed to the reputation of our research team and the University more broadly, both nationally and internationally. It has also informed policy and clinical practice in youth mental health, which I’m very proud of.
Has your work led to any other projects or research advancements?
Absolutely. My humble PhD led to SPARX which then, in turn, opened the door for me to lead other digital health initiatives. One I’m particularly proud of is Headstrong, a wellbeing chatbot that’s now in its fourth year of government funding. It supports young people across and is deeply rooted in co-design and clinical evidence. It’s humbling to see how a small PhD project has cascaded into a whole stream of work, each building on the last.
Are there any publications or media coverage of your work?
Yes – we’ve published extensively and continue to do so. There’s also been media coverage, particularly when SPARX or Headstrong launched nationally. We don’t chase the spotlight, but we do welcome opportunities to raise awareness of our work, especially if it helps get these tools into the hands of young people who need them.
You might have received a letter from us recently.
We’re grateful to everyone who has taken a moment to learn more about the work of Whau Foundation and why funding mental health research matters.
As the only not-for-profit organisation in Aotearoa solely dedicated to facilitating and supporting mental health research, we’re focused on what really works – from early intervention in youth mental health to research into depression, anxiety and addiction.
The stakes couldn’t be higher. The need for effective mental health solutions is urgent, and we are dedicated to accelerating progress. But we can’t do it alone.
We need people like you who are ready to make a real difference.
Donate today and help us fund research that actually works.
Your generosity is an investment in the future of mental health in New Zealand — together, we can make a lasting impact.
Mental health in Aotearoa New Zealand is at a critical crossroads. Despite the efforts of many, challenges continue to grow — and the need for effective change has never been more urgent. At the Whau Mental Health Research Foundation, we’re committed to making that change a reality.
Since 1967, the Whau Foundation has been New Zealand’s only non-profit organisation dedicated solely to advancing mental health research. We’ve invested in hundreds of pioneering projects that uncover what truly works to improve mental health outcomes across the country.
But we don’t just fund research — we also support and champion initiatives that make a real difference. From developing better treatment models to creating early intervention tools, our work aims to transform mental health care and ensure solutions reach those who need them most.
Our focus covers some of the most pressing mental health challenges facing Kiwis today:
“Whau Foundation enables vital, community-driven mental health research that would not otherwise be funded. Your support leads to real-world changes, in clinical training, service design, and equitable care for underserved communities.”
— Dr Gary Cheung, psychiatrist researcher, University of Auckland
“Whau Mental Health Research Foundation empowers both established and emerging researchers to explore bold, innovative projects that deepen our understanding of mental health and addiction. This sparks real, lasting change in service delivery, approaches and practices while fostering and growing a strong New Zealand research capability.”
— Dr Barbara Disley ONZM, Trustee
“It’s a real privilege to be part of a team supporting Kiwis as they lead vital research into areas like depression, anxiety, and women’s health — topics deeply personal and close to my heart. This work has the power to create lasting change in the lives of so many.”
— Kimberley Crossman, Whau Foundation Ambassador
The stakes couldn’t be higher. The need for effective mental health solutions is urgent, and we are dedicated to accelerating progress. But we can’t do it alone.
We need people like you who are ready to make a real difference.
Donate today and help us fund research that actually works.
Your generosity is an investment in the future of mental health in New Zealand — together, we can make a lasting impact.
“I’m so proud to share some big news. I’ve officially joined the Whau Mental Health Research Foundation as an ambassador.
This is something that feels incredibly aligned with both my personal journey and the work I have been doing publicly through my podcast Pretty Depressed Over the past few years I’ve had the privilege of having open honest conversations about anxiety depression and the complex mental health experiences that so many of us carry often in silence.
Alongside these conversations I’ve been on my own journey navigating mental health fertility challenges and hormonal complications. What I kept coming back to time and time again was this huge gap in research and understanding around women’s health. Especially when it comes to how our physical wellbeing and hormonal health impacts our mental wellbeing.
Women are often dismissed or misdiagnosed. Our experiences are minimized and our systems are built on research that has largely overlooked us. That needs to change.
