The audit objective was to examine if ACMA is, in respect of commercial broadcasting services, effectively discharging its regulatory responsibilities under the BSA. The audit examined ACMA's:

• monitoring of commercial broadcasters' compliance with the BSA;
• addressing non compliance with, and enforcement of, the BSA;
• collection of broadcast licence fees; and
• monitoring and reporting of its regulatory performance in respect of commercial broadcasting.

The objectives of this performance audit were to provide assurance that there were effective measures in place to safeguard the national collections and that institutions had processes in place to provide access to them. The ANAO also examined the extent to which the national cultural institutions have implemented the eleven recommendations from the previous report, Safeguarding Our National Collections (Audit Report No.8 1998-99).

The objective of the audit was to assess how effectively Geoscience Australia provides geoscientific and geospatial information and services to assist the Australian Government and key stakeholders. Particular emphasis was given to:

• the collection and management of geoscientific and geospatial data and information, including accessibility;
• the provision of products and services; and
• governance arrangements.

The ANAO examined a number of datasets and product and service projects to assess Geoscience Australia's performance in providing geoscientific and geospatial information and services.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of the AFP's approach to its management of the implementation of NPIs.

The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) is the Commonwealth's principal revenue collection agency. In 1998-99, the ATO accounted for total tax revenue of $135.3 billion. The objective of this audit was to review the ATO's administration of penalties, with particular emphasis on its corporate governance framework and issues relating to consistency, effectiveness and accountability of penalty administration. In particular, the audit examined the administration of two penalty types, Late Lodgement and Tax Shortfall, as case studies.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Taxation Office's (ATO) management and reporting of selected information relating to the goods and services tax and the fringe benefits tax.

The objective of this audit was to assess the Private Health Insurance Administration Council's (PHIAC's) administrative effectiveness as a regulator of private health insurance. In making this assessment, the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) addressed the following criteria: whether PHIAC monitored compliance with its legislative requirements and analysed related data; whether PHIAC addressed and managed non-compliance with its legislative requirements; and whether PHIAC's governance and organisation supported the performance of its legislative functions. Although the Department of Health and Ageing (Health) also has a role in the regulation of the private health insurance industry under the National Health Act 1953 (Health Act), Health's regulatory activities were outside the scope of this audit.

The objectives of the audit were to examine and evaluate the efficiency, economy and administrative effectiveness of the non-judicial activities of the Family Court of Australia. A major aim of the audit was to identify administrative better practices that could be promulgated throughout the Court. The criteria for the audit address the following issues: corporate planning; performance measurement; organisational structure; human resource management; human resource development; management information and reporting systems; and operational processes and procedures.

In 2012–13, the ANAO pilot project to audit Key Performance Indicators(KPIs) was continued with the objective of conducting a review of framework developments, both in terms of the clarity of the policy and guidance issued by Finance and the performance of agencies in applying this policy and guidance, as a basis for implementing a future program of audits; and to further develop and test an audit methodology to address the practical challenges of assessing the appropriateness of KPIs, and their complete and accurate reporting.

On 9 May 2006, the Auditor-General advised the then Minister for Transport and Regional Services that he would undertake a performance audit and that the specific audit objectives and approach would be established once officers of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) had the opportunity to undertake preliminary enquiries with senior staff in Airservices Australia and the Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS). On 31 May 2006, the Auditor-General designated a performance audit under Section 18 of the Auditor-General Act 1997 (Auditor-General Act). The objectives of the performance audit were to: examine the development and administration by Airservices Australia of its contracts with the Solomon Islands Government for upper airspace management; assess the regularity of payments made under the contracts and steps taken by Airservices Australia in respect of any irregularities; and make recommendations for any improvements in the processes employed by Airservices Australia in developing and administering these and similar contractual arrangements.