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 objective was to assess the effectiveness of monitoring arrangements (by the Accreditation Agency) and compliance activities (by DoHA) put in place to achieve residential aged care homes’ compliance with the Accreditation Standards and their other, related, responsibilities under the Act and its associated instruments.
The ANAO’s assessment considered whether:
— a sector-wide compliance strategy was in place and aligned with effective monitoring and compliance activities at the operational level; — there was a clear articulation of the separat but complementary roles and responsibilities of DoHA and the Accreditation Agency; and — performance information gathered by both agencies to support public reporting and business improvements was useful and enabled comparison of performance over time.
The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of DIAC’s management of the student visa program. Three key areas were examined in the audit: the processing of student visa applications; ensuring compliance with student visa conditions; and cooperation between DIAC and DEEWR.
The Objective of the audit was to assess the administrative effectiveness of GPET's management of the general practice training programs, AGPT and PGPPP, the latter being a responsibility that GPET assumed in 2010.
The objective of the audit was to assess FSANZ's administration of its food standard functions, as specified in the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act, 1991 (last amended 2007). Particular emphasis was given to whether:
FSANZ's performance management and reporting provided effective support and ensures accountability;
FSANZ effectively administered its food standard development and variation function, including its stakeholder management; and
FSANZ effectively monitored the implementation of its standards and coordinates relevant jurisdictions to address market failures.
The objective of the audit was to assess DoHA's effectiveness:
in undertaking PIP program planning, program monitoring and review; and
with Medicare Australia, in ensuring PIP program delivery to general practices and their medical practitioners.
In undertaking the audit, the ANAO considered the 12 incentives that comprised the PIP up to August 2009. The three most recently introduced incentives at the time of audit fieldwork, namely, Domestic Violence, GP Aged Care Access and eHealth incentives, were examined in greater detail and formed case studies to support audit analysis. The ANAO also sought views on the program administration from industry, including from general practices directly through an online survey.
With regard to accreditation of general practice, the audit scope did not include an assessment of the Standards nor the work of the bodies that undertake accreditation of general practices. The ANAO's focus on general practice accreditation related to DoHA's management of program entry criteria.
The objective of the audit was to assess the management practices undertaken by APS agencies to achieve value for money and transparency in dealing with contracts for non-APS workers. The focus of the audit was on circumstances where agencies had a significant reliance on a non-APS workforce to assist in achieving their core functions. Regular reporting by agencies of expenditure on non-APS workers was outside the scope of this audit.
The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of DIAC's administration of the health requirement of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act). To achieve this objective, the ANAO examined whether DIAC was setting and implementing the health requirement in accordance with the Act, the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations), and DIAC's own guidelines.
The audit objective was to assess whether the early stages of DIAC's preparations for the re-tendering of the detention and health services contracts were consistent with sound practice. The audit focused on governance arrangements, in particular the recordkeeping arrangements, roles and responsibilities of personnel, expert advisors and the probity auditor—matters raised in the previous audit report. The audit did not examine the RFT, which is not due to be issued until April 2007.
The objective of this audit was to determine whether Health adequately assessed the State and Territory Governments' compliance with their obligations under the terms of the AHCAs. In conducting the audit, ANAO addressed the following criteria:
if Health assessed whether the States and Territories were adhering to the AHCAs clause 6 principles that all eligible persons had equitable access to free public health and emergency services on the basis of clinical need within an appropriate period;
if Health assessed whether the States and Territories were increasing their own source funding at the rate specified in the AHCAs; and
if Health assessed whether the States and Territories were meeting the performance reporting requirements set out in the AHCAs.
The objective of the audit was to assess whether the WHM programme is administered effectively and in accordance with relevant laws and policies. In particular, the ANAO focused on four key areas: the implementation of eWHM visa; authority for the WHM programme; decision-making for WHM visas; and programme performance information. A feature of the audit was the computer-aided scrutiny of over 300 000 visa application records to test DIMA's decision-making processes.