Financial statement audits are an independent examination of the financial accounting and reporting of public sector entities. The results of the examination are presented in an audit report, which expresses the auditor's opinion on whether the financial statements as a whole and the information contained therein fairly present each entity's financial position and the results of its operations and cash flows. The accounting treatments and disclosures reflected in the financial statements by the entity are assessed against relevant accounting standards and legislative reporting requirements.

The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) publishes two reports annually addressing the outcomes of the financial statement audits of Australian government entities and the Consolidated Financial Statements (CFS) of the Australian Government, to provide the Parliament of Australia with an independent examination of the financial accounting and reporting of public sector entities. This report focused on the results of the interim audit phase, including an assessment of entities’ key internal controls, of the 2017–18 financial statements audits of a range of entities including all departments of state and a number of major Australian government entities.

The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) publishes two reports annually addressing the outcomes of the financial statement audits of Commonwealth entities, and the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Australian Government, to provide Parliament an independent examination of the financial accounting and reporting of public sector entities. This report focuses on the results of the interim audit phase, including an assessment of entities’ key internal controls, of the 2015–16 financial statements audits of 21 departments and other major General Government Sector (GGS) entities. These entities contribute 95 per cent of GGS revenues and expenses.

The Auditor-General Act 1997 establishes the mandate for the Auditor General to undertake financial statement audits of all Commonwealth entities including those of government agencies, statutory authorities and government business enterprises.

Financial statement audits are an independent examination of the financial accounting and reporting of public sector entities. The results of the examination are presented in an audit report, which expresses the auditor's opinion on whether the financial statements as a whole and the information contained therein fairly present each entity's financial position and the results of its operations and cash flows. The accounting treatments and disclosures reflected in the financial statements by the entity are assessed against relevant accounting standards and legislative reporting requirements.

The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) publishes two reports annually addressing the outcomes of the financial statement audits of Australian government entities and the Consolidated Financial Statements (CFS) of the Australian Government to provide Parliament an independent examination of the financial accounting and reporting of public sector entities. This report focuses on the results of the interim audit phase, including an assessment of entities’ key internal controls, of the 2016–17 financial statements audits of 25 entities including all departments of state and a number of major Australian government entities.

This report, which informs the Parliament on the audits of financial statements of Commonwealth entities for 1995-96, aligns with the Government's policy for timely public reporting of financial information. It provides a summary of the opinions formed on those organisations' financial statements and the matters and recommendations raised. Matters reported relate primarily to issues on internal control structures and information technology.

This report examined the publication of financial statements and audit reports in the hardcopy and website forms of the annual reports of 117 Commonwealth reporting entities. The audit objective was to determine whether the published financial statements and audit reports agreed in all respects with those that had been certified by the chief-executive or governing body (as appropriate) and the Auditor-General or his delegate. In all but two instances, the reporting period covered was the year ended 30 June 2002.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ended 30 June 2024. The report addresses all applicable obligations under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013; the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule 2014; the Auditor-General Act 1997; the performance measures set out in the outcome and programs framework in the ANAO’s Portfolio Budget Statements 2023–24 and in the ANAO Corporate Plan 2023–24; and annual reporting requirements set out in other relevant legislation.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ended 30 June 2020. The report addresses all applicable obligations under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013; the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule 2014; the Auditor-General Act 1997; the performance measures set out in the outcome and programs framework in the ANAO's Portfolio Budget Statements 2019–20 and the ANAO Corporate Plan 2019–20; and annual reporting requirements set out in other relevant legislation.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ended 30 June 2021. The report addresses all applicable obligations under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013; the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule 2014; the Auditor-General Act 1997; the performance measures set out in the outcome and programs framework in the ANAO’s Portfolio Budget Statements 2020–21 and the ANAO Corporate Plan 2020–21; and annual reporting requirements set out in other relevant legislation.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ended 30 June 2022. The report addresses all applicable obligations under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013; the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule 2014; the Auditor-General Act 1997; the performance measures set out in the outcome and programs framework in the ANAO’s Portfolio Budget Statements 2021–22 and the ANAO Corporate Plan 2021–22; and annual reporting requirements set out in other relevant legislation.

This report summarises issues regarding financial systems, controls and processes from examinations of major Commonwealth organisations as part of the audits of their financial statements. It raises significant issues warranting attention to improve the quality of the underlying control structures that support public sector financial performance and accountability.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ending on 30 June 2017. The report addresses all applicable obligations under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act); the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule 2014 (PGPA Rule); the Auditor-General Act 1997; the performance measures set out in the outcome and programs framework in the ANAO’s 2016–17 Portfolio Budget Statements (PBS) and the ANAO 2016–20 Corporate Plan and annual reporting requirements set out in other relevant legislation.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ended on 30 June 2019. The report addresses all applicable obligations under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013; the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule 2014; the Auditor-General Act 1997; the performance measures set out in the outcome and programs framework in the ANAO’s Portfolio Budget Statements 2018–19 and the ANAO Corporate Plan 2018–19, and annual reporting requirements set out in other relevant legislation.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ended 30 June 2023. The report addresses all applicable obligations under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013; the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule 2014; the Auditor-General Act 1997; the performance measures set out in the outcome and programs framework in the ANAO’s Portfolio Budget Statements 2022–23 and in the ANAO Corporate Plan 2022–23; and annual reporting requirements set out in other relevant legislation.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ending on 30 June 2018. The report addresses all applicable obligations under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act); the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule 2014 (PGPA Rule); the Auditor-General Act 1997; the performance measures set out in the outcome and programs framework in the ANAO’s 2017–18 Portfolio Budget Statements (PBS) and the ANAO 2017–18 Corporate Plan and annual reporting requirements set out in other relevant legislation.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ending 30 June 2016. It addresses all applicable obligations under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 and the Auditor-General Act 1997, the performance measures set out in the outcome and programs framework in the ANAO’s 2015–16 Portfolio Budget Statements and the ANAO’s 2015–19 Corporate Plan and annual reporting requirements set out in other legislation.

