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 objective of this audit was to assess how effectively FaHCSIA and DEEWR have undertaken their roles and responsibilities for specialist disability employment services under the current (third) CSTDA.
The objective of the audit was to determine whether the controls and measures employed by FaCS and Centrelink to deliver Parenting Payment Single (PPS) payments were effective and efficient. To achieve this, the audit focused on four key areas. These were:
the quality of performance measures used by FaCS and Centrelink;
the effectiveness of FaCS' methodology for estimating the levels of risk of incorrect payment to PPS customers and the impact of these incorrect payments on the integrity of program outlays;
the correctness of Centrelink's processing of reassessments; and
the improvements to preventive controls such as training, guidance material, and the Quality On-Line system.
The objective of the performance audit was to review the progress in the delivery of contractual commitments for Industry Development (ID) for the five contracts awarded under the IT Outsourcing Initiative. In particular, the audit examined the effectiveness of the monitoring by DCITA of achievement against contractual commitments for ID; assessed the impact of changes to the IT outsourcing environment on the management and monitoring of ongoing ID obligations; and identified practices that have improved administrative arrangements.
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 objective of the audit was to assess whether the controls employed by the Department of Family and Community Services (FACS) and Centrelink to ensure the correctness of payments made under the Age Pension program were effective and efficient. The ANAO focused on:
business arrangements between FACS and Centrelink and the Business Assurance Framework;
whether the source of error was correctly attributed in customer records assessed by FACS and Centrelink as containing an error in the 2000-01 Age Pension Random Sample Survey:
the correctness of Centrelink's processing of reassessments, including Pensioner Entitlements Reviews, Customer Initiated Reassessments and automated reassessments: and
progress in implementing the recommendations of previous ANAO audits concerning the preventive quality controls that underpin correct payments.
In 1997-98, the ANAO audited the Child Support Agency (CSA), making 12 recommendations to improve its operational performance. A related report by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit supported the general findings of the ANAO audit and reinforced three ANAO recommendations in its own report. The audit examined client service in the CSA by following-up the CSA's implementation of the recommendations contained in these two previous reports and more broadly assessing whether the CSA had improved the management and delivery of its client service sine the previous ANAO audit.
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.