That is why I am so excited to be working alongside the Whau Foundation to help launch a brand new fund dedicated specifically to women’s mental health research here in Aotearoa. With real science-backed research we can build better support systems that truly reflect the reality of women’s lives from puberty to post-menopause and everything in between.
Whau Foundation is named after the NZ native Whau tree that provides shelter for other species to grow and thrive, and their mission is to create a future where mental health care is based on evidence, compassion and deep understanding. The Foundation funds cutting-edge research led by world-class teams across New Zealand and works to challenge the stigma and outdated thinking that still surrounds mental health.
It is a privilege to stand with this group of passionate researchers, advocates and changemakers and to contribute to something that I believe will make a real lasting difference.
Let’s do this together.”
Words by Kim Crossman
#MentalHealthMatters #WomensHealth #WhauFoundation #PrettyDepressedPodcast #RealResearchRealChange
We are thrilled to welcome Kimberley Crossman as an official ambassador for Whau Foundation. No stranger to audiences across Aotearoa, Kim is also a passionate advocate for mental health, drawing on her experiences to help make meaningful change.
“It’s a privilege to stand alongside this incredible team of passionate humans and be part of something that aims to make a real, lasting difference.”
Kim’s involvement comes at an exciting time as we launch our new Women’s Mental Health Fund – a kaupapa that closely aligns with her commitment to supporting women’s wellbeing.
“I know the Whau Foundation does amazing work in the anxiety and depression space. I am so thrilled that they are now starting a targeted women’s mental health fund because I think that is another area which is extremely under researched in New Zealand and obviously very close to my heart.”
Every year, thousands of New Zealanders choose to include a gift to charity in their will. In fact, around 25% of all charity revenue comes from gifts left in wills.
We call this ‘legacy giving’ because these people are creating a long-lasting impact that can be felt for years after they’ve gone.
We’re are partnering with Gathered Here to make legacy giving as easy as possible for our supporters.
Since 2021, online will provider Gathered Here has seen over 30,000 wills written via its platform and an estimated $350 million pledged to worthy causes.
Wills written on Gathered Here are completely free of charge and include free updates for life. No matter how many times you change your mind, you can change your will too.
Now, Whau Foundation supporters can write a will for free just by clicking the button below.
write your will for freeTo learn more about including a gift to Whau Mental Health Research Foundation in your will, you can contact our fundraising team by emailing info@whaufoundation.org.nz
Professor Jim Wright was one of the early recipients of funding from the Whau Mental Health Research Foundation. Over the course of his career, with support from the Foundation and other groups he developed a sophisticated mathematical model of brain function that describes how information processing associated with cognitive function develops, how visual perception occurs and most recently how his work links with other current models of brain function that themselves link back to the abnormalities in brain function associated with mental health conditions such as schizophrenia.
How did the Whau Foundation support your research?
The Foundation played a crucial role in my career at several critical points. To explain how important its support has been, I’ll have to describe my rather long career, throughout which I have been dependent on research funding. This went from rags to riches and back again several times, and was saved by the Foundation when otherwise it would have lost momentum and dissolved, for sheer lack of funds. My case illustrates a more general problem. It is well known that researchers in New Zealand face limitations of budget compared to those in richer countries – but there is another challenge that seems less recognised. The smaller number of sources to whom one can turn when a line of work falls foul of other, unsympathetic, committees bedevils long-term work aimed at long-term outcomes. It is right that dead wood be cut out, but sometimes the presumption of death is premature. Mine has been a case in point.
Could you share a summary of your research project and what inspired you to pursue it?
