The audit objective was to form an opinion on the adequacy of a select group of Australian Government agencies' management of Internet security, including following-up on agencies' implementation of recommendations from the ANAO's 2001 audit. The agencies audited were Australian Customs Service (ACS), Australian Federal Police (AFP), Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA), Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR), Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources (DITR) and Medicare Australia. Factors considered in selecting agencies were agency size based on funding levels, whether the agency was included in ANAO's 2001 audit (ACS, ARPANSA, and DEWR), whether the agency's ICT was managed in-house or outsourced, and the nature of the agency's website (that is, general or restricted access).

The audit reviewed the recordkeeping frameworks of four large Commonwealth organisations. The objective of the audit was to assess whether recordkeeping policies, systems and procedures were in accordance with relevant Government policies, legislation, accepted standards and recordkeeping principles, and applicable organisational controls.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ending on 30 June 2009. It includes a foreword by the Auditor-General, an overview of the Office, a report on performance, details about management and accountability, and the financial results.

The audit sought to assess how well the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) manages aggressive tax planning. We did this by exploring the nature of aggressive tax planning and the ATO's approach to its management. In the latter context, we looked at:

• the ATO's previous experience with aggressive tax planning and action on previous significant external reviews, particularly dealing with mass marketed investment schemes;
• strategy and operations, intelligence gathering and use; and the identification and management of promoters given their significant role in aggressive tax planning.

This report summarises audit and other related activities of the Australian National Audit Office in the period January to June 2000.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of DMO's JORN and JFASmaintenance and support arrangements. The audit examined the maintenanceand operation of the JORN and JFAS radars, and their facilities.

The objective of the audit was to assess the workforce planning systems used by the Australian Defence Force with a view to identifying better practice and making recommendations where appropriate to promote overall effectiveness of planning systems. The main issues were the management of the workforce planning function and determination of workforce requirements. The audit concentrated on the full-time military workforce, but also included the issue of the flexibility for military units to employ reserves or civilians where appropriate.

The objective of this follow-up audit is to examine DEEWR's implementation of the six recommendations made in the ANAO's 2003 report. This audit has had regard to the issues underlying the recommendations, and new administrative issues affecting their implementation.

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 whether Defence is effectively managing the EO Services Contract.

The audit focused mainly on Defence's contract management framework, including the arrangements to monitor the contractor’s performance in delivering services under the contract. The audit also examined the processes used by Defence to develop the current version of the contract and the extent to which the revised contract, as negotiated in 2006, provides an assurance of better value for money when compared to the original contract signed in 2001.