The corporate plan is the ANAO’s primary planning document — it outlines our purpose; the dynamic environment in which we operate; our commitment to building capability; and the priorities, activities and performance measures by which we will be held to account.

The plan highlights our desire to engage positively and transparently in delivering audit and support services to the Parliament. In addition, the plan details our approach to risk management, which is critical to successfully meeting our responsibilities in providing professional and independent audits to the Parliament.

The corporate plan is complemented by the annual audit work program, which reflects the ANAO’s audit strategy for the coming year.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ending on 30 June 2013. It addresses the Requirements for Annual Reports for Departments, Executive Agencies and FMA Act Bodies approved by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit in June 2013; the performance measures set out in the outcomes and programs framework in the 2012–13 Portfolio Budget Statements; section 28 of the Auditor-General Act 1997; and other annual reporting requirements set out in legislation.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ending on 30 June 2014. It addresses the Requirements for Annual Reports for Departments, Executive Agencies and FMA Act Bodies approved by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit in May 2014; the performance measures set out in the outcome and programs framework in the 2013–14 Portfolio Budget Statements; section 28 of the Auditor-General Act 1997; and other annual reporting requirements provided for in legislation.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ending on 30 June 2015. It addresses the Requirements for Annual Reports for Departments, Executive Agencies and Other Non‑corporate Commonwealth Entities approved by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit in June 2015; the performance measures set out in the outcome and programs framework in the 2014–15 Portfolio Budget Statements; section 28 of the Auditor‑General Act 1997; and other annual reporting requirements set out in legislation.

The report summarises audit findings relating to entity internal control structures arising out of the interim financial statement audits of 21 Major Commonwealth entities for the year ending 30 June 2003. The interim audit examinations seek to update the ANAO's assessment of the internal control environment of entities reviewed, so as to determine whether reliance can be placed on those control structures to produce complete, accurate and valid information for financial reporting purposes. In addition this year's report provides observations on some key strategic issues and influences which are, or will be in the future, likely to affect the overall financial framework in the public sector

On 16 May 2017, the Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet wrote to portfolio agency heads, including the Auditor-General, requesting some additional information on senior executive remuneration and highly paid individuals be published on websites by 31 July 2017. The request acknowledges that there is an increasing level of interest from the Parliament and the public to provide greater transparency of remuneration of senior executives and other highly paid officials.

The two tables below outline the cash remuneration at an aggregate level, within dollar ranges (or bands) for substantive senior executives and highly paid individuals, and show the numbers of employees within each band. The two tables will also be published in our audited financial statements which form part of our annual report. These notes are in addition to the information we must report in our financial statements on key management personnel remuneration under the accounting standards.

The purpose of the Australian National Audit Office is to support accountability and transparency in the Australian Government sector through independent reporting to the Parliament, and thereby contribute to improved public sector performance.

The ANAO adopts a range of communication practices to strengthen the impact of its work and facilitate the sharing of audit insights. Communication practices had included the publication of better practice guides on aspects of Commonwealth administration, for the information of Australian Government entities.

The independent Review of Whole-of-Government Internal Regulation recommended that the ANAO take the opportunity to review whether there is a continuing need to develop and maintain separate guidance, where regulators and policy owners have developed or are developing policy guidance material. The ANAO consulted the Australian Parliament and public sector entities, including audit committees within these entities, about the future of better practice guides. The feedback received was that where another entity has produced, or will produce, a similar resource and has committed to continue to do so, the ANAO could add more value by monitoring the effectiveness of this resource. On this basis, the ANAO decided to discontinue and cease distribution of a range of better practice guides from 1 July 2017. Refer to our previously published message from July 2017 (below) for more information about the guides that were removed at this time.

It was also determined in July 2017 that the ANAO would retain three guides and withdraw three guides following a transition period:

Since July 2017, the ANAO has continued to work with policy owners as they have developed or revised their guidance material in relation to the six remaining guides.

In April 2018 we sought feedback from the accountable authorities of policy-owning entities on our intention to withdraw the six remaining guides. All relevant entities supported the removal of the guides, although the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet raised that the outcome of the work being conducted by the APS Reform Committee may lead to new guidance which supersedes the Successful Implementation of Policy Initiatives guide.