As a young doctor entranced with the prospect of a career in psychiatry I believed that psychiatry should be based on an understanding of the function of the brain. Since this didn’t seem to be the case, with the confidence of youth, I thought I would see if I could help sort this out. I joined an international research effort labelled “Brain Dynamics”. Its object is to determine the rules by which the brain performs its most essential function – the embodiment of a thinking and feeling self. In 1971 I had the great good fortune to receive a research fellowship at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) – unusual for a medical graduate, but enabling me to work with the neurobiologist and later Nobel Laureate, Roger Sperry. This led on to work at Kings College, London, then to return home to the brand new Department of Psychiatry at the School of Medicine. Those were refreshing days, before sinking lids sank too far, and greater caution began to affect the course of NZ medical enterprise. In England I had worked with another young researcher, Dr Michael Craggs of University College, London, and Mike returned with me on an MRC Fellowship to New Zealand, to help me set up a laboratory and continue our work. My luck continued when I was asked to start the first graduate training programme in psychiatry. I was able to recruit a remarkable lot of young people, among whom were some who shared my love for fundamental research and became my colleagues and friends, including Rob Kydd, Alex Sergejew, and David Liley. My network of associates also expanded internationally, and so it has continued, apart from a period of absence in a personal research chair in Melbourne, until today, in my retirement.
In retrospect I can now see the work went through four phases.
1. The effect of motivational and alerting neurones on the EEG
The first phase began when I was a research fellow at Caltech, using unilateral electrical stimulation of motivational/reward pathways in the lateral hypothalamus and brain stem of “split-brain” cats, in which the great cerebral commissures were surgically divided. This showed that motivation systems in split-brain animals exert joint influence upon learning in both of the divided cerebral hemispheres, in contrast to the separation of cognitive functions produced by commissure division. This work carried on in London and after return to Auckland. We learnt something of the way brain stem pathways controlled the electrical activity of the cortex, but we could not identify separate signatures of activity associated with the diffuse motivational/alerting effects versus the cortically lateralised processes. Our frustrated efforts to do so showed that an adequate theory of the relationship to electrocortical activity to cortical information processing was lacking, and a decent theory was essential for progress.
So the part of the brain you stimulated, responsible for alerting and motivation, was located in the lower parts of the brain and affected all parts of the brain. What were the “signatures” of brain related activity you were looking for but couldn’t find? Was this electrical activity/EEG or something else?/
Our initial assumptions were pretty naïve. We recorded electrical signals directly off the animal’s brain, and measured their frequency content and the response to sensory stimuli. We hoped these signals would somehow be divisible into two classes that would correspond to the unified and separated aspects of cortical function in the split-brain animal, but we could not achieve this separation. Part of the problem was simply our (and everybody else’s) lack of understanding of the brain waves. Not where the signals were coming from, but the laws of wave motion that they obeyed. That led on to the second phase.
2. The development of a mathematical model of brain waves
The second phase, inspired by the frustration of the first, led on to a series of experiments to determine basic properties of electrocortical waves, so as to determine how a wave theory of the
brain’s activity might be formulated. This was when Rob Kydd, and later Alex Sergejew and David Liley, joined me. Mathematicians and engineers on Main Campus were very helpful offering advice, and we conducted a series of experiments that determined some of the mathematical properties of brain waves. In this work our able technicians John West and Nick Hawthorn played a vital part, as did our neurochemist colleague Gordon Lees. These gave some essential insights on how we could test a wave theory using computer simulations of large populations of cortical neurons.
So to develop a “signature” of brain activity you looked at the EEG and used concepts applied in mathematics and engineering to model the “brain waves” in the EEG? You then carried out a series of experiments to test the theory and then developed the mathematics further to show how cognitive processes were generated in the brain from sensory inputs and ongoing activity forming something like a bubbling soup of brain activity? Or is that the wrong image to apply?
“Bubbling soup” as an analogy is apt, but I’d better explain in a bit more detail. The work became a major enterprise. It led my colleagues and me to successful explanations of mechanisms for cortical pulse synchrony and oscillation, and of evoked potentials and the frequency content of the EEG. These results complemented the work of overseas groups led by Paul Nunez, by Walter Freeman, by Fernando Lopes da Silva and others, but also differed from the directions taken by them in certain important respects.
What emerged was a fusion of ideas and testing of alternate models until we arrived at a viable theoretical framework. The work has continued in Australia at the Department of Physics, Sydney University, where, with Professor Peter Robinson, Chris Rennie, and Evian Gordon, it later became the focus of an ARC Centre of Excellence under Peter’s auspices. We four shared the Eureka Prize for Interdisciplinary Research awarded by the Combined Royal Societies of Australia. Partly as a result of this work, it became possible to conceive of information transfer in the active cortex as a series of punctuated equilibria of signal exchange among cortical neurons – equilibria reached repeatedly, with sequential perturbations of the neural activity away from equilibrium thus forming a basis for cognitive sequences.
