Our staff add value to public sector effectiveness and the independent assurance of public sector administration and accountability, applying our professional and technical leadership to have a real impact on real issues.
The objectives of the audit was to examine the effectiveness and efficiency of DIMIA's decision-making processes and management systems for delivering the parent and partner aspects of the family stream of the Migration Program.
The family stream of Australia's Migration Program enables the reunion of immediate family members of Australian citizens, permanent residents or eligible New Zealand citizens. It consists of four main categories;
This was a follow-up of Audit Report No. 29 2000-01, Review of Veterans' Appeals Against Disability Compensation Entitlement Decisions. That audit examined the Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA's) and the Veterans' Review Board's (VRB's) management of the review of decisions for disability compensation. The objective of this audit was to assess the extent to which DVA and the VRB had implemented the four recommendations of Report No.29 2000-01, taking into account any changed circumstances, or new administrative issues, affecting implementation of these recommendations.
The objective of the audit was to report to Parliament on the progress Defence has made since June 2001 in implementing appropriate strategies for recruiting, developing and retaining skilled IT personnel. The audit focused on management of specialist information system skills and did not examine skills needed by users of information systems, although the latter is of obvious importance for overall performance. In June 2001, the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit (JCPAA), after reviewing the ANAO's Audit Report No. 11 Knowledge System Equipment Acquisition Projects in Defence, commented that its major concern about Defence's ability to develop a knowledge edge with adequate coherence, centred on Defence's ability to recruit, develop and retain skilled individuals needed in all parts of the DIE. The JCPAA recommended that the ANAO conduct an audit of Defence's strategies for recruiting, developing and retaining skilled IT personnel.
Defence has long provided housing assistance for members of the Australian Defence Force (ADF) and their families. In 1988, this function passed to the Defence Housing Authority (DHA), which was established to provide suitable housing to meet Defence's operational needs. In 2000, Defence and DHA signed a Services Agreement valued at $3.5 billion over 10 years. The objective of the audit was to assess whether Defence's management of its housing and relocation services provided for ADF members meets specified requirements; and to make practical recommendations for more efficient, effective and economical use of public resources provided for this purpose.
In 2000, the ANAO tabled Audit Report No 49 1999-2000, Indigenous Land Corporation operations and performance. The 2000 audit made nine recommendations for improvement. This follow-up audit examined the Indigenous Land Corporation's implementation of the recommendations of the 2000 audit.
The audit examined the efficiency and effectiveness of the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations' implementation and subsequent management of the Indigenous Employment Policy. The audit sought to determine whether, in relation to the Indigenous Employment Policy, the department had:
developed appropriate planning processes and performance measures;
monitored and reported performance results;
implemented appropriate evaluation and review mechanisms;
conducted effective marketing and promotion; and
identified enhancements and addressed performance issues.
Australian Industry Involvement Program. Department of Defence The audit examined the management by Defence of its Australian Industry Involvement (AII) Program. AII is the major program through which Defence gives effect to government policy on Australian industry. The objective of the audit was to assess the extent to which the AII Program has achieved its two policy objectives, which are to :
develop and sustain strategically important capabilities in Australian industry to support Australian Defence Force operations and Defence capability development; and
maximise Australian industry involvement in Defence's procurement of goods and services, consistent with the government procurement policy objective of achieving best value for money to the Commonwealth.
The Navy Operational Readiness audit examined the systems that Navy uses to manage readiness and concludes coverage of Navy: readiness organisation and management structures (as well as the interface between these systems and Defence enabling operations); management and maintenance of operational readiness (covering personnel, collective training and other components of operational readiness); and readiness performance information processes. The objective of the audit was to provide assurance to Parliament concerning the progress that Navy has made in the development of operational readiness management and evaluation systems and to identify areas for improvement in these systems.