In May 2018 the Auditor-General wrote to the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit (JCPAA) seeking the Committee’s feedback on the proposal to withdraw the remaining better practice guides. The Committee advised:

the JCPAA has no overall objection to the withdrawal of the Better Practice Guides from the ANAO website. We note the ANAO’s commitment to continue to monitor the effectiveness of the replacement guidance material, as appropriate, under its audit program. We further appreciate that the ANAO’s Audit Insights now provide information on audit issues and examples of good practice, as identified through financial statement and performance audit work, by way of shared learnings for all Commonwealth entities.

Considering the feedback from the JCPAA and policy-owning entities’ support, the remaining guides have now been removed from the ANAO website:

• Successful Implementation of Policy Initiatives
• Public Sector Audit Committees
• Public Sector Governance
• Public Sector Financial Statements
• Developing and Managing Contracts
• Administering Regulation

In 2017-18 the ANAO developed audit insights, a new product which identifies and discusses common recurring issues, shortcomings and good practice examples, identified through our financial statement and performance audit work. The objective of audit insights is consistent with the objective of better practice guides: improved public sector administration.

The ANAO will continue to monitor the effectiveness of guidance material, as appropriate, under our audit program.

If you require access to the withdrawn better practice guides listed above, you can find them through the National Library of Australia’s Australian Government Web Archive.

Welcome to the third edition of the ANAO’s Audit Matters newsletter. The purpose of Audit Matters is to provide updates on the ANAO’s work and provide insights on what we are seeing in the Australian Government sector.

Audit Matters complements the range of reports we table in the Parliament as well as our insights products and events and seminars. I hope you find it useful and please forward it on to your colleagues, and encourage them to sign-up for future editions.

Rona Mellor PSM, Deputy Auditor-General

The audit objectives were:

• to assess the effectiveness of the revised certification process in promoting compliance of government advertising campaigns (campaigns) with the March 2010 Guidelines on Information and Advertising Campaigns by Australian Government Departments and Agencies (2010 Guidelines);
• to assess the effectiveness of agency administration in developing campaigns and implementing key processes against the requirements of the campaign advertising framework;
• to assess the effectiveness of Finance’s administration of the campaign advertising framework; and
• to assess the effect on campaigns of an exemption from the 2010 Guidelines.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether entities properly accounted for software assets, and adopted an integrated planning approach to inform software asset investment decisions.

The main focus of the audit was on whether entities accounted for software costs in accordance with relevant accounting standards and the FMOs, paying particular attention to the standard elements of an internal control framework and accounting practices. In addition, in the context of software asset planning, the audit considered whether entities assessed the risks associated with software assets, used life-cycle costing approaches, and aligned ICT and capital management plans, to inform decision-making on software asset investments.

A Special Account is a mechanism used to record amounts in the Consolidated Revenue Fund that are set aside for specified purposes. A total of $3.40 billion was reported as held in Special Accounts as of 30 June 2003, with $10.33 billion reported as credited to Special Accounts in 2002-03 and $10.06 billion in reported payments (debits) from these Accounts. The audit examined the establishment, management and abolition of Special Accounts by Commonwealth agencies, as well as compliance with legal requirements

The objective of this audit was to assess how effectively entities had developed and implemented appropriate KPIs to support stated program objectives.

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.

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.

The audit objectives were to assess the effectiveness of:

• selected agencies’ administration in developing advertising campaigns and implementing key processes against the requirements of the Australian Government’s campaign advertising framework, and other key legal and administrative requirements; and
• the ongoing administration of the campaign advertising framework.

The objective of this performance audit was to assess agencies' financial management of, and accountability for, the use of net appropriation agreements to increase available appropriations.

The Australian National Audit Office has undertaken a pilot project to assess the status of the Australian Government performance measurement and reporting framework as a basis for implementation of a future program of audits of entities’ key performance indicators, and to develop a suitable audit methodology. This report presents a summary of the work completed to date.

This report covers a number of the discretionary compensation and debt relief mechanisms that are available to Commonwealth agencies, where individuals or entities have been disadvantaged by legislation, or actions by agencies or staff, or some other negative circumstances. It deals mainly with two legislative mechanisms, namely, act of grace payments and waivers of debt, and one administrative mechanism, the Compensation for Detriment caused by Defective Administration (CDDA) scheme. This report also briefly covers two other mechanisms, namely ex gratia payments and payments in special circumstances relating to Australian Public Service (APS) employment. The main objective of the audit was to assess whether the management of claims for compensation and debt relief in special circumstances was in accordance with relevant legislative requirements and Commonwealth guidelines, and whether the current administrative policies and procedures were adequate.

The objective of this audit was to assess whether agencies had effectively administered credit cards, including having complied with legislative and internal requirements.

The second audit, which is the subject of this report, is a broader and more in-depth cross-portfolio audit. Its objective was to assess:

• the planning and delivery of capital works projects by proponent agencies;
• the extent to which projects have delivered on what was intended; and
• the extent to which proponent agencies have complied with the requirements of the Public Works Committee Act 1969 and approved procedures.

The objective of the audit was to assess DAFF's implementation and administration of the three forest industry assistance programs under the TCFA. Particular emphasis was given to the:

• implementation of the programs and ongoing governance arrangements;
• promotion of the program and the development of program guidelines;
• assessment of applications and approval of funding; and
• management of funding agreements.

The audit examined aspects of financial management in the Health Insurance Commission (HIC). The audit objective was to examine the effectiveness of the HIC's internal control structures, as well as its financial management framework and processes, in order to form an opinion on their ability to support HIC Commissioners and managers to make informed decisions on the efficient and effective use of Commonwealth resources.

