Consistent with the ANAO's practices, and in response to a request from AusAID, a follow-up audit was conducted in the period May to November 1998 to assess the extent of implementation of the recommendations of a 1996 audit into the Management of Funding to Non-Government Organisations (NGOs)and whether the implementation of recommendations has effectively improved the management of funding to NGOs. The ANAO examined AusAID's key funding accountability documentation, tested the revised accountability arrangements and consulted a number of key stakeholders, including NGO representatives.

The objective of this audit was to determine whether selected Australian Government organisations had effective processes for managing the annual leave entitlements of their staff, and whether systems and controls over the processing of annual leave were working as intended. In addressing this objective, the audit also assessed progress being made by the audited organisations in implementing the recommendations in ANAO Audit Report No.16 2005-06.

The audit objective was to assess the appropriateness of the use and reporting of confidentiality provisions in Australian Government contracts. This included assessing compliance with the Order and following up on the implementation of recommendations made in previous Senate Order audits.

The audit involved three components:

• an examination of a stratified random sample of 150 contracts listed as containing confidentiality provisions from material and small agencies across the Australian Government to determine whether confidentiality provisions were used and reported appropriately;
• an examination of all FMA Act agencies' calendar year 2009 contract listings, and ministers' letters of advice, to assess compliance with the requirements of the Order, and check reported instances of excluded contracts; and
• a follow-up of the implementation of previous audit recommendations relating to the administration of the Senate Order in four agencies. The selected agencies were the: Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID); Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA); Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF); and the Federal Court of Australia (Federal Court). The selected agencies were audited in one of the ANAO's previous five audits of Senate Order compliance.

Given the importance of customer feedback to Centrelink's business, the ANAO considered it timely to conduct a series of performance audits relating to Centrelink's customer feedback systems, particularly in relation to its delivery of the services then provided on behalf of FaCS. The overarching objective of this series of ANAO performance audits of Centrelink's customer feedback systems was to assess whether Centrelink has effective processes and systems for gathering, measuring, reporting and responding effectively to customer feedback, including in relation to customer satisfaction with Centrelink services and processes.

The audit objective was to assess whether the administration of the LPG Vehicle Scheme is effective. To address this objective, the audit considered whether:

• there is a sound framework for the operation of the Scheme;
• grants are promoted, assessed and approved in accordance with relevant guidance and regulations; and
• the Scheme's performance is monitored and reported.

The objectives of the audit were to determine whether: citizenship services were planned based on a risk assessment, especially in relation to fraud; and were monitored and reported on appropriately; decision-making was accurate, consistent and in line with relevent laws and policies and was supported by appropriate training and quality assurance (QA) mechanisms; client and outsourced services were managed effectively; and promotion strategies were effective and have been evaluated appropriately.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the selection, implementation, operation and monitoring of FRCs by AGD and FaHCSIA. The three main criteria for this audit assessed whether AGD and FaHCSIA had effectively:

• planned and implemented the FRC initiative, including the FRC selection and funding processes;
• undertaken administration activities to guide the operation and progress of the FRC initiative towards meeting its objectives; and
• monitored, evaluated and reported on the performance of FRCs.

The audit examined a range of issues in relation to the development of certified agreements in the APS with particular emphasis on the link between improved pay and conditions and increased productivity, and the funding of agreements. The objectives of the audit were to:

• provide an overview of the range of wage outcomes included in the first round of APS certified agreements;
• identify the administrative arrangements agencies have in place to measure any improvements in productivity that were linked to pay increases;
• determine how agencies funded their certified agreements;
• review the reporting and accountability arrangements agencies have in place to monitor progress and to evaluate the outcomes of their certified agreements;
• determine the extent to which agencies complied with the employment terms and conditions outlined in their certified agreements that contributed to paying for their agreement or measuring and/or assessing improvements in productivity; and
• examine the role of central coordinating agencies in reviewing agencies' certified agreements.

Major capital equipment contributes importantly to the capabilities of the Australian Defence Force (ADF) to achieve the Defence mission, that is, the defence of Australia and its national interests. The Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO) is the relatively new Defence organisation responsible for the acquisition and through-life support of Defence equipment and systems. DMO's stated purpose is to equip and sustain the ADF. In 2001-02, it will spend $2.9 billion on progressing some 270 major capital equipment acquisition projects. This preliminary study for the audit focused on DMO reporting on the status of major equipment acquisition projects.

The objective of the audit was to assess the application of the outcomes and outputs framework in Australian Government agencies. The audit included a review of:

• the outcomes and outputs of agencies and the integration of the outcomes and outputs framework into agencies' operations;
• the extent to which agencies' performance indicators incorporated better practice characteristics to enable agencies to meet their performance reporting obligations;
• agencies' processes for capturing, monitoring and reporting financial and performance information and the extent to which outcomes and outputs information was used in agency decision-making; and
• the extent that agencies met their external reporting and accountability obligations.

The audit consisted of a survey of 44 agencies subject to the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (FMA Act) undertaken in October 2005 and detailed audit testing in three of those agencies. The purpose of the survey was to provide cross-agency data in relation to agencies' implementation of the framework during the period 2002–03 to 2005–06. The ANAO received responses from all 44 agencies, although not all agencies responded to all questions. The ANAO did not audit the information provided by survey participants and the reported results are based on agencies' responses to the survey.

The agencies at which detailed audit testing was undertaken were:

• Department of Education Science and Training;
• the then Department of the Environment and Heritage; and
• IP Australia.