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 the audit was to assess whether the contractual arrangements that have been put in place for the delivery of the Moorebank Intermodal Terminal (MIT) will provide value for money and achieve the Australian Government’s policy objectives for the project.
The objective of this audit was to assess whether the OneSKY tender was conducted so as to provide value with public resources and achieve required timeframes for the effective replacement of the existing air traffic management platforms.
The objective of this audit was to assess whether appropriate steps were taken to protect the Commonwealth's interests and obtain value for money in respect to the $3.5 billion in Commonwealth funding committed to the NSW Government for the WestConnex project.
The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the administration of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation's (CSIRO's) Gift to the Science and Industry Endowment Fund.
The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness and equity of the award of funding under the Clean Technology Program in the context of the program objectives and the Commonwealth’s grants administration framework.
The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the administration of the Smart Grid, Smart City Program, including the establishment, implementation and ongoing management of the program.
Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR); Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA); Department of Finance and Deregulation (DoFD); Department of Infrastructure and Transport (DIT)
Please direct enquiries relating to reports through our contact page.
The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education’s (DIISRTE’s) administration of the Education Investment Fund grants program.
(DIISRTE was the department that had responsibility for the administration of the EIF grants program during the course of the audit. The recommendations and suggestions for improvement are, however, directed to the Department of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education because this department now has responsibility for the administration of the program).
The objective of this audit was to assess the efficiency1 and effectiveness of the establishment, implementation and administration of the bike paths component of the Local Jobs stream of the Jobs Fund. A particular focus was on the establishment of program objectives and the extent to which approved grants have demonstrably contributed to the cost-effective achievement of those objectives. The audit approach has been influenced by recent audits of grants administration which have emphasised the importance of transparent and accountable grant decision-making processes to the cost effective achievement of stated program objectives, and having regard for recent government decisions to enhance the framework applying to the administration of grants.
As an economic stimulus program, efficiency was assessed with particular attention to whether the application, assessment, decision-making and funding agreement processes were undertaken in a timely manner. This emphasis was consistent with the criterion adopted by the Government for the design of the stimulus packages established in response to the global financial crisis (see further at paragraph 4.20 of the audit report).
Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency; Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs; Department of Infrastructure and Transport; Department of Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government
The focus of this audit is the IEP stream of the Jobs Fund. Separate performance audits are underway that are examining the establishment, implementation and administration of the separate components of the Local Jobs stream of the Jobs Fund.
The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of Department of Infrastructure and Transport’s and the Attorney‐General’s Department’s management of the Aviation and Maritime Security Identification Card (ASIC and MSIC) schemes.
The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) is responsible for regulating aviation safety in Australia, the safety of Australian aircraft operating overseas as well as for regulating and administering Australia's airspace. In September 2008, the Senate Committee on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport presented a report on the Administration of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and related matters. That report made three recommendations, one of which requested an Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) audit of CASA's implementation and administration of the regulation of aircraft operators' Safety Management Systems (SMS'). ANAO agreed to this request with the objective of the audit being to assess CASA's implementation and administration of an SMS approach to regulating aircraft operators.
An SMS is a systematic approach to managing safety, which encompasses organisational structures, accountabilities, policies and procedures. Amendments to the Convention on International Civil Aviation (commonly referred to as the Chicago Convention) made in 2006 require that contracting states regulate the SMS' of aircraft operators. As a contracting state to the Chicago Convention, Australia is required to mandate that aircraft operators implement an SMS.
The objective of the audit was to assess how well agencies had implemented the CPGs and relevant FMA legislation when undertaking Direct Source procurement.
The audit examined whether selected agencies had developed a sound procurement framework; appropriately classified procurement methods when meeting external reporting requirements; implemented the CPGs and relevant legislation when Direct Sourcing; and established effective procurement monitoring and review arrangements.