The audit objective was to assess whether the Regional Partnerships Programme has been effectively managed by DOTARS, including the processes by which:

• applications are sought, received and assessed;
• Funding Agreements with grant recipients are developed and managed; and
• the achievement of project and programme outcomes is monitored and assessed.

Following on from the 2002 audit, the ANAO decided to conduct an audit of trust monies in entities operating under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997 (CAC Act). The objectives of the current audit were to: · assess whether the selected entities were managing trust monies in accordance with legal and administrative requirements and better practice principles; · identify better practice in the management of trust monies; and · as necessary, recommend improvements in the controls and practices relating to the management of trust monies.

The audit objective was to assess the extent to which Australian Government agencies ensure that service providers are made aware of the core Australian Public Service (APS) Values and Code of Conduct and these arrangements are monitored.

The objective of the audit was to assess the extent to which the Department of the Treasury and the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) have improved the management of tax expenditure estimates by implementing the six recommendations in the 2008 ANAO audit and the three recommendations made by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit (JCPAA) following its inquiry.

The audit objective was to examine whether Health's financial management framework and processes adequately support Health's Secretary, Executive and managers to make informed decisions on the use of Commonwealth resources.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of agencies' contract management by determining if they had sound practices and systematic approaches to this activity. Particular attention was given to each agency's:

• day-to-day management of individual contracts; and
• approach to managing its contract population.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of annual Certificate of Compliance processes for FMA Act agencies. To form a conclusion against the audit objective, the audit considered: Finance’s administration of the Certificate process at a whole-of-government level; selected agencies’ annual Certificate processes; and, the design and impact of the Certificate.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the ATO's management of its interpretative assistance activities for SMSFs.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Health and Ageing and the Australian National Preventive Health Agency in fulfilling the Commonwealth’s role in implementing the Council of Australian Government’s National Partnership Agreement on Preventive Health, to achieve the Agreement’s objectives, outcomes and outputs, including supporting all Australians to reduce their risk of chronic disease.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s administration of the Tasmanian Forests Intergovernmental Agreement Contractors Voluntary Exit Grants Program.

The objective of the audit was to assess the completeness and reliability of the estimates reported in Tax Expenditures Statement 2006 (TES 2006). That is, the audit examined the development and publication of the detailed statement of actual tax expenditures required by Division 2 of Part 5 of the CBH Act. The development and publication of aggregated information on projected tax expenditures included in the Budget Papers pursuant to Division 1 of Part 5 of the CBH Act was not examined.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of FaHCSIA‘s performance of its lead agency role in coordinating whole-of-government commitments to closing the gap in Indigenous disadvantage.

The Australian Political Parties for Democracy Programme is administered by Finance. The programme aims to strengthen democracy internationally by providing support for the international activities of Australia's major political parties. Funding of up to $1 million is provided annually under the programme to each of the Australian Labor Party and to the Liberal Party of Australia. Guidelines for the programme provide for the parties to re-apply for funding each year and set out the criteria against which applications for funding are assessed. The proposed audit would examine the administration of the program by Finance, including the adequacy of assessment of acquittal documentation and requests to roll over funding.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the management and administration of the Communications Fund, including an assessment of:

• the development and implementation of appropriate investment strategies; and
• the robustness of the governance structures and controls relating to investment activities.

The objective of this audit was to determine whether Health adequately assessed the State and Territory Governments' compliance with their obligations under the terms of the AHCAs. In conducting the audit, ANAO addressed the following criteria:

• if Health assessed whether the States and Territories were adhering to the AHCAs clause 6 principles that all eligible persons had equitable access to free public health and emergency services on the basis of clinical need within an appropriate period;
• if Health assessed whether the States and Territories were increasing their own source funding at the rate specified in the AHCAs; and
• if Health assessed whether the States and Territories were meeting the performance reporting requirements set out in the AHCAs.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of procedures and processes used by DEST and the ATO to record HECS–HELP student loans. To achieve this, the ANAO assessed the performance of DEST and the ATO against three criteria as follows:

• DEST monitored student contributions set by higher education providers for consistency with Australian Government policy;
• DEST paid HECS–HELP advance payments to higher education providers based on sound estimates, and recorded, reconciled and reported these payments; and
• the ATO has established procedures and processes to correctly record HECS–HELP loans against student tax records.

The focus of this audit was on those entitlements administered by Finance. Similar to the 2001-02 Audit Report, the audit scope did not include entitlements provided to persons employed under the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 (MOP(S) Act). It also did not examine the administration of entitlements provided through other agencies (such as Parliamentarians' salary and electorate allowance, which are paid by the Chamber Departments, and entitlements provided to Ministers by their home department).

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the implementation and administration of the Small Business Superannuation Clearing House.

The objective of the audit was to assess the framework being put in place to manage and account for aid funds provided under the AIPRD. In particular, the audit addressed: structures for oversighting the development and delivery of the AIPRD; planning and risk management (including those relating to fraud and corruption); financial management; and arrangements for ongoing monitoring and reporting. The audit focussed on the arrangements being established to monitor, evaluate and report on AIPRD implementation, rather than the management of activities and outcomes achieved. This reflects the fact that the long lead times associated with establishing such a large programme of assistance had meant that only limited activities were underway at the time of audit fieldwork. The ANAO anticipates undertaking an audit in the future of the management of activities and outcomes achieved, when more funds have been expended. It was not the purpose of this audit to examine Australia's immediate emergency and humanitarian response to the tsunami crisis.

