Browse our range of reports and publications including performance and financial statement audit reports, assurance review reports, information reports and annual reports.
The ANAO reviewed arrangements for the development of the department's fraud policy, fraud risk assessment and fraud control plan within the core functional areas of the department that are responsible for these activities. The audit also examined the operational procedures and guidelines that were in place to implement the departments' fraud policy. The objective of the audit was to assess whether DVA has implemented appropriate fraud control arrangements in line with the Fraud Control Policy of the Commonwealth and whether these arrangements operate effectively in practice.
The focus of the audit was to examine recent selected property sales within the portfolios owning the majority of Commonwealth property, ie. those of Defence, Administrative Services and Veterans' Affairs. The approach taken in the audit was to select property sales from each of the three agencies and review the files and transactions related to those sales. The sales were evaluated against criteria which included establishment of sales timetables, sales methods, and completion processes such as the criteria for the selection of tenders and accountability. The objectives of the audit were to assess departments' management of the sale process associated with selected property sales with regard to:
- the extent to which the individual property sale objectives were achieved;
- how departments managed the sales to ensure that the Commonwealth received fair value;
- whether the departments' sale arrangements adequately protected the Commonwealth's interests, including minimising ongoing Commonwealth risk; and
- identifying principles of better practice employed by agencies in connection with these sales.
This audit examined the management of contracts for business support processes in eight Commonwealth organisations-six operating under the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997, and two operating under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997. The objectives of this audit were to:
- provide assurance on the effectiveness of the management of contracted business support processes in selected organisations; and
- identify and disseminate better practices in related contract management.
The objective of the audit was to assess the extent to which agencies have arrangements to establish and use multi-use lists to support value for money, efficiency and effectiveness in procurement.
Please direct enquiries relating to reports through our contact page.
The audit examined ATSIS' implementation of recommendations from Audit Report No.39, 1998-1999 National Aboriginal Health Strategy - Delivery of Housing and Infrastructure to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Communities (the previous audit). In addition to assessing ATSIS' progress in implementing the recommendations of the previous audit, this follow-up audit examined ATSIS' performance reporting of the NAHS program, and concluded that the current level of aggregation of performance reporting makes it difficult to identify the particular contribution that the NAHS Program makes in improving services to Indigenous communities.
The objectives of the audit were to determine whether agencies have implemented appropriate risk management strategies for the new banking arrangements, which came into operation on 1 July 1999 and whether cash funds are being managed in accordance with the appropriate legislation, the Commonwealth's agency banking guidance and generally accepted accounting practices. The scope of the audit was restricted to the departmental cash funds management and focused on risk management processes and management accounting controls adopted in the forecasting of cash flows, operation of bank accounts and placement of funds. The audit examined seven agencies, which are not named in the report.
The audit objective was to form an opinion on the administrative effectiveness of the arrangements between DEEWR (previously DEWR) and Centrelink for the delivery of working age employment services under the Business Partnership Agreement (BPA).
The audit considered the way organisations in the APS process and use cost information. The specific objective was to form an opinion on whether costing processes and uses were: valid, cost effective, and in accordance with the principles of better practice.
This audit followed up the ANAO's 2000 performance audit report on retention of military personnel (Audit Report No.35 1999-2000 Retention of Military Personnel), which focused on examining whether ADF personnel management practices to retain personnel were commensurate with the cost of recruiting and training new personnel, or whether more cost- effective steps could be taken to reduce the separation rates of desirable personnel. The objective of the follow-up audit was to assess Defence's implementation of recommendations made in the original audit report and their effectiveness in helping Defence control the flow of trained personnel from the Services.
Members of the Australian Defence Force (ADF) have informal and formal complaint mechanisms available to them to address grievances. Initially, members are advised to seek resolution of their complaint at the lowest possible level, through the normal command channels and administrative arrangements. A member who is not satisfied that a complaint has been resolved in this manner may use the Redress of Grievance (ROG) system to submit a formal complaint to the commanding officer of the member's unit. The objective of this audit was to ascertain whether the ROG system could be refined to improve the efficiency and timeliness of processing of complaints while preserving the equity and transparency the current system provides.The Redress of Grievance system is clearly time-consuming and resource intensive. Some grievances have taken as long as four years to resolve. Some could be resolved by administrative means rather than through recourse to grievance processes. The system contains various inefficiencies that detract from its cost-effectiveness from the viewpoint of the ADF and individual members. In addition many members are unaware of the system or do not have a high level of confidence in its effectiveness.