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 examine the effectiveness of the design and implementation of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet’s (PM&C’s) evaluation framework for the Indigenous Advancement Strategy (IAS), in achieving its purpose to ensure that evaluation is high quality, ethical, inclusive and focused on improving outcomes for Indigenous Australians.
The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of arrangements for monitoring, evaluating and reporting progress towards Closing the Gap in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander disadvantage.
The objective of the audit was to continue to examine the progress of the implementation of the annual performance statements requirements under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act) and thePublic Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule 2014(PGPA Rule) by selected entities.
The objective of the audit was to assess the framework being put in place to manage and account for aid funds provided under the AIPRD. In particular, the audit addressed: structures for oversighting the development and delivery of the AIPRD; planning and risk management (including those relating to fraud and corruption); financial management; and arrangements for ongoing monitoring and reporting. The audit focussed on the arrangements being established to monitor, evaluate and report on AIPRD implementation, rather than the management of activities and outcomes achieved. This reflects the fact that the long lead times associated with establishing such a large programme of assistance had meant that only limited activities were underway at the time of audit fieldwork. The ANAO anticipates undertaking an audit in the future of the management of activities and outcomes achieved, when more funds have been expended. It was not the purpose of this audit to examine Australia's immediate emergency and humanitarian response to the tsunami crisis.
The objective of the audit was to assess whether FaCSIA administers grants effectively, according to better practice guidelines, and consistently across geographic areas and the range of programmes included in the scope of the audit. The scope of the audit included grants administered by FaCSIA between 1 July 2002 and 30 June 2005, relating to programmes falling within four of the five groups of programmes providing funding for families and communities namely: Community Support; Family Assistance; Childcare Support; and Youth and Student Support. In total, these groups involved total expenditure of some $533 million in 2004–05.
The objective of this follow-up audit was to review FaCSIA's progress in implementing the recommendations of Audit Report No.17 1999–2000. The focus was whether FaCSIA had maintained or improved its oversight, coordination and administration of the CSHA for both the 1999 CSHA and the 2003 CSHA, in line with the recommendations and findings identified in the previous ANAO audit.
The overall objective of the audit was to assess whether the RSS Programme is effective and efficient in providing assurance on the levels of payment error and the resultant risks to the integrity of Australian Government outlays for payments administered by Centrelink. Specifically, the audit assessed whether: the RSS Programme meets the objectives outlined for it in the Portfolio Budget Statements under which funding was provided; there is an adequate methodology underpinning the RSS reviews; the RSS reviews are conducted effectively and efficiently, and adequate quality assurance mechanisms exist to assure the results obtained from the RSS reviews; and reporting by the agencies of the results of the RSS Programme is adequate and takes into consideration the issues identified in Audit Report No. 44 2002–03 Review of the Parenting Payment Single Program, and Audit Report No. 17 2002–03 Age Pension Entitlements.
The objective of the audit was to assess whether selected Australian Government entities were effectively supporting their business requirements through planning for, and management of, the acquisition, disposal and use of their IPE assets. The audit reviewed each entity's policies and practices against a series of audit criteria across the following components of asset management: control environment; planning; acquisitions; operations; and disposals.
The objective of this performance audit was to assess whether DIMIA's information systems and business processes are effective in supporting APP to meet its border security and streamlined clearance objectives. In particular, the audit focused on the following: Mandatory APP - Stage 1 (MAPP1) project management; MAPP1 IT development and system performance; APP performance reporting; contract management; and financial management.
The objective of this audit was to assess DIMIA's management of the tender, evaluation and contract negotiation processes for the Detention Services Contract. Specifically, the audit considered DIMIA's processes for determining value for money based on the department's: evaluation of the request for tender, including the announcement of the preferred tenderer; negotiations with the successful and unsuccessful tenderers; and management of liability, indemnity and insurance.
Parliamentary Committees, particularly Senate Estimates Committees, have for many years taken an interest in the use of consultants by Australian government agencies. In this context, and having regard to the extent of expenditure by FMA Act agencies on consultants, the objective of this audit was to assess the accuracy and completeness of Australian government agencies' reporting of expenditure on consultants.
This audit is a part of the ANAO's protective security audit coverage. The objective of this audit was to determine whether agencies audited had developed and implemented sound IT security management principles and practices supported by an IT security control framework, in accordance with Australian Government policies and guidelines. The audit at each agency examined the framework for the effective management and control of IT security, including the management of IT operational security controls and, where applicable, was based on the Australian Government protective security and information and communications technology (ICT) security guidelines that were current at that time.
The objective of the audit was to assess and report on the progress being made by agencies subject to the Financial Management & Accountability Act 1997 and entities subject to the Commonwealth Authorities & Companies Act 1997: in realising value for money from the procurement process, with a specific focus on buildings, services and products using whole of life cycle assessments; and in the consideration and management of environmental impacts in specifications and contracts. The emphasis of the audit was on green office procurement and sustainable business practices and the value for money within this context. As such, the audit report provides a status report on the implementation of ESD within the office environment of the Australian Government. The audit used a survey approach in conjunction with selected audit investigations to obtain information across 71 agencies and entities selected on the basis of materiality in procurement and coverage across large, medium and small organisations. The agencies selected represented approximately 35 per cent of all government bodies and over 95 per cent of all procurement spending noted on the Department of Finance and Administration (Finance) database on contracts.
The objectives of the audit were to assess agency performance in relation to compiling their Internet listings as required by the Senate Order and the appropriateness of the use of confidentiality provisions in Commonwealth contracts. The audit involved a detailed examination in seven agencies of the processes used to compile their Internet listings and the use of confidentiality provisions in contracts.
A performance audit of the management of the Detention Centre Contracts was listed in the 2003-04 Audit Work Program as a potential audit. The audit work program proposed that the audit would be conducted in two parts. The first part would focus on DIMIA's management of the detention centre contracts with the then detention service provider, GEO Australia. The second part would concentrate on how well any lessons learned from the first contract, were translated into improvements with the new contract. The original objective of this second ANAO audit was to assess DIMIA's management of detention services through the Contract, including the tender process, transition period and implementation of lessons learned from the previous contract.