The audit objective was to assess the appropriateness of the use and reporting of confidentiality provisions in Australian Government contracts for the 2012 calendar year reporting period.

The audit objective was to examine progress in the development of an overarching approach and guidance for the management of the Commonwealth's intellectual property (Recommendation No. 2 of Audit Report No. 25 of 2003–04).

The audit objective was to assess DoHA's administration of prudential arrangements for the protection of residential aged care accommodation bonds.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of DHS' management of the tender process for a replacement BasicsCard to support the delivery of the income management scheme.

In conducting the audit, the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) assessed the following five key areas of the replacement BasicsCard procurement process, which are described in the Department of Finance and Deregulation's (Finance) Guidance on the Mandatory Procurement Procedures :

• planning for the procurement;
• preparing to approach the market;
• approaching the market;
• evaluating tender submissions; and
• concluding the procurement, including contract negotiation.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether, in relation to appeals to the SSAT and the AAT, Centrelink undertakes its role effectively, so as to support the timely implementation of the Tribunals' decisions about customers' entitlements. In assessing Centrelink's performance, the ANAO examined whether:

• the information provided by Centrelink, in relation to appeals to the SSAT and the AAT, effectively supported customers' and Tribunals' decision-making;
• the relationships and administrative arrangements between Centrelink, DEEWR and FaHCSIA supported the effective management of the appeal process and the capture of issues that may have broader implications for legislation, policy and service delivery; and
• Centrelink implemented SSAT and AAT decisions in an effective and timely manner.

The audit focused on the external review and appeal mechanisms and completes the cycle of audits on Centrelink's review and appeal system. The audit examined those appeals where an implementation action was required and did not consider SSAT and AAT appeals that were dismissed, withdrawn or were not within the Tribunals' jurisdiction.

The audit examined the financial management of all Special Appropriations in the period 1998-99 to 2002-03, with the exception of those related to Special Accounts and those administered by Government Business Enterprises. The audit objectives were to: identity all Special Appropriations and ascertain which entities are responsible for their financial management and reporting; and assess entities' financial management and reporting of Special Appropriations against the Commonwealth's financial management and reporting frameworks.

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 objective of the audit was to assess whether FaCSIA administers grants effectively, according to better practice guidelines, and consistently across geographic areas and the range of programmes included in the scope of the audit. The scope of the audit included grants administered by FaCSIA between 1 July 2002 and 30 June 2005, relating to programmes falling within four of the five groups of programmes providing funding for families and communities namely: Community Support; Family Assistance; Childcare Support; and Youth and Student Support. In total, these groups involved total expenditure of some $533 million in 2004–05.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Tax Practitioners Board's implementation and administration of the regulatory arrangements for tax practitioners under the Tax Agent Services Act 2009.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of the Environment’s administration of the Strengthening Basin Communities Program.

The audit assessed whether FaCS effectively undertakes its coordination, monitoring and other roles according to the CSTDA. The audit examined all disability services provided for under the CSTDA, except for disability employment services. The ANAO met relevant officers from FaCS' national office and State and Territory offices, and with 22 stakeholder organisations including: advocacy groups; peak national and State bodies representing the interests of disability service providers and people with disabilities; members of national and State Disability Advisory Bodies funded by FaCS; State and Territory governments; relevant Australian Government agencies; In particular, the Department of Health and Ageing and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. and local government bodies. Fieldwork for the audit was primarily undertaken during the period September 2004 to February 2005.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of DIMIA's management of its detention agreements with ACM to operate Australia's mainland immigration detention centres. In particular, the ANAO examined: DIMIA's strategic approach to the management and coordination of the contract; how DIMIA defined the services to be delivered by ACM; the systems in place to monitor and report against contract performance; the effectiveness of controls over contract payment arrangements; and DIMIA's management of infrastructure through the detention agreements.

The objective of this audit was to follow up DVA's implementation of the recommendations in Audit Report No. 44, 2000-01, Information Technology in the Department of Veterans' Affairs. The ANAO made two recommendations in the report (the second having five parts). The recommendations addressed the monitoring of IT changes; IT performance information; information systems model documentation; and the facilitation of the interpretation of performance information.

Recent performance audit priority for the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government portfolio has been directed at the administration of funding for land transport. Accordingly, this audit is one of a series ANAO is undertaking of land transport funding programs. Four audits have already been completed, namely:

• ANAO Audit Report No. 31 2005–06, Roads to Recovery;
• ANAO Audit Report No. 45 2006–07, The National Black Spot Program;
• ANAO Audit Report No. 22 2007–08, Administration of Grants to the Australian Rail Track Corporation; and
• ANAO Audit Report No. 29 2008–09, Delivery of Projects on the AusLink National Network.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether selected regulatory agencies have cost recovery procedures and practices which comply with the Government's guidelines. To address this objective, the audit assessed the management of cost recovery against the following criteria:

• regulatory agencies have clear and consistent cost recovery procedures to identify their activities and costs, and set fees and levies;
• regulatory agencies have effectively implemented their cost recovery procedures;
• regulatory agencies regularly monitor and review their cost recovery activities; and
• regulatory agencies regularly report on their cost recovery.

