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 audit reviewed Commonwealth National Parks involving total assets of $105 million with net operating costs of $41.77 million. Nineteen Commonwealth reserves are declared comprising six terrestrial national parks, one botanic garden and twelve marine parks and reserves totalling some 23 million hectares across Australia, its external territories and Commonwealth marine areas. The objective of the audit was to examine and report on the adequacy of the planning, management and reporting systems which support the Director of National Parks in the achievement of required functions under relevant legislation and agreed outputs and outcomes.
The audit reviewed the policy advising functions of the Departments of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business, and Family and Community Services. The objective of the audit was to determine whether departmental quality management systems for policy advising were appropriate and the advice provided met expected standards for policy outputs.
The audit reviewed the National Aboriginal Health Strategy (NAHS) component of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission's (ATSIC) Community Housing Infrastructure Program (CHIP). A major NAHS objective is to improve environmental health in indigenous communities through the construction and housing and the provision of water, sewerage and related systems. The objective of the performance audit was to form an opinion on ATSIC's management of the National Aboriginal Health Strategy program in providing housing and related infrastructure to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, and to identify areas where program administration could be improved.
The objective of the preliminary study was to form a view regarding the quality of, and controls over, the Budget estimates and to inform the decision whether to proceed to a full performance audit at this time. On the basis of the quantitative and qualitative analysis of the budget process undertaken during the study, the ANAO concluded that there are no apparent systemic problems in the cash-based estimating processes in the agencies reviewed that would, in themselves, lead to material statistical inaccuracies in the Budget's projected outcomes. The ANAO decided not to proceed with a full performance audit at this time.
The purpose of the audit was to assess whether management of parliamentary workflow by the agencies reviewed was efficient and effective and to identify elements of good practice. In assessing agency effectiveness and efficiency, the audit focussed on issues of client service such as timeliness, quality and cost. It considered also the governance framework and accountability arrangements relevant to parliamentary workflow, as well as more operational considerations including the use of information technology, development of relevant management information and suitable benchmarking processes.
The audit reviewed the use and operation of performance information in service level agreements between Centrelink and three agencies; the Department of Social Security, the Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs and the Department of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business. The objective of the audit was to establish whether the performance assessment framework specified in the agreements enabled the adequate assessment of achievements under purchaser/provider arrangements entered into by DSS, DEETYA and Centrelink.
The audit evaluated the effectiveness of the accountability and oversight arrangements for statutory bodies within the former Primary Industries and Energy portfolio (most of which are now part of the Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry portfolio). The audit focused on accountability of the statutory bodies to the Minister and through the Minister to Parliament; it did not directly address accountability to industry stakeholders and levy papers.
The audit covered major program elements within the Department of Primary Industries and Energy and Environment Australia that are managed:
directly by DPIE or Environment Australia;
through the One-Stop-Shop project assessment process administered by the States/Territories; or
by non-government organisations.
The purpose of the audit was to examine and benchmark the administrative processes established for these programs. The primary focus of the audit was to draw on the best elements of past practice (particularly in relation to programs involving the One-Stop-Shop) and highlight any shortcomings so that the risks to program effectiveness and accountability could be addressed in the implementation of the Natural Heritage Trust.
The objective of Phase Two of the audit was to examine the efficiency and effectiveness of operations of ATSIC Central, State and Regional Offices in relation to the administration of the Community Development Employment Projects Scheme. The ANAO established key criteria to assess progress against the implementation of the Phase One recommendations and further assess the efficiency and effectiveness of CDEP administration. The main areas examined were: planning, including reports of progress against plans and the development and use of performance information; monitoring, including client feedback and the review process at the Regional Office level; the implementation and effectiveness of management information systems in relation to CDEP; and the development and implementation of quality assuranced processes at State/Regional level.
The purpose of this audit was to assess the Department of Social Security's approach to customer service against a recognised good practice methodology, and to identify opportunities for DSS to improve the quality of its customer service, its administrative effectiveness and its overall performance. The ANAO's intention was to identify opportunities to improve customer focus, particularly for those aspects of DSS's administration impacting on customer service. The audit criteria included: customer service environment; human resource management practices; communication with customers; customer-friendly approaches; and systematic approaches to continuous improvement.