3. A model of visual perception
The third phase also began when I was in Melbourne, and arose from dissatisfaction with one aspect of the wave theories of brain function we were developing. It seemed to me these oversimplified the complex microscopic synaptic organisation of the cortex. A solution combining both aspects began when I was able to apply work undertaken with Clare Chapman on the origin of electrocortical pulse synchrony to produce a new theory of the regulation of embryonic cortical growth and the emergence of mature functional connections. This work reached somewhat different conclusions to those of the pioneers of the field; Hubel and Wiesel.
This third phase was then more specifically about perception, particularly visual perception. My understanding of the work of Hubel and Wiesel is that it focuses on the responses of single cells to particular inputs, such as a line in the visual field. What conclusions did your work reach that were different to these ideas?
The visual cortex is the best studied part of the cortex, so this provided the body of experimental data against which a theory could be developed. The classical theories of visual function from Hubel and Wiesel onward emphasised the tuning of inputs to the visual cortex from the eyes, as you say. Without contradicting that type of theory, our work stressed interaction among the neurons within the cortex – their contextual interactions. It turned out this could explain things that were apparently paradoxical in the earlier theories, and account for neuron interactions across the whole cortical surface. By this stage something like a coherent theory of cortical dynamics was beginning to emerge. Its overlap with certain aspects of thermodynamic theory was also becoming clearer, and linkage to developments elsewhere were increasingly apparent.
4. Relationship to the free energy principle of Friston and AI
Thus began the fourth phase. In about 2013 I made contact with Professor Karl Friston at the Wellcome Institute, UCL, Queen Square, London. Karl has advanced a major theory of all self-
organising systems called the Free Energy Principle that has gathered considerable attention in the past two decades. There is reason to believe that a strong general theory of brain function is now close. Our body of work contributes to this and parallels related developments in Artificial Intelligence (AI). Researchers in AI use simulations of large networks of highly simplified, somewhat unrealistic, neurones to replicate some of the cognitive functions of the human mind, and have enjoyed fabulous success so far. Work in Brain Dynamics on the other hand has favoured biological realism rather than emphasis on cognitive abstraction – but the two fields must fuse eventually. Paraphrasing a comment made about AI by one of its greatest founders, Geoffrey Hinton – If we can do that with a bad theory of neuronal function, what could we do with a good one? To return to my original motives for engaging in this work, the same might be said in regard to clinical psychiatry.
Could you elaborate a bit on the relationship to Friston’s theory?
Karl Friston has done something extraordinary. He has produced a conceptual unification of ideas ranging from the principle of least action, essential to basic physics, to the processes of learning in the brain as well as the operation of “deep learning” artificial networks used in AI. The EEG work, and the work I’ve been doing with Paul Bourke, although developed independently, has turned out to be a special case of Karl’s Free Energy Principle, and thus gains wider explanatory power. I mentioned above that the EEG theoretical work suggested connections with thermodynamics. That comparison is not incidental but crucial within the Free Energy Principle. Applying the Free Energy Principle with our understanding of the dynamics of brain waves, and other recent research on the embryology of the brain called the “Structural Model” we have now shown how systems of synaptic connections can emerge in paired subsystems, each ordered in roughly mirror symmetry to its partner. Each of a pair continues to interact with its partner during learning, to more closely approach exact mirror symmetry. This maximizes the mutual information in their exchanges, harmonizing them, so that each of the pair disrupts activity in the other to the least possible extent. The figure to be associated with this interview (see below) shows how these connections form. Harmonization of exchange between many such pairs, taking place along with exchanges with the outside world over the sensory and motor pathways, leads progressively to harmonization of the individual to the environment. The brain thus forms a “generative model”, minimizing the degree in which its ongoing function is disrupted by “surprise” – that is, the arrival of unanticipated sensations. So, I hope you can see why I suggested that a general model of brain function may be close.