The audit objective was to form an opinion on the effectiveness of the NHMRC's grant administration. To meet this objective the NHMRC was assessed against four criteria:

• the NHMRC's governance arrangements provide appropriate accountability that it is meeting its objectives and obligations to Government (Chapter 2);
• there are strategic and systematic processes for developing and implementing grant programs (Chapter 3);
• the NHMRC manages grants post-award effectively, and complies with legislative requirements and program directives (Chapters 4 and 5); and
• the NHMRC monitors and evaluates its business to demonstrate that outcomes are being met (Chapter 6).

The objective of this audit was to assess whether the WSA program has been administered effectively by the NWC/DEWHA, as relevant, and is achieving its stated program objective. Specifically, the ANAO examined whether:

• funding proposals have been assessed and approved in a fair, consistent manner and in accordance with applicable criteria, program guidelines and better practice;
• appropriate funding arrangements have been established with proponents, having regard to the size of the grant, the type of entity involved and the nature of the project; and
• DEWHA (and previously the NWC) is actively monitoring whether proponents are complying with their obligations, and grant payments are made only in accordance with funding agreements.

More broadly, the audit examined DEWHA's strategy for evaluating and reporting on the long-term benefits of the program.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether the Better Regions Program has been effectively designed and administered. The audit scope included examination of all 106 Better Regions projects.

The objective of the audit was to assess the appropriateness of the use and reporting of confidentiality provisions in Australian Government contracts for 2011.

The objective of this audit was to examine the effectiveness of Defence’s management of explosive ordnance by the end users of this materiel in Air Force, Army and Navy (the Services). In particular, the focus was on the effectiveness of arrangements for the oversight and physical control of explosive ordnance once it is issued to Service units.

The audit reviewed Defence’s policies, procedures, processes and inventory management systems for explosive ordnance at the unit level in the ADF, from receipt and storage through to the use or return of explosive ordnance.The audit also examined the relationship between the management of explosive ordnance at the unit level and the Explosive Ordnance Services Contract and, where relevant, the regional Garrison Support Services (GSS) Contracts.

The audit examined agency approaches to the management of intellectual property under its control, and identified themes common to the management of all types of intellectual property. The audit objective was to:

(i) form an opinion on whether Commonwealth agencies have systems in place to efficiently, effectively and ethically manage their intellectual property assets; and

(ii) identify areas for better practice in intellectual property management by those agencies.

The objective of the audit was to assess the Australian Federal Police’s management of the delivery of policing services to the Australian Capital Territory.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre's (AUSTRAC) arrangements for processing financial intelligence, to assist domestic partner agencies and international counterparts in their operations and investigations.

The audit objective was to examine the effectiveness and efficiency of ASIC's implementation of Australian financial services licences. In particular, the audit examined ASIC's planning for the introduction of financial services licences; the roles of the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) and ASIC in defining the effective scope of licensing; ASIC's assessment and processing of licence applications; and ASIC's supervision of licensees.

The audit scope covered development of the R2R Program, management of the initial R2R Program and changes made to the Program funding conditions and administrative guidance for Auslink Roads to Recovery. The scope did not include management of Auslink Roads to Recovery. The audit objectives were to: · assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the management of the initial R2R Program; and · identify any opportunities for improvements to management of the Program.

The audit objective was to form an opinion on the effectiveness of DEST's planning, assessment, and Funding Agreements management for the Australian Technical Colleges programme. At the time of the audit fieldwork (prior to the 2007–08 Budget) the Government had announced the establishment of 21 of the then target of 25 colleges. After fieldwork was completed the Government announced its intention to fund an additional three colleges in three new regions.

The criteria for this audit were designed to test whether DEST's management of the programme complied with its plans, procedures and guidelines, with the Act, and better practices for grants administration. For these purposes, the ANAO focused on DEST's:

• planning for the implementation of the programme;
• assessment of proposals to establish and operate the colleges; and
• management of the Funding Agreements.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of CSIRO’s development and administration of selected National Research Flagships. In assessing CSIRO’s performance, the ANAO examined whether:

• mechanisms were in place to develop and implement the Flagships, within the context of the broader CSIRO change program;
• governance arrangements for Flagships incorporated sound oversight, planning and reporting arrangements; and
• periodic review activities were used to assess and improve the operation of the Flagships.

The audit objective was to assess how four key departments: Education, Science and Training (DEST); Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR); Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaCSIA); and Health and Ageing (DoHA) are implementing the Government's policy objective for Indigenous service delivery.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Parliamentary Budget Office in conducting its role since being established in July 2012.

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 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.

The objective of this follow-up audit was to review FaCSIA's progress in implementing the recommendations of Audit Report No.17 1999–2000. The focus was whether FaCSIA had maintained or improved its oversight, coordination and administration of the CSHA for both the 1999 CSHA and the 2003 CSHA, in line with the recommendations and findings identified in the previous ANAO audit.