This audit followed up the ANAO's 2000 performance audit report on retention of military personnel (Audit Report No.35 1999-2000 Retention of Military Personnel), which focused on examining whether ADF personnel management practices to retain personnel were commensurate with the cost of recruiting and training new personnel, or whether more cost- effective steps could be taken to reduce the separation rates of desirable personnel. The objective of the follow-up audit was to assess Defence's implementation of recommendations made in the original audit report and their effectiveness in helping Defence control the flow of trained personnel from the Services.
The Service Chiefs of Navy, Army and Air Force are accountable to the Chief of the Defence Force for the way that equipment is used by their Service. They are also accountable for the safety, fitness for service and environmental compliance of the equipment. The audit report deals with the way that the Service Chiefs are assured of the safety and suitability for service of the Australian Defence Force's (ADF's) ordnance systems. Ordnance systems include munitions such as missiles, shells and mines, and the auxiliary material necessary to aim, launch and guide munitions.
The audit assessed the operations of the four Northern Territory Land Councils which provide a range of services to Aboriginal people under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976. The audit also assessed the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commision's (ATSIC) administration of the Aboriginals Benefit Account, which provides funding to the Land Councils under the same Act. The objectives of the audit were to assess:
whether the governance arrangements used by ATSIC and the Land Councils are appropriate;
whether ATSIC meets its legislative requirements concerning the Aboriginals Benefit Account in an effective and efficient way; and
whether the Land Councils are effective and efficient in managing their recourses to meet the objectives of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976.
The audit reviewed the extent to which the Department of Health and Ageing (Health) had implemented the recommendations of Audit Report No. 13 of 1998-1999, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Program, taking account of any changed circumstances or new administrative issues identified as impacting the implementation of these recommendations.
The ANAO reviewed arrangements for the development of the department's fraud policy, fraud risk assessment and fraud control plan within the core functional areas of the department that are responsible for these activities. The audit also examined the operational procedures and guidelines that were in place to implement the departments' fraud policy. The objective of the audit was to assess whether DVA has implemented appropriate fraud control arrangements in line with the Fraud Control Policy of the Commonwealth and whether these arrangements operate effectively in practice.
HMAS Cerberus is a Navy base situated south-east of Melbourne, Victoria. As a major Navy training establishment, it conducts initial recruit training, and specialist category training in areas such as communications and engineering. The Australian Defence Force (ADF) Schools of Catering and Physical Training are situated there, as is a major health centre for operational and training needs. The health centre and other facilities at HMAS Cerberus were re-developed several years ago. In August 2001, the then Minister for Defence announced that, in response to continuing concern over facilities management at HMAS Cerberus, he had asked the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) to conduct an independent investigation. The ANAO agreed to review these matters. The objective of the audit was to examine facilities management issues at HMAS Cerberus with a view to clarifying those of concern and ensuring that lessons would be learned from them to assist Defence facilities management generally.
The audit examined the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission's (ATSIC's) grant management practices. The audit sought to determine if ATSIC provides fair and equal access to funding, what the risks to the grants program are, if decision-makers receive the key information they need to make informed funding decisions, and if ATSIC staff complying with grants procedures. The ANAO did not examine the appropriateness of the funding decisions made by regional councils.
The purpose of the audit was to examine the environmental management mechanisms in place across some of the major Commonwealth land management and oversighting entities. In particular, the audit examined Commonwealth environmental management practices to identify current strengths and weaknesses, and provide a framework and direction for the adoption of better practice and continuous improvement. The audit has not been designed to judge past Commonwealth performance using current environmental standards and practices. Rather, the audit focused on encouraging the development of better practice by illustrating the implications and lessons learned from past and present practices.
Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts; Department of Defence; Department of Transport and Regional Development; Department of Administrative Services; Department of Environment, Sport and Territories
The objective of the audit was to assess the performance of the Department's management of the project in the light of accepted project management techniques, including risk management. An important part of the audit was to derive lessons to be learnt and recommendations that could be applied to the remainder of the project and to other large Defence projects.
