The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the NCA's management of its asset portfolio. This included examining its asset management systems and the management of selected contracts that the NCA has in place to maintain specific assets.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether FaCSIA administers grants effectively, according to better practice guidelines, and consistently across geographic areas and the range of programmes included in the scope of the audit. The scope of the audit included grants administered by FaCSIA between 1 July 2002 and 30 June 2005, relating to programmes falling within four of the five groups of programmes providing funding for families and communities namely: Community Support; Family Assistance; Childcare Support; and Youth and Student Support. In total, these groups involved total expenditure of some $533 million in 2004–05.

The audit objective was to form an opinion on the effectiveness of the NHMRC's grant administration. To meet this objective the NHMRC was assessed against four criteria:

• the NHMRC's governance arrangements provide appropriate accountability that it is meeting its objectives and obligations to Government (Chapter 2);
• there are strategic and systematic processes for developing and implementing grant programs (Chapter 3);
• the NHMRC manages grants post-award effectively, and complies with legislative requirements and program directives (Chapters 4 and 5); and
• the NHMRC monitors and evaluates its business to demonstrate that outcomes are being met (Chapter 6).

The objective of this audit was to examine the effectiveness of Medicare Australia's administration of the PBS. In assessing the objective, the audit considered three key areas:

• Medicare Australia's relationship with the PBS policy agency (DoHA) and service delivery policy agency (Department of Human Services (DHS));
• the management arrangements and processes underpinning Medicare Australia's delivery of the PBS (including the means by which Medicare Australia gains assurance over the integrity of the PBS); and
• how Medicare Australia undertakes its three main responsibilities relating to the delivery of the PBS, namely: approving pharmacies; approving authority prescriptions; and processing PBS claims.

The audit was conducted at the: Australian Federal Police (AFP) and the Australian Protective Service (PS); Australian Sports Commission (ASC); Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts (DoCITA); Department of Family and Community Services (FaCS); and Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). The objectives of the audit were to: determine whether entities had established appropriate arrangements in relation to the management of annual leave For the purposes of this audit the ANAO has used the term ‘annual leave'. However entities refer to this entitlement using other terminology such as recreation leave, planned leave or personal leave. and had effective internal controls over leave processing; assess whether leave had been managed in accordance with the requirements of the respective entity's certified agreement; and identify sound and better practices in the management and processing of leave.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Tax Practitioners Board's implementation and administration of the regulatory arrangements for tax practitioners under the Tax Agent Services Act 2009.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Taxation Office’s (ATO’s) complaints and other feedback management systems in supporting service delivery.

The overall objective of the audit was to assess CrimTrac's progress in achieving the key deliverables it was established to provide, given that the agency had been in operation for some three years. The Australian Government provided $50 million for the implementation of CrimTrac, with an expectation that significant progress would be made within the first three years. The audit further examined whether CrimTrac had progressed the key deliverables efficiently and effectively, and whether the data either held by CrimTrac, or accessed through CrimTrac, for matching purposes is secure.

On 3 February 2010, Senator Christine Milne wrote to the Auditor General raising concerns about DEWHA's administration of the Green Loans program and requesting a performance audit of the program. Issues raised included: uncapped assessor numbers; problems with the delivery of the program; the quality of assessor training and assessments provided to households; the lack of an audit facility within the program; and equitable access to work under the program.

In light of Senator Milne's request and other concerns in relation to the administration of the program, the Auditor-General agreed on 25 February 2010 to conduct a performance audit of the program. The objective of the audit was to examine key aspects of the establishment and administration of the Green Loans program by DEWHA and the program's transition to DCCEE. Particular emphasis was given to the program's three main elements:

• training, registration and contracting of assessors;
• scheduling, conduct, and reporting of home sustainability assessments, and the associated payments to assessors; and
• provision of green loans to householders, and the associated payments to participating financial institutions.

The audit also examined the extent to which steps had been taken by DEWHA and DCCEE to assess whether the Green Loans program was achieving its objectives.

The objective of the audit was to assess the application of the outcomes and outputs framework in Australian Government agencies. The audit included a review of:

• the outcomes and outputs of agencies and the integration of the outcomes and outputs framework into agencies' operations;
• the extent to which agencies' performance indicators incorporated better practice characteristics to enable agencies to meet their performance reporting obligations;
• agencies' processes for capturing, monitoring and reporting financial and performance information and the extent to which outcomes and outputs information was used in agency decision-making; and
• the extent that agencies met their external reporting and accountability obligations.

The audit consisted of a survey of 44 agencies subject to the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (FMA Act) undertaken in October 2005 and detailed audit testing in three of those agencies. The purpose of the survey was to provide cross-agency data in relation to agencies' implementation of the framework during the period 2002–03 to 2005–06. The ANAO received responses from all 44 agencies, although not all agencies responded to all questions. The ANAO did not audit the information provided by survey participants and the reported results are based on agencies' responses to the survey.

The agencies at which detailed audit testing was undertaken were:

• Department of Education Science and Training;
• the then Department of the Environment and Heritage; and
• IP Australia.