This second audit report relating to SMSFs examines the effectiveness of the Tax Office's approach to managing SMSF compliance risks. Specifically the ANAO examined the processes the Tax Office uses to:

• identify the risks relevant to SMSFs not complying with their obligations under the SISA, including members accessing their superannuation early;
• mitigate SMSF compliance risks; and
• administer fund wind-ups.

Parliamentary Committees, particularly Senate Estimates Committees, have for many years taken an interest in the use of consultants by Australian government agencies. In this context, and having regard to the extent of expenditure by FMA Act agencies on consultants, the objective of this audit was to assess the accuracy and completeness of Australian government agencies' reporting of expenditure on consultants.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the administration of the Australian Business Register.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Taxation Office’s administration of debt relief arrangements.

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 performance audit was to assess the effectiveness of the conduct of the first National Infrastructure Audit and development of the Infrastructure Priority List.

Over the past few years, the Auditor-General has conducted three audits of corporate planning and two audits of annual performance statements. This edition of audit insights examines the findings from these reports and discusses key learnings that are relevant for all Commonwealth entities.

The fleet oiler HMAS WESTRALIA was a key element of the Royal Australian Navy (hereafter referred to as ‘Navy') Maritime Operations Support Capability (MOSC) from 1989 until September 2006. WESTRALIA provided logistic support to naval operations and exercises and contributed to Defence international engagement through these activities. The new vessel to replace WESTRALIA is called HMAS SIRIUS and was commissioned by Defence in mid September 2006, which was concurrent with the formal decommissioning of WESTRALIA. This approach was adopted by Defence to ensure that Navy maintained a continuous afloat support capability.

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 objective of this performance audit of construction projects on the AusLink National Network was to assess the effectiveness of the administration by DITRDLG in working with the States to deliver the outcomes expected by the Government and the broader community. To inform the audit assessment, the methodology included examination of both Australian Government and State Government records as well as site inspections in relation to 21 projects being delivered in three States (New South Wales (NSW), Queensland and Tasmania). DITRDLG and the respective State road transport authorities were consulted in the selection of projects to be examined in detail.

The objective of the audit was to assess the implementation and effectiveness of the enhanced grants administration requirements for:

• reporting to the Finance Minister on the awarding of grants within their own electorate by Ministers who are Members of the House of Representatives;
• reporting to the Finance Minister on instances where Ministers have decided to approve a particular grant which the relevant agency has recommended be rejected; and
• the website reporting of grants awarded.

The objective of the audit is to assess the effectiveness of the ATO's administration of debt collection. Micro-business debt is a particular focus of attention. The three key areas examined are:

• strategies–especially the ATO's initiatives trialled in 2006;
• infrastructure–the IT systems, people, policy and processes and risk management framework supporting the collection of debt; and
• management and governance–planning, monitoring and reporting mechanisms and liaison with stakeholders.

The ANAO focused on the work of the campaigns area within the Debt Line, which has collection responsibility for 90 per cent of collectable debt cases and responsibility for other key, centralised functions such as reporting, quality assurance review, consistency and best practice, and the debt collection initiatives.

The current audit has focussed on Stage 2 of the Scheme. Its objective was to assess whether ACIS is being administered effectively by DIISR and, as relevant, by Customs. In particular, the audit examined the department's arrangements for:

• assessing the eligibility of participants to receive duty credits;
• calculating duty credits accurately and adhering to the funding limits for the Scheme;
• checking the integrity of participants' claims, which are self-assessed;
• accounting for the duty credits transferred to and used at Customs; and
• measuring and reporting on the performance of ACIS.

The audit also followed up on whether the ANAO's previous recommendations have been addressed.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of Defence’s monitoring of the implementation of ANAO and internal audit recommendations. The audit also examined a sample of ANAO and internal audit recommendations—reported as being complete by Defence—to assess the extent to which these recommendations had been implemented by Defence.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether purchases of goods and services are conducted in accordance with relevant legislation, Government policies and guidelines, and sound purchasing principles and practices. The audit at each entity covered the internal control framework for purchasing and purchase transactions during 2002-03 and 2003-04 and, where applicable, was based on the CPGs current at that time. The audit examined all aspects of the purchasing process from the initial requirement for purchase through to the delivery of the supply and payment. It included an examination of aselection of individual purchases at each audited entity.

In two letters dated 19 and 22 June 2009, the Prime Minister requested a performance audit of a range of matters relating to representations to the Treasury regarding automotive finance arrangements for car dealers. In response to these requests, the Auditor-General decided that ANAO would undertake a performance audit under section 18 of the Auditor-General Act 1997 (Auditor-General Act). The audit objective, based on the matters raised in the Prime Minister's correspondence and in the Parliament, was to examine and report on:

• any representations to the Treasury since October 2008 from all sources regarding automotive finance arrangements for car dealers, including any made in relation to John Grant Motors;
• the nature of these representations;
• the manner in which the representations were responded to by officials, having regard to any relevant standards and procedures; and
• any related administrative matters that came to attention.