The ANAO selected four FMA Act agencies to provide a cross-section of the 104 agencies that reported procurement activity in AusTender in 2008–09. The agencies selected for audit were:
the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA);
the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (Innovation);
the Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA); and
the Australian Crime Commission (ACC).
The ANAO examined a stratified random sample of 645 procurements valued at $10 000 and over, across the four agencies. More detailed testing was undertaken for the 285 Direct Source procurements in the sample.
The audit scope covered the management of the AusLink R2R Standard Program and the AusLink R2R Supplementary Program. The scope did not include management of the Nation Building Roads to Recovery Program, which has only recently commenced. The audit objectives were to:
assess the effectiveness of the management of the AusLink Roads to Recovery Program;
assess the delivery of the program and management of the funding, including the extent to which the program has provided additional (rather than substitute) funding for land transport infrastructure; and
identify opportunities for improvements to the management of the program.
Recent performance audit priority for the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government portfolio has been directed at the administration of funding for land transport. Accordingly, this audit is one of a series ANAO is undertaking of land transport funding programs. Four audits have already been completed, namely:
ANAO Audit Report No. 31 2005–06, Roads to Recovery;
ANAO Audit Report No. 45 2006–07, The National Black Spot Program;
ANAO Audit Report No. 22 2007–08, Administration of Grants to the Australian Rail Track Corporation; and
ANAO Audit Report No. 29 2008–09, Delivery of Projects on the AusLink National Network.
The objective of the audit was to assess how effectively Geoscience Australia provides geoscientific and geospatial information and services to assist the Australian Government and key stakeholders. Particular emphasis was given to:
the collection and management of geoscientific and geospatial data and information, including accessibility;
the provision of products and services; and
The ANAO examined a number of datasets and product and service projects to assess Geoscience Australia's performance in providing geoscientific and geospatial information and services.
The objective of the follow-up audit was to assess the extent to which Airservices Australia, and where relevant, the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government (DITRDLG), have implemented the four ANAO recommendations contained in the previous audit report.
As an element of the arrangements implemented to support the role of the ANAO in reviewing campaigns' compliance with the Guidelines announced on 2 July 2008, the ANAO advised the chair of the JCPAA that the ANAO will provide regular summary reports to Parliament. Section 25 of the Auditor-General's Act 1997 provides for the tabling of such reports.
determine the extent to which government entities complied with the requirement to publish and maintain documents online that were presented to the Parliament;
evaluate selected government entities' policies and practices regarding online publishing; and
assess AGIMO's policy and guidance in support of online publishing.
To address this objective the audit was conducted in three parts. Firstly, we reviewed a sample of papers tabled between 2000 and 2008 in order to assess their availability online. Next, we examined the online publishing practices of five government entities. These were the: Australian Federal Police (AFP); Department of the House of Representatives (DHR); Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government (Infrastructure); Department of the Treasury (Treasury); and National Archives of Australia (NAA). Finally, we reviewed AGIMO's role in supporting government entities in their online publishing practices.
The objective of this performance audit of construction projects on the AusLink National Network was to assess the effectiveness of the administration by DITRDLG in working with the States to deliver the outcomes expected by the Government and the broader community. To inform the audit assessment, the methodology included examination of both Australian Government and State Government records as well as site inspections in relation to 21 projects being delivered in three States (New South Wales (NSW), Queensland and Tasmania). DITRDLG and the respective State road transport authorities were consulted in the selection of projects to be examined in detail.
The objective of this audit was to assess whether the Scheme is being administered effectively by the department. The ANAO focussed on Program Year 1 of the Scheme, 2005–06, and examined DIISR's arrangements for:
assessing the eligibility of entities to receive grants;
assessing entities' claims for eligible expenditure;
adhering to the funding limits for the Scheme when calculating and paying claims, and managing any debts that arise;
and evaluating and reporting on whether the statutory objective of the Scheme is being met.
The audit did not examine the other components of the 2005–2015 industry assistance package; nor did it examine any of the programs delivered under the previous assistance package (2000–2005).