I understand he (Friston) has related his work to some of the phenomena people with schizophrenia experience? Also could you speculate on what all of this might mean for clinical psychiatry. Will we eventually be able to apply this to diagnose conditions or monitor treatment?
Extensions of this work have led to analysis of EEG and brain scan data in psychiatric settings, aimed to increase precision and understanding of abnormal findings. This has been the goal all along. Evian Gordon, one of my colleagues while in Australia has taken this work onward by creating a database of recordings from patients with major mental illnesses and matched control subjects, with the object of being able to increase diagnostic precision. This has been achieved in some circumstances, but has also made plain how complex this task is. Artificial Intelligence is needed in the analysis of the data, and the size of the normative database must be very large indeed. But it can be done.
The formal Free Energy Principle arose first in the context of statistical analysis of brain scans in psychiatric research, and thus has been aimed at practical psychiatric outcomes since its inception. The generality of the principle enables linkage between theories, say, of the brain and neurons, to otherwise apparently disparate subjects – like psychiatric mental phenomenology – leading on to what has been called “computational psychiatry”. The object is to describe the abnormalities of mental illnesses as far as possible, as derangements of Brain Dynamics. It’s early days, but already there are advanced ways of analysing scans and EEG in psychiatric context. If these became standard parts of clinical practice they would revolutionize diagnostic formulation and we could expect that they would then guide the pathway of management. But sadly, they remain too complex and costly to be practicable for widespread application. One must accept that is generally the case with any radical advance in its early stages. We must wait and see.
Can you tell us more about what impact receiving support from the Foundation has had on your career or future research opportunities?
As I implied at the beginning of this interview, my career has been something of a Rake’s Progress. I have had a lot of luck and excellent support. This includes research fellowships for myself and my colleagues, and grant funding from Caltech, MRC (UK), ARC (Aust), NH&MRC (Aust), MHRC (UK), MRC and later HRC(NZ) and AMRF, including a very large grant through the Pratt Foundation of Australia when in Melbourne. However, this work has always been controversial and funding has been frequently declined. Refusal on grounds of caution is of course right and proper and to be expected – but when a project is as long-term as this has been, a funding drought can result in the loss of critical and valuable research workers and technical staff. It is on such occasions the Foundation has come to my aid several times, with relatively small, but absolutely essential funding relief. I will be forever grateful.
How would you describe the significance of support from Whau MentalHealth Research Foundation for researchers in mental health?
In my opinion the most important role of the Foundation is to seed early research by younger researchers (or recently inspired working clinicians) to get a climate of research-driven work established. Quite apart from its intrinsic value, the value for morale and recruitment within MH services cannot be over emphasised, and I wish there was more of it – much more. For the services themselves to be effective a critical mass of well-informed leaders must be sustained, and research training encourages rational initiative in a way like no other.
As I have said above, I want to point out a secondary role – the bridging of finance so that long-term projects with scientific depth can be sustained. The Foundation saved my work and my career. I hope it will save others.
Where can we find publications of your work?
My publications can be found at https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=FQUMolYAAAAJ
These publications acknowledge the Foundation in numerous instances. The most recent is
at https://academic.oup.com/cercor/article/34/10/bhae416/7848491
Left: Theoretical reconstruction of the disposition of cells and synapses in a surface-oblique view of a single cortical column. Large coloured neurons represent superficial patch cells. Black smaller cells are local short-axon excitatory cells in layers 2/3 and 5/6. White cells are those of layer 4. Small coloured spheres represent synapses projected from patch cells of the same colour.
Right: A set of seven adjacent cortical columns. It can be seen that each of these columnar organizations forms an approximate mirror of its surrounding neighbours. The pattern of connections corresponds to that in real neurons. The mirror arrangement enables
learning to evolve toward an optimum (see text)
Whau Mental Health Research Foundation is dedicated to facilitating research that advances mental health, transforms lives, and offers hope to individuals and families across Aotearoa. With nearly 60 years of experience and almost 200 research projects supported, we are shaping a healthier, more compassionate future for mental health care together. By engaging the brightest minds in mental health research, we drive progress that creates real and lasting impact.