The Department of Defence is responsible for administering the Defence export facilitation program which is aimed at promoting Australian defence-relevant exports. The Department administers the program in cooperation with AUSTRADE. Defence is also responsible for administering export controls on defence and related goods and dual-use goods. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade is responsible for controls on chemical and biological weapons precursors. The Department of Primary Industries and Energy is responsible for controls on nuclear-specific technology and source/fissionable material. The Australian Customs Service implements barrier controls at ports and airports. In September 1993 the then Minister for Trade referred to the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade (JSCFADT) an inquiry into the implications of Australian defence exports. The JSCFADT's Report on the Implications of Australian Defence Exports (September 1994) recommended, inter alia, that the Auditor-General conduct a performance audit of the operations of the guidelines concerning the controls on the export of defence and related goods, the export control process, and all export facilitation activities. The Auditor-General agreed to undertake an audit, which commenced in May 1995 as a preliminary study and was designated as a performance audit on 30 August 1995.
The primary objectives of the ANAO preliminary study were to gain an understanding of the concepts and associated processes used in the management of preparedness. This included the methodology for translating the Government's strategic guidance into military capability; the processes by which the Services translate preparedness directives into operational requirements; and how Headquarters ADF (HQADF) and the three Service Offices assure themselves that units can satisfy the requirements of preparedness directives.
Within the scope of this preliminary study the ANAO did not attempt to form a conclusion regarding the current ability of the ADF to satisfy the roles set by Government in strategic guidance; that is, its actual state of preparedness. It was important first to obtain a good understanding of the concepts and associated methodology used by Defence in managing preparedness.
The objectives of this audit were to assess planning, management, conduct and staffing of internal audit in the Department of Defence, with a view to providing assurance as to the standard of its work. Opportunities were taken to identify specific policies and practices that would improve the efficiency and effectiveness of MAB audit. Fieldwork for the ANAO audit was performed between May and August 1995.
whether the planning and implementation of the DSS Teleservice project has been adequate to ensure successful operations;
the efficiency and administrative effectiveness of Teleservice Centre management practices;
whether Teleservice Centres have been successful in delivering the anticipated improvements to client service; and
what opportunities might be available for improvement in the operation of the Centres.
An important aim of the audit was to ascertain with DSS what value could be added by identifying more administratively effective and efficient means of managing and operating their Teleservice Centre network. In addition, the ANAO considered that the experience gained and lessons learned from the introduction of Teleservice operations by DSS could improve the planning and implementation of major technology-based operational and client service initiatives in the future, both in DSS and the Australian Public Service (APS) generally.
In carrying out the audit, the ANAO undertook an extensive examination of the Teleservice environment including:
examining the experience and practices of private sector call centre operations;
reviewing the DSS Teleservice network, involving detailed discussions with departmental officers, examining files and data and observing Teleservice Centre operations; as well as
consulting a range of community groups and government agencies familiar with DSS's Teleservice Centre services.
Audit Report No.5 1993-94, Explosive Ordnance, Department of Defence, was tabled in the Parliament in September 1993. The report was structured in three parts. The first part covered explosive ordnance (EO) issues common to all three Services; the second part focused on the management of explosive ordnance by the Navy; and the third part was a follow-up of the 1987 audit report on Air Force explosive ordnance. The report made 39 recommendations. Defence agreed to implement most of them.
It was considered timely to undertake a follow-up audit into key issues of the recommendations contained in the audit report, given the elapsed time since the report was tabled and the issues associated with public safety.
The purpose of the audit was to ascertain the extent to which financial management arrangements helped the department to achieve its objectives and the way that these could be improved in the light of the department's management reforms generally.
Elements of the Financial Management Improvement Program, and the accrual reporting framework, were at an evolutionary stage in the department. The audit therefore focused on quite fundamental financial management issues, including:
the ability of financial management systems to provide information that was timely, accurate and relevant to the needs of management and other users; and
the extent of coordination and control of financial management across departmental programs and between National and State Offices.