The objective of the audit was to assess whether selected regulatory agencies have cost recovery procedures and practices which comply with the Government's guidelines. To address this objective, the audit assessed the management of cost recovery against the following criteria:
regulatory agencies have clear and consistent cost recovery procedures to identify their activities and costs, and set fees and levies;
regulatory agencies have effectively implemented their cost recovery procedures;
regulatory agencies regularly monitor and review their cost recovery activities; and
regulatory agencies regularly report on their cost recovery.
The objective of this performance audit was to assess the effectiveness of the administration of grants made to the ARTC. The audit involved an examination of DOTARS' administration of the grant funding approved for, and paid to, the ARTC (in respect of both the grants paid for projects approved under legislation and the three special grants). It also involved consideration of the role of Finance and the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C) in advising on the special grant funding and (in respect of Finance) the payment and reporting arrangements for the grants. The audit was conducted under Section 18 of the Auditor-General Act 1997.
The current audit has focussed on Stage 2 of the Scheme. Its objective was to assess whether ACIS is being administered effectively by DIISR and, as relevant, by Customs. In particular, the audit examined the department's arrangements for:
assessing the eligibility of participants to receive duty credits;
calculating duty credits accurately and adhering to the funding limits for the Scheme;
checking the integrity of participants' claims, which are self-assessed;
accounting for the duty credits transferred to and used at Customs; and
measuring and reporting on the performance of ACIS.
The audit also followed up on whether the ANAO's previous recommendations have been addressed.
The objective of this performance audit was to assess the administration of the National Black Spot Programme. It was undertaken in a manner similar to the audit of the Roads to Recovery Programme. Specifically, the audit approach involved:
examination of DOTARS records and discussions with officers in DOTARS and four of the State road transport authorities responsible for administering the Programme;
analysis of project monitoring, reporting and payment arrangements; and
selecting a sample of 45 LGA areas across four States so that ANAO could examine projects delivered with Commonwealth funding.
The objective of the audit was to assess the implementation and administration of the movement limit and the Slot Management Scheme at Sydney Airport.
The scope of the audit included the development and administration of the SADM Act. The scope also included the development and administration of the relevant legislative instruments and determinations, particularly those which put in place the monitoring and compliance frameworks that support the legislation.
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
The audit objective was to examine progress in the development of an overarching approach and guidance for the management of the Commonwealth's intellectual property (Recommendation No. 2 of Audit Report No. 25 of 2003–04).
assess, in a selection of FMA Act and CAC Act agencies, how well the revised Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines had been implemented; and
identify any better practice or common problem areas to assist other agencies in their future procurement activities.
The audit focused on procurement requirements that had changed as a result of the revised CPGs, rather than being a more general audit of compliance with all procurement requirements. The audit was conducted in the following entities:
Australian Federal Police;
Bureau of Meteorology;
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO);
On 9 May 2006, the Auditor-General advised the then Minister for Transport and Regional Services that he would undertake a performance audit and that the specific audit objectives and approach would be established once officers of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) had the opportunity to undertake preliminary enquiries with senior staff in Airservices Australia and the Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS). On 31 May 2006, the Auditor-General designated a performance audit under Section 18 of the Auditor-General Act 1997 (Auditor-General Act). The objectives of the performance audit were to: examine the development and administration by Airservices Australia of its contracts with the Solomon Islands Government for upper airspace management; assess the regularity of payments made under the contracts and steps taken by Airservices Australia in respect of any irregularities; and make recommendations for any improvements in the processes employed by Airservices Australia in developing and administering these and similar contractual arrangements.
The audit scope covered development of the R2R Program, management of the initial R2R Program and changes made to the Program funding conditions and administrative guidance for Auslink Roads to Recovery. The scope did not include management of Auslink Roads to Recovery. The audit objectives were to: · assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the management of the initial R2R Program; and · identify any opportunities for improvements to management of the Program.