The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the department's administration of general recurrent grants paid to the States and Territories for government schools. To achieve this, the ANAO assessed whether the department:

• paid the correct amount of general recurrent grants to the States and Territories;
• effectively managed the agreements with the States and Territories; and
• monitored progress towards achieving the National Goals for Schooling in the Twenty-First Century.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Health and Ageing's administration of health workforce initiatives in rural and remote Australia.

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.

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 audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the department's administration of general recurrent grants for non-government schools. The audit examined key processes in the department's administration ofgeneral recurrent grants for non-government schools for 2005–08 in accordance with the Schools Assistance (Learning Together—Achievement Through Choice and Opportunity) Act 2004.

The audit examined the effectiveness and efficiency of the FAO's management of overpayments, within the FTB Programme. In particular, the ANAO considered the FAO's activities in relation to FTB debt prevention, identification, raising and recovery. The audit also compared the FAO's policy documentation and guidance material for staff, against relevant sections of Family Assistance legislation.

The objective of the audit was to assess how effectively DHS (including CSA), FaHCSIA and Centrelink managed the implementation of stage one of the CSSR and the Improving Compliance program.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of DEEWR’s administration of FWEIP. The three high level criteria that were used to make this assessment were the appropriateness of DEEWR’s:

• program planning and design;
• selection and engagement of providers; and
• program monitoring, reporting and evaluation.

The audit reviewed the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement (CSHA). CSHA is a joint arrangement between the Commonwealth and the States under which both the Commonwealth and the States contribute funding in the form of grants, which are used by State Housing Authorities to provide a variety of housing assistance programs to households on low incomes and those with special needs. The overall objective of the audit was to assess and report to Parliament on how effectively the Department of Family and Community Services (FaCS - formerly the Department of Social Security) administered the CSHA and to identify any areas where improvements could be made.

The audit examined the effectiveness of DEEWR's: administrative framework for the program; management of the application, assessment and funding processes; and monitoring of and reporting on the program's performance.

In order to form an opinion against the audit objective, the ANAO primarily conducted fieldwork and documentation reviews at DEEWR's central office. A stratified random sample (in order to provide for representation from states, territories and school sectors) of 74 applications from Rounds 1 and 2 was also selected for detailed examination. Through this sample, the ANAO sought to determine whether funding applications had been assessed in accordance with the established assessment criteria and that quality assurance mechanisms for the assessment process were effective.