Given the significant expenditure associated with the Super Seasprites, and the problems that the Project had encountered over some time, the ANAO had commenced this performance audit prior to the Government's decision to cancel the Project. The focus of the audit was on Defence's and DMO's administration of the Project. In light of the Government's decision to cancel the Project, the objective of the audit was revised to place greater emphasis on those issues that resulted in the failure of the Project to provide the required capability, and highlighting project management lessons for major Defence acquisitions going forward.Accordingly the audit objective was to:

• identify those factors that contributed to the on-going poor performance of the Project;
• outline measures taken by Defence and DMO in seeking to overcome issues encountered by the Project, and key lessons arising from this project for the benefit of major acquisitions projects generally; and
• determine the capability and cost implications of a project that failed to deliver to expectations.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of DEST's administration of its role in Australian Apprenticeships. To achieve this, the ANAO assessed DEST's performance to determine if DEST:

• monitored whether Australian Apprenticeships was achieving its objectives;
• effectively managed the Australian Apprenticeships Incentives Programme; and
• effectively managed its contracts with Australian Apprenticeships Centres.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of Defence’s implementation of reforms to capability development since the introduction of the two-pass process for government approval of capability projects and government’s acceptance of the reforms recommended by the Mortimer Review. The scope of this audit included the requirements phase and, to a limited extent, the acquisition phase of major capability development projects, focusing upon changes flowing from the major reforms.

The objectives of the audit were to assess:

• whether FaCSIA has effectively administered the distribution of funding for the Local Answers, VSEG, Reconnect and Minor Capital Upgrade programmes, including promoting the relevant schemes to potential applicants, developing application forms, handling and appraising applications, selecting recipients and making grant announcements;
• the pattern of approvals of grants to States/Territories and to electorates held by the Government and Opposition parties under the Local Answers and VSEG programmes; and
• whether FaCSIA administered eight one-off grants to community organisations provided as a result of Government commitments during the 2004 Federal Election campaign in line with relevant legislation and guidelines.

The objective of the audit was to examine the Tax Office's administration of the Lost Members Register. In particular, the audit examined the Tax Office's governance arrangements for the LMR; its strategies for managing data quality; and its provision of access to LMR data. The audit also considered how the Tax Office's administration of the LMR has responded to recommendations made in the ANAO's earlier review (Audit Report No.17, 2005–06 Administration of the Superannuation Lost Members Register), relevant changes in funding and legislation supporting the LMR, as well as the Change Program.

The objective of the report is to review the effectiveness of remediation activities put in place by Defence and the DMO to improve the performance of SDSS following the delivery in July 2003 of the SDSS Upgrade Project, with specific attention to the SDSS Get Well Programme. The audit reviewed the outcomes of the Get Well Programme, and assessed how effectively a segment of the Defence supply chain (of which SDSS is one key component) was meeting selected maritime end user capability and reporting requirements. In order to achieve this, the audit reviewed three key maritime combatant forces: COLLINS Class submarines; Adelaide Class Guided Missile Frigates (FFGs); and ANZAC Class Frigates. The ANAO notes that these three capabilities account for some 50 per cent of the Navy's total forecast expenditure for 2006–07.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of DAFF's implementation and administration of the Securing our Fishing Future structural adjustment package industry and community assistance programs.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of Tourism Australia's governance arrangements, the management of its marketing contracts, and whether outcomes are being achieved. The audit reviewed Tourism Australia's:

• procurement processes for selecting service providers;
• management of service provider contracts; and
• governance framework including planning, performance management and reporting.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the administration of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) financial industry levies.

The objective of this audit is to examine DIAC's implementation of the nine recommendations made in the earlier audit. The audit has also taken into account changed circumstances since the original audit. These include a heightened security environment after 11 September 2001 and the results of other relevant ANAO performance audit and financial statement work. The audit also examined ETA decision-making processes to gain assurance about its robustness in a changing risk environment. This issue came to attention in recent audits of visa management processes.

The follow-up audit assessed the extent to which the Australian Taxation Office (ATO), Department of Health and Ageing (Health), and Medicare Australia had implemented the six recommendations from Audit Report No.47 2001–02, Administration of the 30 Per Cent Private Health Insurance Rebate. The audit also looked at: the implementation of some of the major suggestions for improvement in the original audit; and the current validity of some of the positive major findings from that audit. The audit found that the ATO, Health and Medicare Australia have acted upon the recommendations contained in Audit Report No.47 2001–02 and, overall, the administration of the Rebate is currently being undertaken effectively.

The objective of the audit was to assess the ATO's administration of activity statement HRRs. Specifically the audit sought to: examine aspects of ATO governance relevant to its administration of activity statement HRRs. This includes: ATO planning, the integration between Lines to administer HRRs; corporate risk management processes; and performance management; assess the ATO's methodology and practice to identify and, if necessary, correct activity statement HRRs; and identify and assess the Information Technology (IT) and manual systems, processes and controls used by the ATO to process HRRs resulting from the lodgement of activity statements.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Tax Office's administration of the Superannuation Co-contribution Scheme.

The audit reviewed five key areas: governance arrangements; information technology systems and controls; co-contribution processing; compliance approaches; and communication with clients.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of FaHCSIA’s administration of the HAF. To address this objective, the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) assessed FaHCSIA’s administration against a range of audit criteria, including the extent to which:

• assessment and approval processes were soundly planned and implemented, and were consistent with the requirements of the overarching financial management framework;
• appropriately structured funding agreements were established and managed for each approved grant; and
• the performance of the HAF, including each of the funded projects, was actively monitored and reported.